CarlRitner

Why would you say clubs could and probably are short? 3=(1-4)=5, 3=(2-3)=5 are fairly common shapes.

In my partnership, disciplined (as it refers to weak twos and other preemptive bids) doesn't mean suit quality or points; it means staying within the partnership agreements.

I agree; this is East's first opportunity to pause and review the dummy. I would be pinged on every trick if held to an extra second or two...

So then, to merge an idea from another topic, 1C .... 7NT - (Pass) - Pass - (Dbl) Pass - (Pass) - (Rdbl) - (Pass) Pass - 1C IB accepted could very well make the news some day. Unless 7NTxx ends the auction....

Gotcha. Didn't mean to stir things up, it's just anytime I can combine bridge and computer stuff, I enjoy it. 4 trillion boards ought to cover my needs.

Yeah, I caught that part too. Was curious if the director asked why she did it then, or even if the director was called. I assume using the STOP card and then not making a jump bid to be an irregularity.

The reason I mentioned this is because for years, Bridge Baron (and most other bridge playing programs) stated "4 billion random deals" etc... but about two years ago, Bridge Baron upgraded the internal dealer to cover all possible deals. I can't tell you why they did this, but it was implemented without any issues (I am a beta tester for them). I would never "notice it" repeating (heck, I can replay my deals from a year ago and not notice it, and I did not mean to imply it was "broken". I was expressing curiosity, perhaps on the wrong thread?

So, despite the hands dealt being statistically appropriate for hand patterns and HCP, can BBO deal every possible deal, or only 2^32 (4 billion or so)? I thought one needed 96 bits of entropy to cover all 53,644,737,765,488,792,839,237,440,000 possibilities.

Did anyone bother to ask why the STOP card was used? Maybe the East "LOL" had a brain fart and goofed up the order of the suits. Or something in her head just said 2S- 3H was a jump. To say it "suggests" much of anything about her hand is presumptive, in a somewhat accusatory manner, if I am reading this right. If not, then never mind.

My only comment is that you'd probably want to limit comments to those playing at a level where the gain from using this method will definitely outweigh the losses from a forget or misunderstanding. I think you are talking expert+ where the plus indicates no problems with very memory intensive methods. It might not suffer too much from the "use it or lose it" syndrome, since keycard asks are fairly common.

That was my first thought, but I would also agree with Bbradley's 3C "nothing to say" making sense.

“I don’t believe that the Earth’s but about 9,000 years old,” “I believe that the Earth’s but about 9,000 years old,” I can't tell the difference between those two statements.

I can't properly state a logical reason why, but I think you are correct about combining chances.

I agree with both of you. Does GIB use Italian cue bidding (ambiguous 1st/2nd round controls)?

1C - 1D; 1S - 2D; looks sensible. Walsh can be ignored with this sort of shape.

I use these ranges as well, 2/1 GF, 15-17 NT, trying my best to lose inverted minors. I try to avoid using 3N if there is an alternative since it eats up so much space.

Sorry, I looked at it three times and saw a jump bid. I did it again until I smacked myself pretty hard. I need to adjust my meds....

(2♥) - no - (no) - 2NT ? I was taught this is strong, 20-22 HCPs.

I always thought the intent of this regulation was to prevent the offending side from having an agreement based on a deliberate insufficient bid. The non-offending side can certainly have an agreement as to how to handle insufficient bids, including when to accept or not, and what subsequent calls mean. Knowledge gained by the NOS is AI and can be used however they wish, correct?

Perhaps slightly off-topic or not: Is the fourth suit always FSF when it is bid at the 3-level?

Perhaps some do it just to see if they can get away with it, undetected. In chess any outside observer can see all the pieces (complete information) and consult a computer. In bridge this would be difficult to do (unless it's VuGraphed) but then who/what do you consult, and how to do it quick enough? Better to hack the deal machine/network.

Point count is a conscious evaluation system. Judgment is a sub-conscious evaluation system. Both are a series of calculations and yes/no decision points based on those calculations; the sub-conscious performs many additional steps much faster and then passes along an answer to the conscious.

Mike Lawrence's 2/1 CD shows continuations for both the older Lawrence style (non-GF) and the newer Lawrence style (95% GF). 95% means you can stop in 4m if you do not find a fit and notrump looks not so good. Lawrence's 2/1 book touted the older style. Lawrence today says he prefers the newer "GF" style. The CD is, in my opinion, awesome.

Because of many people asking: WC shipping in the USA is $3 for the first book, $1 (or less) each after that.

Photos removed