Kaitlyn S

It wouldn't be unbelievable to do it on ---, xxx, AKQx, AKQJxx if your opponent "knows" you are expecting a heart lead. Given that you might not make 5 on a heart lead, is this such a bad shot? Now given that responder can rule this hand out because he has the worthless H-AK and the useful DA, I'm guessing that opener is missing 2 minor suit cards and I wouldn't bid 7. If the HA is useful (say: --, x, KQxxx, AKxxxxx), I'll pay off.

I wouldn't think your average pickup partner plays exclusion.

If ever I needed a thumbs up emoticon, this would be the time.

Cool! We can be Caitlynne & Kaitlyn! :D How interesting! I listed quite a few things simply because most 2/1 players play them and rather than wonder if partner plays something, if he says my profile is good, I know we play it. I would have assumed that others would have listed a lot for the same reason. I know that when a partner fills a seat that has nothing listed and won't talk (or may not speak English), and the opponents open 1C and he bids 2C, I am clueless whether he thinks it's a monster, or showing clubs, or showing the majors. If someone says my profile is OK except support doubles, I know exactly what it means when he bids 2C, and he knows that I know what it means because I put it in my profile. (Incidentally, someone said she couldn't see more than 3 lines of my profile. Is that true or was she missing the scroll bar?) A friend told me of that old client. They said they would set up chats in it and I don't think we can join them. That's something to think about. Again, thank you all for your well thought out responses. When I first posted some friends said this was a great site but I just wasn't seeing it. Now I am seeing just what an awesome community you have here. I'll probably be replying a lot less in this thread but to anybody that wants to comment, thank you in advance.

[ Very good point. I am holding off on the 'expert' a bit. This comment made me laugh, because it reminds me of a player I played with here that said "Nobody that plays here is any good anymore" right before he didn't cover an honor to cost a trick (but it was worth it because the opponents who were getting annoyed at him were so delighted.) My guess is that we have a different definition of a "useless bridge player". If someone is fun, lack of skill won't detract from my enjoyment much. And miss out on the sociability? The people are the most fun part of the game! (BTW, I appreciate your reply, it's just not for me. It might be for someone else that sees it though :) ) The level of play might be lower but in my limited experience the success rate is higher - because an intermediate partner also seems to attract intermediate opponents. That being said, if you expect little from an intermediate partner, you won't be disappointed, and they tend to be a lot more sociable. Oddly enough, I find that my intermediate partners consistently play much better than my intermediate opponents. I wonder if there is any correlation with the discussions after the hands :D Agreed, and I have since stopped. Since my OP, now that I have an idea what's going on, I've had nothing but pleasant experiences. Very enlightening. I think it's a lot like finding a partner in real life - you have to try a lot of them before you find one that clicks. Fortunately, here you don't have that awkward break-up conversation. Thanks for all the replies everyone, and I'll respond to the rest later :)

I think I might be getting an answer to my original question - your screenshot was very helpful in that regard. Probably most of the time I click on a seat, the host gets multiple entries. Since experienced users probably click faster, so they appear at the top of the list. Also those numbers, for example the 7+ on anaarepere (which mean tournament success, I'm guessing?) are going to be chosen before me. Friends of the host will be also. So it appears that what is happening is that I'm not being chosen because others are either faster or are more proven. Which is cool - at least I understand the process more now. Thanks very much for your help, Diana. This thread might have a happy ending for me - I got two very nice invitations in my mailbox! I wasn't fishing for invites but I'm looking forward to playing with them. :)

I had to search for what makes a table interesting. While I agree that these tables would be enjoyable, wouldn't these players be even less likely to want to play with me? (I'm trying to see it from their standpoint also; I don't want to inflict myself upon someone that would not enjoy playing with me - I'm just guessing that most of the players rejecting me might enjoy it and I'm trying to get an honest idea of why it's happening. But I do appreciate all the responses.)

Ah, I never thought of that. It's possible that I'm just too slow to grab seats, but it seems odd that the seat is still clickable all those times. I guess there is no way to tell the difference?

I thank you for having the decency to attempt an answer. While one can't read the minds of one of the 500 or so that rejected me, someone might point out why they might reject somebody. Most people who lock their seats have reasons why they would reject someone. I'd just like to hear some honest answers as to why players are rejected. If I hear those honest answers, it will help me find a suitable table in the future. I would totally agree with you if I was looking to play at a random table. However, I usually click on about 50 people in the main room who need partners before finding one that appears to be playing 2/1 with similar gadgets (a pretty common set to go with 2/1.) When I find one, that player already plays most of the same things I do, so I click on the seat. After all the work of finding a suitable partner, I am then rejected. So I don't think the list of conventions should be a deterrent. I wouldn't expect so either. I am usually rejected rather quickly. I asked the wrong question. What I should have asked is, "If you lock seats and sometimes reject players, how do you make the decision to reject someone?" I think that might be more likely to start an honest conversation than my OP which might be read as "Boo-hoo! Nobody likes me!" despite that this wasn't my intent at all.

I may try that only as an experiment to see if it makes a difference. But I'll know I'm lying :)

44 views and 0 replies. Perhaps I'm being viewed as a troll or bitch or whiner. That is not my intent. I would like to seriously know how I can play with people with compatible systems. Please don't ignore me because you think answering me would imply that you were one who shunned me. I really don't care about that and I don't remember any of the shunning usernames anyway. I would appreciate honest input about what I need to do differently in the future to be allowed to play with someone that plays a system I'm comfortable with, or failing that, how to start a table and attract partners who play 2/1 and either card standardly or UDCA. I do know that I could put locks on my seats (or maybe I can't because I'm too new to the site) but that just seems so unfriendly and I'd like a different option.

Hi. I'm fairly new to the site. I play 2/1 with many gadgets but prefer not to play O/E discards or Lavinthal or something bizarre that I haven't heard of. So I walk into the main bridge club, click on names until I find somebody that plays 2/1 that either cards standard or UDCA. 95% of the time, the seat partnering this person has a lock. I click on the seat, and out of maybe 500 attempts, I was only allowed to play once. The one time I was allowed to play, I had a good time, but that hardly makes up for the time that I have wasted clicking on spots and being refused. Many times I have started my own table and requested a 2/1 partner. 90% of the time I get someone who plays SEF or Polish Club or something else foreign to me and I'm shooting in the dark, especially as very few of the players will even say anything about what they play or how they signal. I think that the "Take me to the first open seat" feature is responsible. I am wondering if my newness is responsible for me being refused. I looked at my profile and I have a 100% hand completion rate so that isn't the issue. I list myself as Advanced and my listed conventions imply that I have some clue, so that doesn't appear to be the problem, although maybe it is. I refuse to call myself an Expert since I feel an expert is somebody that people might pay to play with, and I definitely don't qualify, although I sometimes play live with my friends with thousands of master points and nobody is unhappy to draw me as a partner (I don't do tournament bridge myself.) I have learned that others classify differently though, most "experts" do not realize that double and correct shows significant extra values. I really hope my self-classification isn't the reason I'm being shunned. If there is some secret place where past scores are shown, that is not what is causing players to reject me, for the few times I have played with a random partner against two random opponents, my IMP score is usually at least twice theirs. So can one of the experienced players on the site tell me why (a) all 2/1 players that play std/UDCA have to lock their partner's seat, and (b) when I try to play in that seat, I am only allowed to play 0.2% of the time?