mink

I would suggest that the ads there do not blink or change while a hand is being played. When switching to the next board the ad can also be switched. For kibs and the dummy and in tourneys while waiting for the next round it is ok to switch ads. Karl

Jillybean, I think you did not get my point: I agree that the cases you mentioned need an adjustment by a human, even if pre-adjusted by an automatism (like always A--). I suggested a final automatic adjustment only for those cases where there is only one result possible, no matter how the hand is played. Karl

to jw_nl: I like the way you handle your tourneys, and agree with everything you said. to Ben: it is indeed possible to keep track of the tables still playing when the round finishes, and I did that myself when I was still directing tourneys some time ago. If players tell the TD by private chat that they want a board to be adjusted, it does not much harm provided that they do not expect the TD to answer this message. However, unnecessary chat to TD always distracts a bit. to Uday: In my opinion a decent director should try his best to adjust all unfinished boards, because in most cases the A-- is very unjust to the side which did not waste time, or even unjust to all if the delay was caused by the need to sub a player. Doing all the adjustments can be a lot of work indeed. However, the server software could help the director by adjusting those cases where the final outcome is clear: - round finished when both opps have agreed with a claim by declarer but the claim did not succeed because dummy was not online (maybe this has been fixed already) - round finished when only the last trick was left to be played - round finished when declarer had only trump in his hand and opps have no trump left Maybe for all unfinished boards with 6 or less tricks left to play, the server could trigger a gib or deep finesse analysis of the unfinished board to be run on the client machines, and automatically assign the worst possible score for each side. I guess in many cases this would be the same score for each side. And even if not, it is possible that the difference is only about overtricks. It would be even better of course that in cases where the results were not the same the delayed tables were allowed to finish their board even though the new round had already started - I suggested this long time ago. However I understand that this would require a considerable amount of software development. Karl

I think I should emphasize the crucial point of this affair: Kaapo let his "Friend1" use his computer to log into BBO 8 months ago. I assume that means Friend1 never used Kaapo's PC during the last 7 months. Now something happens to Friend1 which he is responsible, but not necessarily guilty for. An automatic ban is invoked that not only blocks Friend1 form the Main Bridge Club, but also Kaapo's PC. My conclusion is that I should not let anyone else log in from my PC, because if at any point in future that id causes a ban to be invoked, this ban will extend to my PC. I think this makes it clear that it would be desirable to think about some more detailed criteria for the decision if a PC should be included in a ban or not. Maybe it could be possible to identify the main user for any PC, and bock a PC only if the ID to be blocked is the main user for that PC. Or maybe bock the PC but not the main user even if he uses the blocked PC. Karl

By the headline of this thread the OP suggested that there might have been an UI, but he did not mention in the text what kind of UI this might have been. I understand this was an online tourney, so the only possible kinds of UI are chat or break in tempo, and I guess the OP would have told us about that if it occurred. As he did not specify the kind of UI, it looks to me as if he wants to suggest that because strange things happened, there must have been an UI. I strongly object that. There is only an UI if it has been observed. If you assume an UI that could not be observed (e.g. by telephone), you just assume they are cheaters. But this should not be assumed without any evidence. Another topic are undisclosed partnership understandings. But as long as it is possible to find some logic in the bids that can can be explained without assuming that E/W have a secret defense system against precision 1♣, any accusation of this kind should be carefully avoided by the TD. If the TD is really suspicious he should ask Stephen Pickett's database if such a call like the 1♠ has occurred before when these 2 players played together. Others already pointed out why all bids by EW were reasonable without knowing details of the hand in advance. I may add that the possibility that East may have ♦ makes it even more risky for West to bid them, because this might have led to a ♦ contract if North did not bid 3nt but simply pass and instead. If I were West and knew my partner's hand I would not bid 3♦ here, as I cannot foresee that North will bid 3nt. The 3♦ bid is only good if partner has not so many ♦ cards and the 3♦ bid makes it impossible for opps to find their nice ♦ fit. Karl

If I intended to cheat I would certainly prefer seeing all cards as a kib over other methods that all involve communication with my partner, which is distracting, may involve misunderstandings and useless when I am declarer. But I guess that banning kibs at some tourneys will hardly decrease the overall amount of cheating, as the cheaters simply play in other tourneys. I am sure that the BBO abuse team does a good job identifying the cheaters simply by their way of play and the fact that some other account was logged in from the same IP address. This is the way the problem should be handled, rather than banning lots of innocent kibs just to keep a few cheaters out. Karl

Situation: 1024*768, window covers all the screen, everything big, playing in a tourney. The call TD button sits just under the LHO. If I move my mouse upwards, crossing the call TD button and then resting on LHO's name, sometimes his profile is not displayed. Whether this occurs or not depends on the velocity of the mouse movement. Btw while writing this post is the first time the new Firefox 2 spelling checker helps me to avoid typing errors. Really a reason to change the browser if you did not do it already. Karl

Download and install was as usual - no errors.

Today I played in a free tourney with 122 tables, 3 rounds, 9 boards, swiss. My own result is not important, but I wondered how the winners managed to get 48 IMPs out of these 9 boards. This is what I learnt by myhands: In board 1 they failed to defend 4♠, so opps made their 4♥ and scored 6 IMPs. This was the second board: [hv=d=e&v=n&n=s743hq8dkqt3ckt65&w=sj8hak65432d9864c&e=sakqt2h97d752cq73&s=s965hjtdajcaj9842]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - 1♠ Pass 2♠ Pass 4♠ Pass Pass Pass Lets say George sits East and Donald sits West (names invented). George is lucky that South leads ♥J. Looking at 4 hands we see that George has easy 12 tricks now by cashing first the trumps and then the hearts. Looking at it from the declarers point of view there also is no other option in sight. But George cashes ♥A, ♠A, ♥K and ♠J, and this is of course the last time for the dummy to lead. George is lucky again that opps allow him to make his ♣Q, but he is still down 2 instead of 2 overtricks. I assume Donald was angry now. But he found a way to handle his anger: in 5 of the 7 remaining boards, he doubled the final contract. 3 times opps redoubled. There were 2 boards where he did not double: in Board 6 he passed his partner's double, and in board 4 opps had doubled his partner. Needless to say, everything was perfect for George and Donald in those 7 boards: When opps played, they went down, and in board 4 George managed to make an overtrick in 2♠ doubled. Here is the complete list from myhands: 4♥S= -420 -6.09 4♠E-2 -100 -8.83 5♠xN-2 300 -0.96 2♠xN+1 870 12.99 4♣xxE-1 200 6.45 2♥xW-2 500 7.74 3NxN-3 800 12.35 3NxxS-3 1000 14.38 3♦xxS-2 600 10.62 Just one example of the hands that Donald (West) doubled 3nt with: [hv=d=w&v=n&s=sh6432dat8543caj2]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] This was board 8 and got him the highest score of all. Now who is still claiming that bridge is a game of skill? Karl

Even in older versions of Netbridgevu the slider on the chat scrollbar sometimes disappeared, but it came back when I clicked on the srcollbar. Some days ago, while at a table, the chat srollbar suddenly became totally invisible, and clicking there where it should be had no effect. However, it was still possible to scoll though the chat with the plage up and down keyboard keys. Some time later, still at the same table, the scoll bar was there again, and worked, and I had no idea what made it come back. This happened only once since the recent betas were launched. Sorry I do not recall which beta it was. I am using windows XP and a full screen window on a 1024*768 display. Karl

I agree the messages do not really help. I rather think there should be a tourney option like "Automatically sub player after n minutes of inactivity". This should include players with and without connection. Chat should count as activity, and the automatism should not be executed if a TD is at the table, if the player in question is dummy or if the round is already finished for this table. TD and partner should still be able to sub a player earlier, like today. BTW, a claim currently cannot succeed if one of the players has red dot, even if it is the dummy and both opps have agreed to the claim. Maybe it is possible to improve this, or has it already been improved? Karl

I'm curious to understand what type of information you think is missing from existing FD files. (I certainly agree that some improvement is possible, however, the system as currently implemented is far from useless) For example, lets look at the MOSCITO FD file: ... Dear Richard, I did not say that the information that FD files provide is generally useless for me. If you play a rather artificial system like MOSCITO the information is very useful indeed. But, astonishingly, I never happened to play against a MOSCITO pair. When I happen to play against a pair with a FD cc loaded (which occurs only rather seldom), and they play a natural system like 2/1, I get correct explainations for the first few bids that are not very enlightening as they more or less say that the bids are natural. But soon they bid something for which no explanation is displayed because the is not included in the FD file, though just the meaning of this bid would be interesting to me. This occurs earlier if the auction is competitive. Take for example 4th suit forcing. Even in non-competitive auctions there are so many possible bidding sequences that I doubt all of them are included by more than a few FD authors. Karl

I would never try to learn a system from a FD file. The reason is obvious: I would have to follow each possible bidding sequence and then have to guess the guiding principles according to which this file was coded. And probably I would find that some paths, though they could well happen, are not included. This is true especially for competive bidding; it is just too boring to click in everything what is possible. I rather would look into some documentation prepared for a human reader. There are so many systems for which such information is available that decoding a FD file makes no sense to me, and therefore any copyright probably makes no sense, too. For the same reasons I would not accept a FD file somebody else has created to be loaded when I play with him: I should look through every sequence in it in advance, and I am far too lazy for that. When opps have FD active I do not trust the explanations for this reason, but more often opps' FD is just useless for me because the first bid I would really like to know more about is usually not included in the file. Karl

Hi Erkson When I click on that link with IE6, a small Download window opens with the option buttons for Open, Save and Cancel. There is also a tick box (which I have ticked) which says "always ask before opening this type of file". If I use the Open option the link opens as a bridge movie - as expected because I have that association set up in Windows Explorer. However with Firefox, when I click on the link, I don't get a download window with any options. the link immediately opens as a text file. I have found this happening on Nikos's site and also on Yvan Calame's site (http://www.bridgefederation.ch/2006/etc/index.php) yet when I click on links in the BBO archive (http://bridgebase04.bridgebase.com:81/vug/?C=M;O=D) they open immediately as bridge movies. It doesn't matter whether I left click to open immediately or right click to get a small menu with an Open option - the link still opens as a text file. Very odd :) I think the difference between the forum links and the myhands links is that forum links force a new window. My firefox behaves exactly like yours. Somebody should talk to the firefox people because this is not the way I think this should be handled, and this is probably true for documents other than .lin, too. In the meantime, as a workaround, maybe everybody who creates new links to .lin files on own web pages should use links without the "open in new window" attribute, as this attribute make no sense for .lin files anyway. Karl

Of course it would have been ok for your partner to open 1♥ after the opp had taken back his bid. But I would object doing so without calling the director. The only thing that could be legally done without the director would be a call by nickf without asking his partner, thereby accepting opp's 1♥ lead. If you do anything else without calling the director, there is a great risk that the procedures defined by the laws are not followed. You can also argue that it is impossible to follow the procedures if the laws require the director to e.g. take back a bid - you cannot tell you opp to take back his 1♥bid, and it is completely illegal that opp bids 1♥, then your partner passes, and then you pass. Why not play a trick counter-clockwise from time to time, or? Karl

I know at least one notebook that is connected to the internet via usb and has Windows 98 installed - and it has been working for at least 2 years now. Karl

Swiss and survivor tourneys are split in sections so that no section is bigger than 50 tables. If you chose the non-swiss movement when creating the tourney, the sections are smaller, I think max 12 tables, but I am not really sure if it is exactly 12. Maybe the number of rounds affect this, as it is not reasonal to more rounds than tables in a section. This is all true for clocked tourneys. How the sections are handled in unclocked I do not know. The reason is to optimize the masterpoints for acbl tourneys, if I remember right. There is no real reason for other tourneys, but it does not really matter there. Karl

I have every trust in Mr. Tetzlaffs word that they can, and even would like to. What helps in this respect is that you do not need to wait until the crops are mature, but you can harvest them after the initial growth is completed, which also requires less fertilizer. This way you can gain several harvest per year even in Europe. Selecting the right crops further optimizes this, and different crops should be grown in order to make efficient use of the soil. Karl

You are right in one respect: 0.26 Euro/100km was incorrect, I made a mistake when copying the figure. The correct value is 0.42Euro/100km. I did not have the time yet to verify all of Mr. Tetzlaff's calculations. However, my impression is that his work is well-though and the presentation is flawless. I have already asked him a similar question by email and was satisfied by his response. Your idea, however, to compare prices of energy and water, does not sound serious, as energy is measured in kWh and Water in m3. It makes no sense to say 1 kWh Energy can be compared with 1 m3 water and then compare the prices for both. But what we could do is compare the fuel costs for hydrogen out of biomass with the fuel costs of gasoline out of crude oil. A year ago the German gasoline price was 1.20 Euro/liter. Without taxes this is 0.36 Euro/liter. Density of gasoline is about 0.72 kg/l, so we have exactly 0.50 Euro/kg. Energy density for gasoline is 12 kWh/kg, so we have 0.042 Euro/kWh. Mr. Tetzlaff has calculated 0.041 Euro/kWh for hydrogen as it would be available at the filling station. So you could say it is the same price. What makes the difference is the fuel cell. The efficiency of the system fuel cell - electrical engine - wheel is 80 % at least, while the efficiency of a gasoline car is only 14%. This means, if you calculate the energy price for the energy that arrives at the wheels of the car, you get 3.00 Euro/kWh for the gasoline car but only 0.51 Euro/kWh for the hydrogen car. This is roughly factor 6. This of course is only true if you do not have enough bio-hydrogen forall. Mr. Tetzlaff claims at least in Europe it would be no problem for the farmers to meet the demand. (He has presented his concept at farmer meetings already.) However, if this was really the problem, you could generate hydrogen from natural gas or crude oil and still enjoy the cost benefits of a hydrogen car. On the other hand, when you really have enough hydrogen in a developed bio-hydrogen economy, then it will be impossible to sell oil anymore. Karl

They do pollute less because they need less fuel because they do not waste fuel. Of course this is true only if the car is travelling in urban areas where much stop and go occurs. When travelling on the highway, a hybrid car has no advantage at all. This is probably the reason why I have never heard about hybrid trucks - trucks relatively seldom drive into the middle of the city. This is the essential misconception. Production of syngas from coalstarted already in the 19th century. It was first used for street illumination, and became available to homes for heating and cooking in the early 20th century. The hydrogen portion in the gas was 50%. What needs to be done in order to get pure hydrogen is just separate it, which is no problem with todays technology. This means, it is easy and efficient to produce hydrogen from biomass or any other hydrocarbon material. The technology is available. Fuel cells are available as well. If you plan to operate them with hydrogen you need a most simple device with no moving parts inside, which could be produced very cheaply if high quantities were demanded. A network for the transportation of hydrogen from the biomass converters to homes and business is available, too: I was first used for the syngas, today it is used for natural gas, and can be easily used for hydrogen in future. This concept is unique because prevents pollution, saves very significant amounts of money and eliminates the dependency from the big energy multies and oil producing countries. The only problem is that you cannot start to produce hydrogen if nobody has fuel cells and there is no point in buying a fuel cell if hydrogen is not available. Therefore, the society would have to decide to restructure the energy distribution by converting from electrical current to hydrogen. This is not easy of course as both oil industry and the providers of electrical energy would lose their whole business if this succeeds. But the advantages are so great that I think it is worth a try. This is why I started this thread: to promote the idea. It can only become true if at least many people know about it. Karl

This could also be in the gas prices thread: Mr. Tetzlaff predicts if we started with the hydrogen economy right now that a fuel cell car in 2015 would need 0.26 kg hydrogen per 100 km, which can be compared to 1 liter / 100 km. Expenses for that will be 0.42 Euro / 100 km - including German VAT but no other taxes. There should be no other taxes if the hydrogen is produced from biomass, as there is no fuel tax on bio-fuels today. The car for which this is calculated is comparable to todays middle-class cars with a top speed of 260 km/h. With a 100 liter tank of compressed hydrogen the operating range would be 1500 km. Needless to say that such a car would also be cheaper when you buy it, as a combustion engine and all additional aggregates needed (e.g. generator for electrical power) is much more complex than an fuel cell combined with a electrical engine. This information is taken from http://www.bio-wasserstoff.de/h2/Brennstof...obil/mobil.html and just translated. Karl edited - corrected typing mistake in the Euro/km figure given

A solar thermal power plant sounds nice, but you have to build mirrors and collectors which are expensive and have a limited lifecycle. You get thermal energy from this. If you like to convert this energy to hydrogen, you are facing big losses. If you just generate electrical power, the losses are not so big, but you cannot store the energy. And such a facility covers a big area you have to find in the first place. (I bet the neighbors would not like that). Agricultural area that is not used for food production is available in Europe. It would also be a good idea for some of the areas used for food production currently to be dedicated to energy production in order to reduce the overproduction of food in Europe. In order to use this for energy production you have to invest nothing. Farmers could just use the machinery they already have and start to produce biomass. Only some central facilities for the conversion of biomass to hydrogen need to be built. This is a much smaller investment than building thermal power plants that yield a similar amount of energy. Karl

This is not true. If you take a car with an electrical engine that gets its energy from a hydrogen fuel cell and the hydrogen was produced from biomass, the energy that reaches the wheels is at least 80% of the Energy that was contained in the biomass originally. Just compare this to only 14% if you take a conventional car with a combustion engine and crude oil as the primary energy. If you use the fuel cell at home and use the electrical power as well as the heat it generates, you can have a combined efficiency of even 90%. I would call this using less energy. Karl

Your complains are probably too late. This is what Fred wrote recently: Maybe this works also if you see the red name in the table list of the tourney. Karl

Offline players are only part of the problem. There are also red dot players and inactive players. At the start of the tourney you have no problem with offline players, as they are excluded from the tourney automatically just before it starts. You have a problem with players who were away from the computer when the tourney started. But no software could possibly tell you who they are immediately after the start of the tourney. Instead, the best policy is to wait 2 or 3 minutes. Within this time, most of them have arrived. After that, some other player at the table where an inactive player blocks everything will call you and you can sub the inactive player. Of course, it would be easier for directors if the software automatically subbed an inactive or offline player after some time that could be specified by the host when creating the tourney. In cases where the connection is ok the player in question could be warned short before the subbing, and he could click a button if he is just thinking. Karl