glen

to quote from the site, www.bridge.nl , via translation: "Probably the World Cup will be held in the second half of October 2011, the location is not known", that is the location in the Netherlands is not known yet, but it will be there.

I'm going to reply as if this question is in the "Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion" forum. 1) Forget about NMF and artificial bids here - this is not the forum for discussing these on this auction. 2) Play new suits by responder are forcing if below game. On the auction 1♦-1♥;-2♦-?, both 2♠ and 3♣ are forcing. On the auction 1♦-1♠;-2♦-?, both 2♥ and 3♣ are forcing. With game invite values, instead of the bidding 3♣ or, 2♠ on the first auction where opener has denied 4♠s (skipped over 1♠ to bid 2♦), prefer to make a natural invite bid such as 3 of your major, 2NT or 3♦ if your hand fits this. Sometimes you will have to make forcing new suit bids with only some values in them, and not length, when you have no better bid to make. These forcing bids do not establish a game force in a beginner or intermediate partnerships, but advanced and expert partnerships, using methods such as Bridge World Standard, might put in place firm agreements.

I would suggest for opposite-passed-hand 1NT that you either want: a.) a 1NT opening that is wide ranging, but limited in that responder will never have enough to invite in NT - for example 10-14 opposite a system that opens all 11s. b.) a 1NT opening that has a minimum such that responder will still bid 3NT some of the time - for example, opposite a system that passes flat 9s, 16-18. However see awm's clever discussion in another thread that recommends that it is better to open the strong ♣ with 16-18, and open 1NT with 19-21 (I would modify that to open 1♣ with 16-17, 1NT with 18-20). You might decide to use a.) 3rd seat not-vulnerable, and b.) the rest of the 3rd and all 4th seat times.

He wants to play 1m-1♥;-3♠(♥ fit + unknown singleton)-3NT as natural?

Top bridge players are very highly competitive (understatement) - for a pair to drop out losing by 16 IMPs with 42 boards to go implies there are other undisclosed reasons, which they may not want to tell others about. As noted above, even if absolutely nothing further is done, there is a big cost to this pair in the future as nobody can trust them as teammates.

Something interesting is to shift ♦s for ♣s, as follows: 1♦: 12-14 balanced; normally all 4333, 4432, and 5332, even with 5M 1♣/♥/♠: almost always at least a 4 card suit, always in the majors - If two suited, the second suit will normally be longer. - If one suited, the suit will normally be 6+ cards. - May be balanced only if 18-19 HCP, 1♣ may have only 2-3♣s only if 18-19 HCP balanced (option: have 1♣ open all 18-19 balanced, and/or expand to 18-20 or 17-19 with a 14-16 1NT). 1NT: 15-17 balanced; normally all 4333, 4432, and 5332, even with 5M 2♣: Strong, 16+ with ♦s OR 22+ balanced OR any game force. If ♦s unbalanced and below a game force, either one suiter or with longer major 2♦: 11-15, 6+♦s, always a one suiter 2♥/♠: 11-15 with 5+M and 4+♦s 2NT: 20-21 balanced Lil' ♦ may not be the engagement one is looking for, but its playable. 1♣ can be played as forcing, ♣s or balanced, and if balanced 18-19 or 22+, and the 2♣ opening is unbalanced with a major and a game force, or ♦s and 16+ without ♣s. For spicing it up, when balanced not vulnerable 1st and 2nd, 1NT: 10-13-, 1♦: 13+-16, 17-19 opens 1♣/♥/♠.

I'm dazed and confused (yes, not the first time, not the last time) - doesn't op say "1♣ 12-14 balanced; normally all 4333, 4432, and 5332, even with 5M" - how is that prone to aggressive preemption given it is a single hand type? Also why does hrothgar "I'd expert [sic]" that 1♣ has some big hand types?

Does this hand type open 1♠/♥ if 17+, opening the longest suit first? and, from awm's first item, does 3-3-2-5 exactly 18-19 open 1♦ with just two diamonds?

cute

remove all masterpoints <> Track winner and 2nd place only remove all masterpoints <> absolutely no reward to any other position

The last Super Bowl paid the winners $83K per player, and losers $42K. However, even with the low monetary reward (average salary $1.4M), nobody said "Why bother playing in the Super Bowl?". Its not about the masterpoints.

For mixed they could used mixed up points, such as Plattitanium.

Yes, the kennedy club was superseded by the tiger club, where the alert depends on how it is being employed

mid-chart+, if 15+, assuming the openings are both forcing and artificial (natural and forcing always allowed) - the opening can be artificial and non-forcing too, as long as it is 15+ - for example a 1H opening showing 15-17 NT, but you can't upgrade 14s into it

Not exactly - the feature is now demanding I change the pre-nup, and even if I do nothing but fire off PRs, my damage levels keep increasing

I’m having some troubles with some new video games: Dinner Crashers - I get into the dinner, shake hands with the president (see 24 Season 2 ending), but can’t activate the firefight with the secret service Grand Slam Auto - I escape the house (close call), but immediately drive into either a fire hydrant or tree, and then it’s just evade the police Modern Warfare V - I add 30k more troops, but then the enemy retreats into the mountains, and they stay hidden until I exit Any hints or easter eggs?

by almost a board. See pages 7 (a pix of Justin and father, or is that Phil?) and 1 of today's bulletin: SD Bulletin 3 3rd was Meckton and 4th was involved in the appeal on page 6

Is this ACBL GCC legal? See: ACBL Convention Charts 2NT asking for aces, undefined hand type. (btw responses are 3♣ 0-3 aces, 3♦ 4 aces) If 2NT is not legal, is 4NT opening asking for aces legal, and why the difference?

The flaw in this pyramid is that its foundation is the people around the average age of an ACBL member. However for the future of bridge try developing what the pyramid of bridge players under the age of 40 looks like (perhaps pyramid is too big in this context). If one consider the range of gaming options for the under 40 (farmville, counterstrike, uncharted, etc.) the ones that stick to the bridge are the few that love complexity, not the ones that want packaged pastimes.

could be the new ACBL Life Master requirements taking effect early Happy pardon-a-turkey day to all celebrating that!

2♠: shapely responsive double Pass, and then double of ♠s as available: high card points responsive double

a feature I would like to see would be wtf asking after the hand. player: wtf was 2S? robot: 8+ points, 5+Ss player: you didn't have that robot: sucks to be human

See the section Switch Plus in: http://www.ny-bridge.com/bt/add96.html As Granovetter notes about Bergen's Switch: For additional fun at the table, you can rename Switch as Bergen2 when describing it.

The problem with Fred, is when one now puts out bait for him, not only does he eat the bait, he eats the fishing line, and rod, and the boat too. In older days he would take the bait and, running with the thread, tow the boat along to port. The good news is that his current approach is much better for time productivity, which means more time for BBO and software, and for me if less from Fred here means more things like BBO/mobile, its a win for far more of us if he's business and software focused. Now that we are Fred-poor, the rest of us can step up to the plate, but we have to avoid playing grenade baseball. On unmoderated rec.games.bridge, here are quotes from a current thread, the quotes all from yesterday or early today: - Your assertion that maybe Meckwell would win more if they listened to you shows the height of your stupidity and ego. - The gist of this sub-thread is that your hysterical attack on the 1D bid in question has been met with disagreement and silent derision, now not so silent. - You continue to be a true genuine ape. - The most pathetic thing about this is that you are taking isolated hands and trying to make a case against a systemic call that you don't understand. Makes one happy to be in BBO forums, doesn't it?

I think at some point BBO needs to update the 2003 Terms of Service thread: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=33 Understandably (though imo wrong), you want BBO forums to include these terms of service: 1) "Do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites." 2) Do not use our site to do anything that would be clearly deemed as running down our online bridge site and/or its services. 3) I'm not sure of what the wording would be, but there is now some sort of rule, or clause so to speak, on BBO forums about linking, or link lots, to external sites. At this time you are deleting postings (not mine, this is my first and last posting in this thread) that do not cross the terms of service.