pilowsky

My biggest grumble is when I get invited onto a friendly table for a few hands (incredibly, it does happen) and my partner (and/or) opponents decide to 'coach' me. It's not the coaching that bothers me - even if they're quite dogmatic as Bridge players sometimes are (say it isn't so) - it's more the effect that this sort of carry-on might have on other players. Sometimes I say things I later regret - who can cast the first stone. I always feel bad about it. People don't realise how much other people invest in what is apparently just a game. A neurosurgeon once said to me when I was complaining about something trivial: "Come on Paul, no-ones dying". It's hard to argue with a neurosurgeon. I guess I could have said, "I know that - it's more important - my partner didn't return my lead. What an idiot!". But, as Dr Suess would say, "I didn't, and now it's too late!."

Thanks - not Polish - for at least 2 generations!

It's possible that the worlds best card player is John Hush. After all, he did prove that 1=2 (https://bit.ly/3ti1yaH). And he can find a missing card in the deck using algebra (http://bit.ly/HushCard). But can he answer a Bridge question or does only the King know? http://bit.ly/TheKingKnows Playing 2/1: A new hand appears. I have 17 HCP and 7 losers. Just as I'm deciding whether or not to open 1♥ or 1NT, My partner opens 1♦. It's an IMP's tourney with some pretty aggressive opponents and South - not wanting to feel left out, overcalls 1♠. I decide on 2♥. Pass, Pass, Pass. -6 IMP's. Top boards were (an impossible) 6NT for +11 IMP's. Afterwards, we had a bit of a discussion about who should have done what. I thought I should have simply bid 3NT. My partner thought she shouldn't pass a change of suit. She's a much better player than me, but still, we thought we would get a second opinion. Here's the deal [hv=lin=st||pn|Player1,TheOtherWoman,Player2,pilowsky|md|2S3H986DQ876CQT842,SK865HJ4DKJ53CA65,SQJT74HKT3DT4CJ93,SA92HAQ752DA92CK7|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%208|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20!D;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|1S|an|One-level%20overcall%20--%205+%20!S;%208-17%20HCP;%209-19%20total%20points|mb|2H|an|mb|P|mb|?|mb|]300|300 [/hv] The possible contracts

As sfi implies, any bid of 2(minor) over 1(major) establishes that you cannot stop below game. On the other hand, 1NT is absolutely forcing for one round (North is not a passed hand). 1. The bid of 2♦ does not deny support for Hearts. 2. 2♦ does not require 5 ♦ - only a Diamond suit and a game-forcing hand. 3. 2♠ is both natural and forcing and suggests to me that North has 4243 (SHDC) and 13+HCP. 4. A bid of 3♠ by opener ought to have 4♠ in my view to safely allow for game in spades. 5. Responder now has a choice of 4♠ or 3NT. 6. After Responder has bid 3♠ or 3NT, the opener can stop or continue depending on the quality of their hand. That's how I would have understood it from GIB 2/1 - I'd be interested to know how close it is to reality.

For all tournaments click here: https://www.bridgeba...tourneyhistory/ For your details click here: https://www.bridgeba...hands/index.php - for example, Here are your hand records over the past two days: https://www.bridgeba...ime=1615813200. If you want to see how many points you - or anyone else has accumulated click on this link and enter their username: https://www.bridgeba...x.php?u=13honey PS. I don't know why, but Daylong individuals (eg the Daylong MP no 1.) don't seem to show up when you search under your own name. I play the DL no 1 and can't find the records when I search the Hand records.

Rudeness is a problem in any language!

"The glories of our blood and state Are shadows, not substantial things; There is no armour against fate; Death lays his icy hand on kings: Sceptre and Crown Must tumble down, And in the dust be equal made With the poor crooked scythe and spade." (James Shirley) Playing GIB 2/1, I bypass my wonderful diamonds to make my partner aware of my five crooked spades. But, with no armour against fate, Scylla passes and Charybdis doubles. Well, I have five spades and a nice diamond suit. I'll pass and see what West thinks of his partner's hand. Pass, Pass, Pass. Scylla leads the ♦6, and the dummy appears. I'm guessing that the ♦6 is a singleton. Charybdis ruffs with the ♠K. Panic sets in. When the dust settles, I've managed a creditable 1SX-4 and -800. I was not disappointed when I discovered that this scored +1.6 IMPs What did Scylla and Charybdis fail to find? [hv=pc=n&s=st7642h4dakqj83cj&n=sj9ht83dt97542c42&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sppdppp]266|200[/hv] Here's the deal The possible contracts

This is an important question for me. I have played in Beginners sections, where people usually never complain about the time (except the Directors who want the game to move along because they have other things to do. I have played in intermediate sections where people complain about everything all the time. Their intent is apparently to distract and intimidate. Most of the time, their attempts at intimidation are so funny that that in itself is the most distracting part. I have kibitzed Advanced players. They seem to take as much time as they want. Could you outline the non-grievance causing time zones for the people that are new to the game? I watched Bobby Fischer solve a little puzzle on the Carson show last night. (http://bit.ly/FischerCarson). It took him 17 seconds. He was pretty good at puzzles. He used to take a little longer to make his moves at the Chessboard when things were interesting. Fischer never played Bridge, to my knowledge, probably too distracted by hesitating opponents. Interesting! I just discovered that Fischer invented "Fischer random chess". This involves shuffling the pieces on the back row before the start (subject to certain limits). His aim was to level the playing field by getting rid of opening theory by allowing for 960 opening positions. Which would almost destroy opening theory.

Thanks - I'll try harder next time! I always wondered why Gossett chose 'Student'? 'Partner' didn't think much of my 2♥ either, but I was the 'Dealer' - I felt obliged to say something.

[hv=lin=st||pn|pilowsky,Innocent,Partner,Bystander|md|1SJ9432HKQJT85D52C,SQT85H73DA98C9862,SHA2DKQJ7CAKQJ753,SAK76H964DT643CT4|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%207|mb|2H|mb|P|mb|6C|mb|P|mb|P!|an|Hmmm%20|mb|D|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|SK|pc|S2|pc|S5|pc|C3|pc|CA|pc|C4|pc|S3|pc|C2|pc|CK|pc|CT|pc|S4|pc|C6|pc|CQ|pc|H4|pc|S9|pc|C8|pc|CJ|pc|H6|pc|SJ|pc|C9|pc|HA|pc|H9|pc|H5|pc|H3|pc|H2|pc|S6|pc|HK|pc|H7|pc|HQ|pc|SQ|pc|D7|pc|S7|pc|HJ|pc|S8|pc|DJ|mc|13|]300|300| Known for our combination of guile, subtlety and ingenuity in the art of bidding, my partner and I reached the optimum contract of 6♣X. I can tell immediately that everyone will be impressed by our careful control bidding and my improbable preempt. So, after you stop crying/laughing at our bidding, how do the people that know what they're doing reach the right spot?[/hv]

A "Kroger" in Virginia accidentally used empty syringes instead of loading them with the vaccine. https://edition.cnn.com/videos/health/2021/03/12/covid-19-vaccine-empty-shot-carrie-hawes-nr-vpx-sot.cnn/video/playlists/coronavirus/

Oops! Thank you - I thought I was missing something. But the something that I missed was that I made the correct lead to beat the contract. Now it sort of makes sense. Make the right lead, you fail, Make the wrong lead; you succeed. Obviously, in this case only. Edit: I was conflating two posts. this one (3NT - I was on lead), and 4S - robots on lead. Both questions now understood. FWIW, Stephen, sometimes people (viz., me) do have difficulty realising 'obvious' things. Even if this never happens to you. But thanks for the reminder.

But which player would you bar? The robot that provides the wrong information, or the human that doesn't care what her partner thinks? If you start barring people on BBO who do things that their partner interprets correctly but wrongly, or wrongly but takes some other action, or any of several other possibilities, then there wouldn't be many people left on the site. I do tend to agree with the farce point. I think (have said so elsewhere) that robot and Human Bridge are quite different games. A bit like having one pair Curling while the other pair plays Ice-Hockey. Sure, both games are played on ice and require skates, ice and a ball and sticks, but the pace is a little different, amongst other things.

Thank you, Barry. That's very helpful. So, what you are saying is that in tournament situations (say a Daylong), " we ensure that the same random hands are used at all the tables that had the same bidding and play leading up to the decision point". But not in tables in the Prime Club. So long as I know that the Prime Club is simulating multi-skilled opposition, that's fine. I don't like it, but it is what it is. It feels like the tournament players are getting Prime cuts and the Prime players are getting salami - so to speak. In any case, I'll just leave it as something that I would prefer to be different. OTOH In another post, I provide an example (https://www.bridgeba...age__mode__show) which was Board number 4 from DL (MP) 1 - 2021-03-10. Here, after the same bidding has occurred, 3 players get one lead, but 10 others get a completely different lead for exactly the same auction. Me and 2 others (pilowsky; 3NE+1; (3) -630; 2.94%; Your Movie). ♦4 is led to me (passive).The winner and nine others (Other Human; 3NE-1 (10) +100; 86.76%; Sample Movie). ♥5 led to others (4th down from AK653). Does this mean that this was an error? Or am I missing something? Again?

I am not a Director, but I have played extensively with Robots (and Humans on BBO for a while now (not as much as many others). In my opinion, you should not worry about it. Only the robot can alert in a robot-human partnership. The robot tells the table (partner included) what it "understands" the bid/call to mean. NOT what it actually is. Because robots do not remember their individual partners (there are so many!), it is absolutely 100% impossible for the (misrepresented) bid to be a partnership understanding. The robot is telling the truth, "I understand this bid to mean X". Another situation that commonly arises is when Human+robot are playing Human+Human. If Human+Human are playing a highly unusual system () such as Acol or Precision, or worse, they alert their call, but the robot will not understand the alert. If someone bids 1NT (11-14), the robot makes an inappropriate call, and the Human+robot partnership suffers, would there be any damages awarded against the Human+Human pair? Not in my experience.

Absolutely agree. There is nothing unique about the stupidity of some people in America. I would know, I was born in Capetown. There are some pretty unique people there too. Some of them come to Australia where they complain "Ag man it's so terrible heer". "Ah carnt find a plaice to pork ma coor in the coor pork." "Ag shame, ah know". etc. As far as Miller goes the biggest disappointment of my young game-playing 'career' was that Bobby Fischer turned out to have such 'unusual' views. Of course, that isn't the only reason I prefer Bridge to Chess. Could be worse I guess. He could have joined Jews for Jesus. Still - his style of play does inform my Bridge-playing. Nothing wasted, clinical and neutral, but with brilliancies where appropriate. I just wish I could get within a mile of that level. Also agree about the media, just can't apologise enough for the Murdoch press. In Australia, we have been trying to contain them for over 100 years. All of us 'Labor stalwarts' have been blasting away at Murdoch since I joined the party in 1972. Here is a link to our 26th Prime Minister Kevin ('07) Rudd from the National Press Club recently. http://bit.ly/RuddNPC Rudd was a career diplomat who speaks fluent Chinese. I quite liked him and was sorry to see him go. But he was supplanted by one of my sister's school friends who used to play at our home. Her older sister was in my class. My mother once said to her "Julia what do you want to do when you leave school?" "be a teacher" she replied. My mother convinced her to do law instead because she was A) Smart and B) good at debating. It's a true story, it's in her Biography. My mother used to do that sort of thing. "Mum, I want to be a Film Director". "Sure Paul, anything you want as soon as you finish Medicine." - no messing with my mum.

[hv=lin=st||pn|SouthHuman,~~Robot,NorthHuman,goffster|md|1ST54HA63DJ8632C72,S6HKQ74DAQ74CAQT8,SAQ872H985DT95C54,SKJ93HJT2DKCKJ963|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%203|mb|P|mb|1D|mb|P|mb|2C|mb|P|mb|3S|mb|P|mb|3N|mb|P|mb|4N|mb|P|mb|5D|mb|P|mb|6C|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|HA|pc|H4|pc|H5|pc|H2|pc|S4|pc|S6|pc|SA|pc|S3|pc|SQ|pc|SK|pc|S5|pc|D4|pc|CK|pc|C2|pc|C8|pc|C4|mc|11|]300|300| So you bought the farm, pushed the envelope but didn't have the "right stuff". If only South had led away from their Ace, all would be fine Ace. To be fair, it is tricky to bid 5♣ over your 5♦, West did his best. Or, you could pass 4NT, which is the 'optimal contract' anyway. [/hv]

Hi George Just looking at your profile, it says SAYC, so you must have added that when you started originally. On your device, select 'account' Now you see your profile. You can choose skill level and Country etc. Where your name is, there is a space called 'Other' where you now have SAYC. In the area where it says SAYC, put in whatever system etc you want. Now the hard part, Click "save changes" at the bottom or you will lose everything. Which is bad. Now when you click on your name in the box at the top next to BB$ a box should appear with the new changes. I think the option to upload a profile image is still unavailable.

Bridge as an inverse index of global poverty. I just downloaded this from ourworldindata. My link Since the introduction of Bridge, countries, where it is popular, all show dramatic decreases in poverty. Countries were selected based on BBO's data about where their advertising comes from, and my own guesses.

Good news everyone the last person to occupy the white house is fading from public view. https://www.axios.com/trump-news-interest-plunge-4dbe22a0-2722-4c8e-9297-85de0f41d7c0.html

My dog does bark in the night - at almost anything. With an 8 card Spade fit, playing SAYC or 2/1 or even Acol (I think), West or East should be bidding spades.

That's completely reasonable, and I agree with all you say. Because of my easy online access to multiple sources - and well-honed skills at finding information, synthesising and writing about it - my interests are slightly different. What I enjoy when I'm not stuck trying to figure out a Bridge Master problem or trying to add a new arrow to my limited quiver is trying to make sense of the world around me. Outside the United States, many people have looked at the rise of ultra-nationalism as terrifying. I'm one of them. I am disturbed by the fact that people as overtly racist as Bobert and Greene, as stupid as Gohmert or Johnson or as devious and self-serving as Cruz and Hawley can be elected to any national legislature. Don't get me wrong. There are equally self-serving people on all sides of the political spectrum and everywhere in life. Unlike some, I know that there is no point trying to reason with people who have no literacy in rational thinking. I empathise. I just spent two hours on Bridge Master level 3 A-7 getting nowhere. Sometimes if you don't know something how do you figure it out? You simply have to keep looking for clues and learning more until you understand. As you know, just pressing the enter button or playing the cards isn't going to work. But my anxieties are not restricted to the USA. There is a saying in Australia that when times are tough (politically), people turn to the non-conservative option to guide them out of it. When things seem to be stable they revert to conservatism. Slime moulds do the same thing. During periods of need they aggregate into a slug, but during times of plenty, they all do their own thing. That's what European colonisation is all about, looking for times of plenty - usually at someone else's expense. What about "conservatism". To me, conservatism as a political creed seems to about allowing individuals to disturb the equilibrium to their advantage with no concern for the other people that may be damaged. As a creed, modern conservatism seems to me to be the political philosophy of the slime mould in times of plenty, with little or no regard for the plight of others. Sure, we all want things to be a little better for ourselves and our families, but I do not regard the amount of wealth that I have as a way of keeping score. When Bunker Hunt and his brothers cornered the silver market (e.g. http://bit.ly/BunkerHunt) and nearly caused a financial apocalypse, they got away with it. I recall (it may be apocryphal - but it sounds good enough to be true) that when Hunt was asked why he kept acquiring so much money he replied that (approximately) "the money isn't important, it's just a way of keeping score". Well, while people like Hunt, Buffett and Trump are keeping score many thousands of people are starving and suffering because of their devotion to a political creed. On a personal note, I was born in 1958, I went to more schools than I can count in four different cities in Africa, Europe and Australia. I spent around 15 years at Universities training before I felt ready to strike out on my own. This is not an unusual experience for some on this forum, but in the real world, it's unheard of. So now that I have retired, I feel like Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange land". I speak English fluently in 3 different accents but have lost almost all of the >8 different languages that my Father and Grandfather could speak. I think this upbringing gives me a very different world view. Not better, but different. So, bye and large I think we are mostly in agreement. I do not hate Americans as a whole - that would be racism. There are individual Americans I find pretty distasteful (see above for 6 examples), and sometimes I disagree with individual Americans that I otherwise like. In the end, it has nothing to do with whether or not a person identifies themselves as "American" or Jewish or anything else. I despise Stephen Miller for example. The fact that he is an American Jew has nothing to do with it.

I tried to leave a messge under the announcement about Marc Smith's Prime Bidders debrief. My message read "will it be recorded for sleeping members?" I posted the reply and this message appeared: First of all, why the cheery exclamation mark!!! Second, I've read Jose Saramago's book "The Double". I bought it in London (UK), read half and left it on the plane. Then I had to buy another copy from Amazon to finish it. I accidentally bought two. It was a great book. Duplication is important. I'm on the alert for it. I didn't. Anyway, Would I lie to you? http://bit.ly/LieNoNoNo

When I make a point about the behaviour of "America" as regards the way that it deals with both the inside and the outside world, I am using the word "America" in reference to the actions of its government. When you say "us" and then say "I hate", are you implying that every single thing that America does you stand behind? All the time? I note in your posts Ken that you commonly generalise from personal experience. I do the opposite. I look at the actions of the synthesized whole - as represented by the actions wielded by the elected Federal government. Does the same apply to other countries? Yes, it does. The conservative government in Australia, Britain and other places are concerned only with the well-being of individuals. "Fairness" to Scott Morrison in Australia does not mean that all the citizens in Australia should be cared for and treated fairly. No, what he means (and others of his political persuasion) mean is ONLY those citizens that are willing to have a "go". The concept of "having a go" is quintessentially Australian, but there seem to be two schools of thought about it. One group, the Morrison conservatives believe that you are not entitled to any help or aid from anyone unless you prove that you can look after yourself, in which case, obviously, why would you need any help from anyone. I don't agree. Morrison's argument (which is similar to the "if you are poor suffering starving or in desperate need of help then it is Gods will and all will work out for the best. In fact, you might learn and grow as a result" idea. American mythology (via Hollywood) is chock full of this approach to life. Some American writers see it differently. Joseph Heller in Catch-22 to illustrate exactly what a load of baloney that argument is. btw, an American journalist once asked Heller why he had never written anything else as good as Catch-22. He replied, "neither has anyone else". Hating "America" does not mean I don't like everyone in America, but I do understand that America is a country (I have lived in both New York and Virginia) where there are many different ideas and approaches. Where individual success is treasured, and individual failure is despised, where money is the way of keeping score, where everyone as a child is required to pledge allegiance to the Flag every morning. In other countries it's different. I don't know what your lived experience of other cultures is, Ken, but I can tell you for sure that if someone criticises something about Australia, half of us will join them - possibly more. When I complain about some element of "America", it disturbs me that every single American will leap to its defence. Certain elements of American society are a malignancy in any civilised society. There are holocaust deniers in America that boldly display NAZI derived symbology to advance their cause. Tens of millions of Americans have appalling levels of literacy (scientific and language). And I don't just mean Trump - who has difficulty reading from his teleprompter. When you self-identify as "I" and refer to me as "someone who hates us", does this mean that you personally approve of every action taken by the US government and that anyone who disagrees is unpatriotic or hates all individual Americans? What about the millions unable to afford decent healthcare, housing or education? What kind of system of government turns its back on its citizens in their hour of need? When Morrison went on Holidays during the Bushfires that destroyed vast swathes of our country he was roundly excoriated by most Australians, but not by around 33% of "us". That ~33% are beyond the reaches of rational thought. I know - I meet them at Bridge clubs in Sydney all the time. When I called one out for describing "All South African Jewish women" as arrogant I report it - does it have any effect, no. Many Australians are as bad as many Americans. And don't get me started on the British - and don't mention 'the war'. I take every individual person on their merits. I don't look at their 'manner' or 'smile' - even Hitler could smile. Trump smiles and laughs all the time. No, I listen to the content of their speech and writings and their behaviour to others. Oliver Sacks describes walking past a roomful of patients who were laughing at Ronald Reagan on television. "Why laugh," he asked. "He's the President, making a serious speech." "Well, listen to what he is saying", one replied. That's what I do Ken, I listen. I listen carefully to the words that people utter. When they say later "oh, he was just kidding, it was a joke" I don't believe them. le style est l'homme même.

Not sure that's true. Here's what it says. "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." Looks like BoJo's biggest problem would the 14 years a resident problem. Also interesting (where are the lawyers?) is the question: If Trump persists in living in Mar a Lago, where he is not entitled to be a 'resident' according to the contract that he signed, wouldn't that make him a homeless person, of no fixed abode, and technically, not a resident? Just asking