Butchie T

Thanks but this particular notification has always been turned off. The problem is a function of registering as a sub. There are no filters on this tab. I enjoy sitting in for a hand or two in a random game but "Team Games" border on not being real bridge.

Let me be clearer, sorry. When I'm "loitering" and looking to sub around somewhere, I'll receive a barrage of requests to substitute in any of a plethora of "Team" games. When I decline twice, I must then reregister to sub. Rinse. Repeat. Any help?

Any idea on how to eliminate being incessantly asked to play in someone's "pipe"dream team game? Thanks

There are broad swaths of my history I'd like to forget.

ACBL MP is an artificial construct designed to lure players (read: payers) into thinking that earning ACBL LM designation means something after all the watering down of rankings. Just play bridge to have fun and keep your brain supple. If you want tangible rewards, collect S&H Green Stamps.

Keep in mind that Double Dummy shows the maximum tricks IF all finesses, squeeze plays, end plays, etc. are executed flawlessly. In other words, if you play the board with all hands exposed.

By the powers vested in me – which are as worthless and artificial as masterpoints of any stripe – I dub thee, 1niceguy2, Master of All You Survey.

Games listed under the "Pending" tab as "Running" are ongoing Individual games in which you can still register and play. Games listed under the "Running" tab have begun and are closed to additional players.

Thanks Paulg. I appreciate your input. Yes, it makes sense to replace the original "paying" player. However, it is the practice of BBO to consider a sub the player of record if s/he has played more than half the boards. In my case, I was seated at the start of the second hand, played the next ten boards, and bid, with partner, to win the auction on the twelfth, and final, board. Yet, I was not the player of record. It should be noted that I'm not politicking for points as none were won by our team. Trying to satisfy my curiosity. Thanks again.

I was tapped to sub in an ACBL Speedball. I entered the game at the start of the second board and played till the (almost) end of the game. I say "almost" because, as the final board was being played – I was dummy – I was replaced with "The original player has returned. Blah blah blah..." I asked the director what had happened. He said he didn't know (really?) but that there was nothing he could do and that I should contact BBO. Anyone have a similar experience?

For the life of me, I cannot fathom why ACBL awards ACBL Masterpoints to members who compete in Robot Tournaments. Robots are not ACBL Members.

Thanks for your response. The offending CC is not a stock card. It is entitles "Fran and Lynn" and partner is listed as "SSIplayer". Any ideas? Thanks again.

I have the opposite problem. I have a card on my list that is not associated with me or any partners. It will not delete. Any suggestions? Thanks.

There is a Convention Card on my list that has never been associated with with me or any of my partners. I am unable to delete it. While not harmful, it is an annoyance. Using the delete function is ineffective.

E/W pair must have had a higher score.

Regardless of the strat in which players are placed, there is no equalization of their opponents. It is, therefore, possible for a "C" pair to have all "A" opponents and vice versa.

Please explain how the ACBL points leader is able to play up to 38 ACBL games in one 24-hour period. On several days, this person has played 20, 25, 30 games. In one day! It appears that 2-3-4 games are being played simultaneously. How is this possible? Person has accumulated more than 500 MP so far this month!

It is not uncommon, as a "C" pair, to play 3 "A", 2 "B" and 1 "C" in an ACBL Open. Doesn't seem equitable and is THE reason we won't play in online rRegionals.

Robots don't seem to react well to doubles and robots will rarely allow a closeout 3NT bid to stand. They often push to ridiculous slams.

Played in an ACBL Open game with more than 100 tables. The strats in our section were evenly divided with five each A, B and C pairs. We played six rounds of three boards (a pet peeve of many about those overpriced Regionally-rated tournaments on BBO.) It seems unfair, as C's, then, that we played against three A pairs, two B's and one other C. Am I assuming your computers are able to alleviate this inequity or are they just lazy?

It remains the exception, not the rule (now required), for pairs to post their general approach. Am I unreasonable to expect this or to ask for a director's help when a cc is not posted? Often, pairs will not respond to the director and much time is wasted waiting for their non-reply. Hands time out due to this obstruction. I feel this is unethical play – a form of cheating – if opponents have agreements and conventions but won't share them.