Ant590

Can I eat a Weierstrass?

Clearly the blancmange function http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blancmange_curve Good for undergraduates too because it's an example of a continuous, nowhere differentiable function. mmmmmm, blancmange.

Anyone noticed we're getting very close to the 40,000th thread on the forums...

As per http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=38901, I choose the Road Runner.

Interesting. Weren't you one of the ones who supported Meckwell in the thread about the multi bid and provided defense controversy with the Singapore team? For example: pwned!

For me this would show control in the rounded suits, and demand a diamond-controlling partner to make a forward-going move. In effect, for me it cancels last train and reverts the 4♥ call to it's previous meaning (for instance in some circumstances 4♥ showed a different control, and so 5♣ is asking for a heart control).

Think it's a "what's partner's style?" issue to help choose between pass and 3NT. It seems most people I know make reasonable r/w 1st preempts so I would 3NT it.

8.5 I have sympathy for not doubling, but I think it's losing bridge.

I was once told that this is exactly what dummy should do in this situation.

I can see situations where 4th hand decides to "take a view" and pass a balanced 12 count. However, if partner were to find this out he may go on tilt, and so you would wish to politely decline a request from the opponents to examine your hand.

Have you tried selecting "list all tables", rather than "help me find a game"?

Try searching for Kokish 2H in google. The following links seem ok: http://www.doublesqueeze.com/2009/03/tools...nings-part.html http://www.bridgehands.com/K/Kokish_Relay.htm

50p says it was intended as natural

But what will Csaba do with his free time then? P.s. It's a great suggestion. Should certainly do it.

I think the problem is that there are many pairs who do not know that "no agreement" is an adequate response to these questions (provided you have no explicit or implicit agreement). For such a pair, the questions will seem like an attempt at fishing a ruling if their response is "wrong". Luckily, in games where players are ignorant of the rules usually don't matter, so I would only ask (and expect to hear a reasonable answer) in higher-standard games, compared to your average club night or low tables of a national event.

Yes, Casaba has it right, my comment about the equivalence of 1♣-1♦-2♠ and 1♣-1♠-2♠ was quite misleading. There are some hands which would have bid 1♠ over 1♦ which now have to bid 2♠; i.e. hands that can't really bare to be passed out in 1NT/2♣ but would have chanced a 1♠ bid as the latter is hardly ever passed (whereas 1NT/2♣ is more frequently).

Two come to mind... (1) 1♠ -- 4♥ (2) (1x) -- dbl -- (rdbl) -- pass

I wish someone would make an index of this stuff somewhere!

I can't find the thread where Frances wrote, but http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=32153 is a different one.

LOL. Can we frame this one please?

Nah, there are levels of self-serving: (1) Working for a charity is self-serving to a certain extent as you feel good about the help you're doing (2) Stealing money from a charity is self-serving also, but I doubt anyone would regard it the same as (1) The only valid argument is that there is no universal metric.

Nah, I just have no judgement. But it's post on the BBO forums or continue the Thesis, so I might as well look foolish here :)

I hate replying first, but... x (whatever the partnership agrees it to be), then pass partners 5♣, raise anything else to slam.

So Phil, was this for a bet, or did someone's opinion differ from the collective mind that is the BBO forums?

Chronic underbidding from both players? [hv=d=e&v=n&w=saqj2ha3dk8cakt63&e=s76hj86daqj765cqj]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♣ -- 1♠* 2♠** -- 3♦*** 3NT * Transfer Wash (diamonds or min balanced) ** Natural extras, equivalent to 1♣-1♦-2♠ *** Extras, bad hands go through Lebensohl