alano

Oh god, my club is stuck in the dark ages. They will ONLY play aggregate on the night we play .......... :P

Our club rule (which BTW I had *nothing* to do with inventing! :rolleyes: ) would penalise us bold savers for the correct -3500 (we'd be doubled, right?) but our opps would indeed gain only +600 instead of the +1510 they would presumably have been entitled to... ... so if you REALLY don't care about being humiliated in public, you could bid 7N against any nice looking slam and kick your opps where it hurts in terms of their score. It really does suck, doesn't it? I love these crazy threads. A

Er .... playing bridge was the whole point. I can't see yours. :rolleyes: Moving on, perhaps the question becomes, "do any other clubs have this frankly peculiar rule?"

Just as a brief postscript to this one, two people were sick so in the end it defaulted to a straightforward 4 table teams match. Pity......................... (though we did win! :D ) Still it might happen next year! :rolleyes:

Hi Our local real world club has a limit on big penalties of 600 NV or 800 VUL. So on an aggregate night, for 1NTX -4 NV, the real score of -800 is capped at +600 when awarded to the gaining side (declarer's pair takes the full penalty i.e. -800). I assume it must be a local regulation (is it standard?) What happens if the contract is REdoubled? Such a hand i.e. 1NTXX NV went for -4 last night scoring -1600 for the defence, but the benefitting pair were allowed to claim +1200 (being twice the cap of +600). I'm not in favour of capping but I assume it's there to stop collusion to get a pair a huge score. Or at least to lesson the effect of a freak bad show, as happened here (I think the XX was supposed to be a rescue request!). If this is the case, why should the cap be doubled just because the opps invited more pain on themselves, whether voluntarily or not! ? Can anyone comment? A

More suggestions I've had include playing as 4 pairs but each pair sitting out, and using Butler scoring (?) to pair the 5th pairing with the average from the 1st four. A

Yes, thanks for this idea, it certainly works. I can get it fairly well balanced with 5 sets of 5 boards. If all the boards are flat the end result is a tie so it has to be right. It seems to take the lie of the cards out of the equation which is the important thing. Plus it looks like fun! No pressure if a tricky grand slam comes up while you're at the Anchor Table then :rolleyes: Alan

Hi folks We are organising our annual challenge match against local rival team. To date we have done a simple Teams of 8 arrangement with 2 pairs from each team sitting NS and the other 2 EW. This year however, more people are desparate to play so we decided to try for a teams of 10 event to see how it goes! The only problem is ... how can we score it fairly? Does anyone know of a movement that would let this work? If not I'm going to have to try to work one out from scratch.... :) Cheers Alan

Uday I have isolated my problem with the news to a firewall issue: my intertex firewall was blocking all traffic to Port 81, which it appears that BBO is using to connect to the news server. I have opened up Port 81 and it now works, and hopefully won't present an unmanagable security risk. Anyway, useful to know that the connection accesses that port I think. Regards Alan

I tried installing the DLL (it's in \WINNT\system32), but I still get "Action cancelled. Internet Explorer was unable to link to the Web Page you requested....." whenever I try to view the news page. Happy to try any other ideas. Alan

I can't see the news at all either, on a PC with win2000. My default browser is Firefox, no idea if that affects it.