pilowsky

I see the problem, next time try some of this:

Robots don't make stupid bids, but Ollie sometimes does.

...Lol, thanks for that, but of course the real reason is that although you get told that the person is playing Solitaire they could be doing all sorts of other things on BBO, as I discovered when I rang my friend and said "why are you playing Solitaire...?" Turns out it's a default message B. Maybe the Robots can't be bothered and they're just .

Thanks, the 3rd link is the system I expect to face.

Recently, I was invited to play in a session where I know that a well-known pair who play a forcing pass system will be present. As an existentialist, this system speaks to me. After all, the pass contains the thing in itself. Non-vulnerable opener may have a hand equivalent to 1NT or 2♣️. What should I do as LHO. A search came up with at least 3 ideas that I list as links at the end of this post. I would be interested in your thoughts. This also bears on the question of people that open with a strong 1♣️ which has similar thinking behind it. My initial plan was: (remember forcing pass applies only not vul v vul opener has 13+ points any shape). So loosely based on modified Cappelletti, here are my suggestions. All comment welcome. OPENER passes CALL MEANING PASS I HAVE NOTHING 1♣ DOUBLE ≅ TO AN OPENING HAND 1NT YOUR 1NT BID 2♣️ MAJORS EVERYTHING ELSE AS USUAL

For what its worth, at least 2 of my friends have joined as paying customers, and we practice together or alone regularly. My play has improved a lot as a result.

Could it be the Prime club? Are they the robots?

♣Having recently discussed this with a new partner I am interested in your views. Our system card says bid after double below 3♠. Does that mean that in this case 'double is penalty or 'act'?. My second question is at what point do you feel free from an obligation to act if the responder intervenes with a bid? Is there any research on this or is it a 'judgement call' For example 1♣ X 2♣ 2♠ easy. (based on a hand the robots gave my friend and me). But what about the present situation particularly where your system card specifies 3♠ as the GIB card does? "Negative X and Responsive X up to 3♠, Support X up to 2♥ (GIB may do support X with Kx)." Perhaps the advanced robots will call the director! Is the response always automatic? And then, 5 minutes after I make this post, playing in an ACBL daylong comes this hand where I open 3♣ the robot doubles, my partner passes, and there is a pause (robot simulating) and then the robot passes! 100% to me. Here's the hand.[hv=pc=n&s=sa872h76djckqjt42&w=skj54hkj4dq9854c6&n=sq6hqt983dk632ca3&e=st93ha52dat7c9875&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=ppp3cdppp]399|300[/hv] So the robots don't follow their card - Director!

Here's one I call Michael in honour of the Canadian expert MikeH. If you open a weak 2 in the majors and partner responds with 2NT (15+ forcing), then a bid of the Mi- nors favours playing in the suit whereas a bid of the majors is C(hael) onstructive and favours playing in no trumps. Minor keys are sad and Major keys are happy so there is also a musical relationship.

Yes, I joined. I find the robots very handy for practice.

"Sheila: the only sensible thing pilowsky wrote was that he is not an expert. It can be difficult for a relatively new player to learn whose posts to study, and use to improve, and whose are utter nonsense and will make your game worse. Look to see who gets 'likes' for their posts, and who is giving the likes. The better players don't always agree with each other, but they will usually explain why they differ. You won't find any good players up voting any of pilowky's posts, nor of his former persona olpossum." lol, I don't know who 'possum' is Sheila but one only has to read that sentence to get a feel for Mike's personality. (and his grammar and spelling). It is interesting that he seems to regard posts as some sort of popularity contest - I think I'll start a competition for him. In any event, I hope that you get some helpful responses and agreement. As opposed to Mike's opinion of me. It's up to you, but I would caution you against people that routinely use terms such as 'utter nonsense' and 'will make your game worse': this sort of argument may play well during some sort of moot court, but it is of little use in trying to understand a logic puzzle such as Bridge. By the way, Mike likes to be friendly to everyone: Here is what he said back in 2011 (it is still on his member site) apparently before he stopped posting for a while: "Gone, gone, gone. I got tired of all the personal attacks here...including the ones I made. Life is too short to waste time and energy on mickey mouse arguments. I'm not criticizing anyone but me, but since I can't stop rising to the (perceived) bait, I'm outa here. I may lurk but it will be a long time, if ever, before I post."

Hi Sheila, I can only imagine the conversation that went on. Agh shame! Anyway, it is interesting that this question arises so soon after the discussion about bidding over a weak 2♥ or 2♠ opening and the rule of 17 that Mike and tramticket had very strong views about. I wonder if you would be kind enough to provide the full hand for everyone to see so that they can apply their judgement. I am not one of the experts whose views you seek, but my 2 Rand's worth is as follows: Opener preempts with 6-11 HCP. LHO bids 2♠. This may be weak with 6+♠ since a double might be more appropriate if LHO had points. Openers partner can either call 4♥ or pass depending on their hand. Vulnerability is also important. Over 3♥, RHO should either bid (3♠, 4♠, 3NT, something else or quietly pass. To me anyway a double must be for penalties since LHO has already bid their hand - such is the nature of pre-empts. On the basis of what you have shown so far, it sounds like quite a discussion followed and it would certainly help me to see the full deal since I am not an expert.

It is an interesting problem. One of the people that I saw must be a real problem because on his system card it says "Please send abuse complaints to abuse@bridgebase.com pref 2/1 udca +++" . I can only assume that he anticipates a larger than usual number of abuse complaints and that the new 'report abuse tab' will be insufficient in his case. A sort of Abuse Pre-Alert. I plan to add please send compliments about my terrible humorous asides to ...@...

I'm only intermediate, when I'm advanced, maybe I'll be able to Handel inverted Beethoven. I'll have to get Bach to you on that.

No worries, imgur works like a charm and is easy to manage.

I am frequently reminded, by myself and others, of the importance of remembering things. I know that many people have shared tips on memory in the past but it never hurts to resuscitate this thread. My favourite is the rule of three: (I love rules - a great substitute for judgement). I try to use Music, Colour and a Name or an object to associate with something to be able to recall it easily. Here are two, leaving out the third will annoy me into remembering it. Beethoven carding, the odd-numbered symphonies were the best so discarding low odd cards 3,5,7,9 is encouraging. Remembering the tunes and associating a colour with each reinforces it. Generally, after about a week, the mnemonic can be discarded and the memory remains.The Rolling Stones song helps me remember Puppet Stayman because if you have Hearts you bid Spades (I see a Red door and I want it painted Black).Space left intentionally blank.Over to you.

Don't be mean guys. A nice person at BBO support just replied to my email. I'm sure it was the woman on the left. Now I understand why it took a while to respond. Mind you, she hasn't said anything about the email where I commented on the new splash screen. Must be exchanging something with the chap that looks exactly like me on the right.

Well, let's deconstruct the scene. The people are mature and handsome. A man reclines on a leather chair. A flame flickers in the background. They all look pretty pleased with themselves. Twister is my vote.

Name another Olympic sport that does not have a standardised system for enabling participants to compare themselves in rankings. Chess, Karate, Curling, Basketball, Running, Tennis, but for some reason there is no incentive for one of the largest single organisations involved in Bridge to be involved in serving the Bridge Community in this way. Perhaps Bill, Sharon, David, Fred and Uday ought to be asked their opinions on the matter since they actually own the company? The stuff about privacy laws I take it is something you just made up. Right?

Yes, the correction is right, it should be ≧.

Dear Mark, Thank you for your ideas, but that is not how research works in real life. I knew a theoretical physicist who once approached a senior Professor of Biology and told him that he had a Theory about how the brain worked and asked him to conduct a specific experiment to test the idea: that did not end well. I suggest that you do your work, and I'll do mine. Yes, I am still working on this problem. It is a large and interesting one. If it piques your interest, then it is you that should also do some research. This habit that some people have of providing instruction to others along the lines of you must do this, or that is not conducive to progress. Quite the opposite; I am sure that you, as a mathematician, are more qualified than me to test this hypothesis for the benefit of all. The answers may be of interest beyond Bridge: who knows, that's why it's called research.

Thank you.

It's a good thing that you are not the person making the decisions over there barmar. Perhaps the actual owners of BBO, and the various governing bodies of Bridge, should consider international masterpoint aggregation for the community good, and for the financial benefit of the owners of BBO and it's employees. I'm not certain, but I suspect that your consumers might think it a good idea.

By the way, it does raise another interesting thought, why not have BBO allow you to add all Bridge numbers. That way BBO could become the de facto international site for masterpoint aggregation! now there is a topic for the water cooler.

add acbl number