pilowsky

I would like to amend my original answer. Clearly, the answer to the OP's question is me.

Now you know what a talking point is.

"In the 20th century, American novelist Alan Harrington illustrated a real and lasting depiction when he said, "Public relations specialists make flower arrangements of the facts, placing them so the wilted and less attractive petals are hidden by sturdy blooms." To this day we watch as spin doctors continue to misuse their privileges, undermining the ideals of democracy one campaign at a time. This is a great concern. As a devoted democratic citizen I believe those in power need to expose us to these 'less attractive petals' because after all, democracy gives us the right to information symmetry and to live in a society based on objectivity." I suspect you may be mixing up your figures of speech (would that be a sphixaphor?). Kellyanne Conway, and now Kayleigh McEnany, both from the Alastair Campbell school of antonymical speech. "Would I lie to you!". Kellyanne's famous "Donald Trump is not a liar...He simply says the opposite of what is true" and her alternative facts are surreal and compelling in their dark Orwellian beauty. When a politician has a 'talking point' they are like a dog with a bone. I once ran for parliament. We were taught to prepare a point and stick with undeterred by any question that we might be asked. This is quite different from what the 2 K's do. Like Trump they just look at you and tell you that black is white. So good news my friend. At least this time, The evil that these men do seems to have been created in America. Even if it's most subtle exponent - Campbell - was a Yorkshireman.

By the way, what exactly is a "talking point". Many years ago someone said to me "Paul, then one thing led to another and before I knew what was happening...". So, I was wondering, aposiopesically speaking, if that was what a talking point was, or if it was something else...

Hi It's a big problem (or challenge as they say). It also depends on what sort of system you want to play. The other problem is that other players will be playing different systems so there is no end of difficulties to cope with. Eventually, I decided to join the Prime club several months ago so that I could start out with a simple 2/1 system and bid and defend against it with each bid explained for me. At $4.99 a month, this seems a pretty good deal. I can then try out what I learn in the robot daylongs without offending real people. Although in Face to face I play SAYC with various gadgets. Most of the time it's guesswork. Next, I read various books on "judgement" I think that Judgement is a code word in bridge circles for what to bid and when. There's a lot of good stuff out there. I'm getting some lessons at the moment and reading what the experts say on the Forum all of the different views are helpful as I work out where to go next. Good luck partner

Are bridge players rude, stupid, or something else? Here is a well-known quote from Shakespeare. ANNE: Villain, thou know'st not law of God nor man.No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. RICHARD: But I know none, and therefore am no beast. This applies to many of the people that you might meet in Bridge world. They look like people. They sound like people. But sometimes something is missing. Let's think about what goes into a complete human. In Yiddish, the highest praise that you can give another person is to call them a Mensch. This literally means Human being. You have differentiated them from an animal. Do not be deceived by somebody calling themselves a Director or a Bridge Teacher. These are not mighty accomplishments. Look up the qualifications needed to become one. You will see what I mean. When I first took up bridge again after retiring I too fell into the trap of reverting to childhood ways. I was a childhood chess player. I carried on like a child for a short time. I was a little unsteady but rapidly regained my equilibrium. I am still a poor bridge player, but I am enjoying the game. What about rudeness? To be a Human, one needs to pass through a series of developmental stages. Not everyone successfully manages this. Some people pass through them and then oscillate back and forth for various reasons. Here is my brief summary of the stages. I call them Qualities. Base qualities are those that a person appears with at birth. The English call them congenital from the Latin 'con-' meaning 'with' and 'gene-' birth. English speaking doctors do this in order to make themselves sound smart and to disguise their meaning from patients. Priests did the same thing by using Latin as a 'secret language'. 'Secret' also comes from the Latin 'secretus' meaning to set apart. Ironically, Sacred can also have the same meaning 'to set apart'. In both cases, the intent is to disguise meaning and create a language that has meaning that is only partly understandable. Not all groups of people do this. If I ask Google to translate congenital into German it gives me 'angeboren' which in German simply means inborn even to the average German. Same in Dutch 'aangeboren' but not in Esperanto! 'kongresa' - shame on them. Primary qualities are those that develop on top of base qualities as the person develops and grows through its initial stages. Unimpaired by environmental toxins and provided with optimal nutrition you will continue to develop as programmed by your genetic load. Secondary qualities are acquired on top of primary qualities. The child, for example, can walk, and understand that when its mother is out of the room she still exists (object permanence). Eventually, the child gains control of its faculties and basic physical abilities. It can walk, talk, eat and annoy its parents. These secondary qualities develop over our entire lifetime and are quite plastic. They can strengthen or atrophy depending on use or disuse. Following a severe injury, they can be irreparably damaged. Tertiary qualities are acquired over and above secondary qualities. Tertiary qualities require scholarship. Scholarship is a learning activity in which knowledge that has been acquired over time by other members of a Society is accumulated by an individual so that that individual can use that knowledge productively. Tertiary qualities may range from the ability to operate a supermarket checkout to brain surgery. It is still simply an accumulation of knowledge by an individual that is used productively for the benefit of themselves and society in general. Synthesized qualities stand apart from all of the qualities discussed above. Synthesized qualities include insight, imagination, self-reflection, volunteerism, altruism, empathy and generosity. One central feature of synthesized qualities is that there is no obvious reward for the person who has these qualities. Yet, the person believes that there is considerable value to these qualities. In some cases, people are driven to behave in this way because they are told that something called 'God' requires it. But, many people are confirmed non-believers in any kind of God. what is their reason for such apparently unrewarding behaviour? If existence is truly absurd and pointless, why help others? Why should one seek to discover new things with the objective of helping others and improving the common good? Their reasoning may be that calm, order and the well-being off all people around them is the most important thing for everyone's continued existence. Since there is no 'afterlife' only this life. Therefore, we should all strive to ensure that everyone in this world achieves as much happiness as possible. Only then can the social contract be truly achieved. Another way to understand bridge players is to read either Flatland or Sneetches on Beaches. Both books give a pretty clear idea of what happens when people fail to understand each other. Bridge is incredibly frustrating for many of the people that play it because the language that is used (bidding) conveys very little meaning and the Players are often not good at interpreting subtle meanings. Just read the pages of this forum. Every question yields dozens of divergent opinions. Frustration, as Yoda remarked (probably), leads to anger which in people that lack synthesized qualities can quickly turn to anger which is displayed as misogyny, rudeness, violence, antisemitism, racism and all sorts of other bad behaviour. Everyone has different ways of managing this. I have reported one Director to the Jewish Board of Deputies. I do not expect much to be achieved. I now restrict my bridge activity to online games. If a player abuses me online, I may report it but I always make a comment to myself in the space provided, save the chat and follow them. I make a point of using my own name when playing. After all, my relatives died in the Holocaust. I may not believe in God, but I am Yad Vashem. Good luck partner.

It's an action that I have on my card and play happily all the time with some partners. My partners that I use it with use the cover card method to decide whether or not to raise me to slam or bid 4NT. Statements such as "this is an offbeat action" or sentences that begin with the only possible course of action with this hand... generally lead me to think that there must definitely be a better way of doing it. "this plaayer needs to understaand how poor the bid is" is another one that is sure to make me think that I am on to something useful! I have seen convention cards that are so dense that you need a power tool to lift them. That kind of bridge is not for me. Tarrasch might approve but Botvinnik would not and Kotov would detest it.

The Dean of my Medical School was once asked: "What is the curriculum?" he replied, "Forget about the books and lectures - the examination is the curriculum". Gus Fraenkel was a pretty smart man. I learned that simple fact when I was 17. It applies to everything.

Unfortunately, although I can locate the tourney record I am unable to find the full hand records with the bidding. All that I can tell you is that the sample movie for the 2 people that bid and made 6♥ shows 1♥ as the opening. Here's the link. 14 people bid and made 4♥ +2 South here is the sample movie with a bid of 4♥ PPP. followed by another 14 with who got the same result as me bidding 4♥ PPP. The 2 people at 5♥ reached it after starting with a bid of 1♥. 6 people reversed into 6♥ and also didn't make it after starting with 1♥. One person went off 1 in 4 hearts after opening 1♥. and just for completeness, 1 person hit 6♥-2 after starting with 1♥. So, in summary, it seems like the best bid to find the best contract quickly in this case at least is 4♥. Since I don't have access to the results of the people that won the tourney, it's impossible for me to tell the extent to which this deal affected the outcome. Presumably, the results of each stratum are intercalated equally to achieve the final result? I don't know. My view is that it's the average result that counts over time. is an icon in Australia because he planned his campaign from the rear. I think he's great. I am no fan of ice-skating but I can see a lesson when there's one to be learned. Bradbury reminds all of us that one day we might get a chance!

You now have more opinions than there are cards in the deck. That should answer your question

It is 2020. A human bridge player can read their partner's system card and system notes. GIB is a computer program, not a human being. It cannot 'learn', 'think' or 'assume' but you can!

Yes you can, a regular post writer who is a much better player than me called paul gipson alias paulg has made a video all about it you can find this and other similar useful info by googling "how to set up a table on bbo"

Well, that depends. If you start the table, you can think for as long as you like. people will come and go and probably complain that you are slow, perhaps say mean things but the table is yours and you can stay as long as you want. I would not recommend thinking for longer than about 15-30 seconds at the most on a casual table that you are visiting. Longer than this and people will start to think you are having connection problems and are likely to throw you off. This is especially true in the Competitive area. Remember, people may be grabbing a quick game on their phone or at lunch and do not want to mess about. BBO is quite different from the Club. If you like to play slowly the best thing to do is get three friends and set up a table together. then you can take as long as you want. Another possibility is to kibbitz other games for a while to get a feel for the pace of play. If you really want to take your time you can join the Prime Club and play against 3 robots. They are very patient, never complain and you can take as long as you want. Great practice. But you do have to pay after the first month. There are other options.

I see this all the time, just refresh your browser and everything returns to normal. Just a ghost in the machine!

Correct, as I pointed out, according to double-dummy and Bridgesolver (which I attached) it should make if I play it better. I know its a long name and people get a bit tired towards the end of long words and I know that my uncle the famous South African cricket umpire spells it with an 'i', but I spell it with a y always have done, alwais will.

That sounds familiar! And I thought that's what Namyats was. The plot thickens: Here's what it says in Wikipedia In the card game bridge, Namyats is a conventional agreement to open hands with a long major suit that are too strong for a direct preemptive opening with a 'two-under' transfer bid. When the long suit is in hearts, opener bids 4♣ and when in spades bids 4♦. Accordingly, the method was originally named 'Four Club and Four Diamond Opening Transfers'; it is also referred to as 'Mitchell Transfers', after the developer of this bidding method, Victor Mitchell. The name 'Namyats' is the surname of Mitchell's bridge partner, Samuel Stayman, spelled backwards. In England, this convention is known as 'South African Texas', a name borrowed from a similar variant on the Texas transfer convention played over 1NT opening bids. Not to be confused with JT Mitchell inventor of the movement. or his equally famous wife Jacqui. Interestingly, in light of recent discussion elsewhere on the Forum, this is the UK South African Texas Transfer. No wonder bridge. is a difficult game to learn. Here's a pastiche of 3 bits of Reese's book on Precision from 1972

Just played in two IMPS challenge tournaments. In the first one I was doing OK but in the end 3 players decided not to complete making my reasonable score uncompetitive. I'm declaring shenanigans as they say in South Park! Here is an image - as you can see 11 tables start but only 8 finish, denying me a place in the sun. Life is hard. . You can see that result at the bottom. More fun is the following where I stuck it out to give everyone a fair go and the tourney ended with the 8 tables that started. Me last of course. Here is a link to the killer board. In best hand tournaments you know that you definitely have the best hand. Unfortunately, your partner doesn't. This can sometimes lead to some interesting bidding sequences if like me you enjoy trying to mess around to outwit GIB in order to get large IMP swings. One nifty way to do this is with 1NT on off-shape hands. Here it is: pass, 1NT: I have 15 HCP pass 2♣ my partner has "Stayman--" Exactly what counts as Stayman for GIB is still a bit of a mystery, but at least North has 9HCP, 2 4CM and a singleton ♣. 5♣ FTF, you would think that would stop most people in their tracks. Not the North robot. This means that I have 5-♣, 2-5♦, 2-5♥,2-5♠; 15-17 HCP; and biddable ♣; with 18- total points. North presses on with 5♠. No explanation is provided for this bid - so I can't give you one. Anyway North gave up on me at this stage and I was left in 5NT. West being an advanced robot made the advanced lead of the ♦5 instead of the ♥8. Either way, I should be doomed. Enjoy. I always come out of these having learned something. [hv=pc=n&s=sq4h4daq72caqjt42&w=sk98haq986dj65c65&n=saj532hjt32dk98c3&e=st76hk75dt43ck987&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1np2cp5cp5sp5nppp]399|300[/hv]

The K&R hand evaluator says K&R (KJ9862 A 85 Q876) = 11.90 DK = 9+. Who am I to disagree? As I understand it playing 15-17 (balanced) i.e not me. you definitely (IMHO) have a perfect hand for a Texas (Dallas) transfer at the Sydney Bridge Centre and in Melbourne they use South African Style. On the North side of the Harbour Bridge, where most of the South Africans live, they use Dallas-style, which is what I learned (even though I was 1 year old when I left Capetown). Since 17 + an optimistic 12 is unlikely to equal slam in anything, my vote goes to 4♥. Against humans or robots - less info to opps the better.

It's a really generous offer. I'm also very grateful that you have learned to spell pilowsky correctly. I'll bear it in mind if the ACBL starts giving me free games again. When I started playing bridge just over a year ago and had no masterpoints they were handing out free games so I gorged myself on a whole bunch. I'm sure a whole lot of other people did as well. There is probably a blip in your data that is worth looking at.

It depends on the Club. I did join the ACBL because it was quite good value when I was starting out. Pre-pandemic, they were hosting their games on BBO. You will have to judge for yourself. Many of the other clubs can just ask to be a member of but you do have to pay for each tournament. There are many online bridge platforms apart from BBO - just use google to find them. BIL is hosted on BBO if you are like me, a Beginner/Intermediate. There are also more advanced Clubs. As you play more and read the Forum you will start to get a feel for BBO world. BBO also has a Facebook page that can be helpful. As of course does ACBL and other local organisations. There is so much stuff out there you will not have time to play bridge. Basically, there are tons of ways to spend money on bridge.

"I like to open four of a major a lot." Leo LaSota wrote that a long time ago about playing against GIB. I weighed up the fact that he is into personal fitness against the fact that he is a really good bridge player and decided to follow his advice. I have deviated from it now and then and the results are usually bad if I do. Here is a hand that came up at matchpoints yesterday. As you can see from the Traveller I only got 42.68% illustrating my poor play, and a key difference between MP's and IMPS. The 14 players with 1 trick more than me get ~ double the percentage but the 2 people that bid and made a slam only get about 20% more than the people above me. In IMPS the differences are much more dramatic (just for the people who were asking about this earlier). So, here is the hand, and the double-dummy showing that on the lead I should make an extra trick. The part that interests me is how to get here. FWIW, the hand evaluator gives this result: K&R (A KQJT985 AT3 J7) = 18.00; DK = 15. One reason that I dislike 2♣ with hands like these is that when I'm LHO or RHO I will always jump in with an annoying bid at any vulnerability. (8320 1732 2173 2344) The shape is also quite interesting in that despite the unusual length in three suits the remaining cards are normally distributed in the other hands. [hv=pc=n&s=sahkqjt985dat3cj7&w=sqj986532ha7dj85c&n=sk4h432dq962cat98&e=st7h6dk74ckq65432&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=4hppp]399|300[/hv]

And there's the problem. You say "I know who controls the computer". I have worked with computers since I was programming in Fortran in 1976. I have used a slide rule to calculate politicians broken promises and publish the result in National newspapers at the age of 14. Everyone here is pretty clever. But if you really think that someone is actually "controlling the computer..." then I think it's time to look up external locus of control. Entirely up to you.

Unfortunately, Stephen, your arguments are not supported by facts. They are sweeping generalisations. You claim that "all of us understand" and then in the same breath say that "I don't understand"! Immediately afterwards you launch into what seems to be a clear demonstration of what is known as "external locus of control". You can read about it here (https://en.wikipedia...ocus_of_control). The computer is just a computer. It doesn't care about what you want. Neither does BBO. If you do not enjoy it then go elsewhere. I do enjoy it. I find it to be a stimulating mental exercise that is unsullied by distractions that allows me to meet people from all over the world. It is far and away superior to anything I can experience in the Club in Sydney. It is nothing to do with the computer. If you want to play face to face bridge then just get three other people and off you go. I do this on Stepbridge and other computer platforms. I will not be doing it at the face to face "Club" because it does not cater for all people, and because it is expensive and because I have seen and experienced a large amount of bullying racism antisemitism and misogyny. As for so-called errors, I have seen the computer make choices that I would prefer it not to make. These choices are never better or worse than choices that a human partner would make based on bids that I have made on the trust-your-partner principle. What many (not all) people do not seem to understand is that the computer only plays one system. (like the terminator) It never deviates. It does not understand irony and if you indicate that you have a certain holding then it will simulate based on that estimation. Sometimes this will result in a contract that humans characterise as "ridiculous" - bad luck - no-ones dying.

Only paid tournaments award masterpoints. On BBO, you will only get masterpoints if you pay money and join the tournament - not as a sub. All points are equal in BBO world but are separate for different jurisdictions. You can look up your points and anybody else's points by following this link and typing in their name. The full detail of where and when points were obtained then appears. This is not the same as the number (which is the rank - like junior master etc), letter, or symbol next to the name. http://www.bridgebase.com/points/index.php The masterpoints awarded on BBO are significantly inflated compared to those awarded in Australia. I'm not sure about other countries. In any event, they are not an index of skill. Many excellent players have no masterpoints. They are just poor and don't want to waste money. Gambling, as a good friend of mine once said is a tax on stupid people. BBO is incorporated in Nevada! I try to earn masterpoints to track improvement and to make sure that I am not fooling myself I am mainly interested in open events where the competition is most fierce.

Which does make it a portmanteaux word of Flower and Howell. I suppose, if the movement doesn't work properly then it would be a Howler? Or if you are annoyed with your partner it would be a Bowel movement because S/he was giving you the sh*ts.