undoubling

This is NOT just confusing-----it is completely erroneous as the play DOES NOT conform to the auction------with the lead coming from the WRONG hand!!

But FIRST it has to be updated TO an abacus!!

MP's (from whatever nation) are just "ego awards" designed to make players "feel good" about their accomplishments in this game. Their true value is in the EFFORT it takes to achieve them. It doesn't matter if the "effort" is due to longevity, purchase, or ANY OTHER method, it TAKES effort to gain the rank achievement. ANYTHING that "waters down" that effort is detrimental to the GAME of Bridge!!

I suspect that what you are referring to are "untimed" games, where pairings are determined by availability rather than a "regular" movement sequence. Because these are ON-LINE games, and not "live" f2f, this type movement is possible AND allows "faster" (not necessarily better) players the option of play rather than waiting for everyone to finish the current round. Usually, these games DO NOT allow for "kibitzers" to minimize the ability to provide UI to players.

Better to invert the reversion sequence!!

1) You have a "trump stack" AND an entry to partners hand for ruffs. 2) You expect partner to have values in the led suit and want to "get out of the way" early 3) You "hope" declarer will read you for KQ (?) or longer and will try to ruff losers early 1&2 are "good" ideas but better if the singleton is a low card and NOT an honor 3 is "usually" wishful thinking and can be considered a "desperation" lead that is least likely to cost a trick for your side

I'm a Bronze LM, certified teacher and director, and love to play in Regionals and Nationals, especially w/those just beginning to surface into this wonderful game!! I play SAYC (with some bells and whistles) and am available those days to play. Contact me if interested at: undoubling@gmail.com or through BBO at: undoubling

Depends on the number of SECTIONS involved in the game. Overall placement in a multi-section game is more valuable (BBO or other) points-wise than section places-----b/c the overalls are measured against ALL of the players, not just those in YOUR section.

It's better to look at your score percentage to determine how well (poorly) you did. The "rank" doesn't provide enough data to determine the "true" value of your "rank". Percentage-wise provides a better snapshot of your performance relative to ALL others who played in that event.

See "BBF Login Problem" for added data

Just in case it was missed: A notification of "root security certificate" expiration was issued BY the "root security certificate" SUPPLIER. This notification DID NOT provide ANY "work around" process. AND this certificate was (most likely) applicable to OLDER Microsoft OS's!! Specifically NON-CURRENT OS's (including NON-updated Win 10 os's). Corrective action (by user) incudes ensuring your OS IS Win-10 (or 11) AND updated to current version. Otherwise, you can try to access BBO using another browser---------WITHOUT any guarantee of success. This certificate is subject to EOL criteria.

Edge, which is standard for Windows systems, works just fine. I'm not sure what works with Apple systems

It is "just like" "regular" matchpointing, where you get one point for each pair you beat (better score than) and a 1/2 point for each pair you tie (in your direction). The only difference is that BBO calculates the matchpointing in terms of percentage.

BBO allows 6 Minutes per board in a tournament---so an 18 board event will last just shy of 2 hours. That's a good rule of thumb to follow if you want to invite someone already playing in an event. Check the start time of the current event, and the number of boards x 6, added together will approximate the end of that event.

I, as an ACBL teacher, find that on-line "teaching" of this game is best done 1 on 1, as you both have the opportunity of reviewing auctions and card plays almost immediately, or can relax and review the entire session at your leisure. This allows for the student to see the issue, and to note ALL of the probable solutions to see which one is "best". On-line "group think" sessions aren't as valuable.