glen

Black Knight: None shall pass. King Arthur: What? Black Knight: None shall pass! King Arthur: I have no quarrel with you, good Sir Knight. But I must cross this bridge. Black Knight: Then you shall die. ... King Arthur: Now, stand aside, worthy adversary! Black Knight: 'Tis but a scratch! King Arthur: A scratch? Your arm's off! Black Knight: No, it isn't! King Arthur: Well, what's that then? ... Black Knight: Come on, then. King Arthur: What? Black Knight: Have at you! King Arthur: You are indeed brave, Sir Knight, but the fight is mine! Black Knight: Oh, had enough, eh? King Arthur: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left!

Troll: Stop. Who would cross the Bridge of Psychs must answer me these questions three, ere the other side he see. Sir Lancelot: Ask me the questions, Troll. I am not afraid. Troll: What... is your name? Sir Lancelot: My name is Sir Lancelot of Camelot. Troll: What... is your quest? Sir Lancelot: To seek the Holy Grail. Troll: What... is your favourite colour? Sir Lancelot: Blue. Troll: Go on. Off you go. Sir Lancelot: Oh, thank you. Thank you very much. Sir Robin: That's easy. Troll: Stop. Who would cross the Bridge of Psychs must answer me these questions three, ere the other side he see. Sir Robin: Ask me the questions, Troll. I'm not afraid. Troll: What... is your name? Sir Robin: Sir Robin of Camelot. Troll: What... is your quest? Sir Robin: To seek the Holy Grail. Troll: What... is the capital of Assyria? [pause] Sir Robin: I don't know that. [he is thrown over the edge into the volcano] Sir Robin: Auuuuuuuugh. Troll: Stop. What... is your name? Galahad: Sir Galahad of Camelot. Troll: What... is your quest? Galahad: I seek the Grail. Troll: What... is your favourite colour? Galahad: Blue. No, yel... [he is also thrown over the edge] Galahad: auuuuuuuugh. Troll: Hee hee heh. Stop. What... is your name? King Arthur: It is 'Arthur', King of the Britons. Troll: What... is your quest? King Arthur: To seek the Holy Grail. Troll: What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow? King Arthur: What do you mean? An African or European swallow? Troll: Huh? I... I don't know that. [he is thrown over] Troll: Auuuuuuuugh. Sir Bedevere: How do know so much about swallows? King Arthur: Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.

imo, the reason tourneys ban psychs is not to protect beginners. For beginners, everything is a problem - what to bid, what to play, what's going on. Handling a pysch is just another small problem on top of the mountain of challenges. In live bridge beginners often don't even know they have been psyched, as they are too focused on their own hands and don't yet have the skill set to analyse a deal. The reason tourneys ban psychs is that a lot of their customers hate trickery in the bidding being used, either by their opponents or by their partners. They detest it, feeling it is an underhanded attempt to fool people. At the local club that has banned most psyches, there are almost no beginners. There are, though, lots of players who have played for many, many years, and who hate psyches. They have found that while psychs are legal in bridge, it takes away their enjoyment of the game. The club has banned psyches for these customers, and it has nothing to do with beginners. If BBO allowed it for their ACBL tourneys, that players could put "no psychs please" in their profiles, and you were not allowed to psych with these players, either as partners or opponents, then what you would find is not a lot of novices and intermediates with this. Instead you will find advanced, expert, "world class", and all sorts of life masters, including gold and diamond life masters, with "no psychs please". For its a set of the long timers that hate psychs, and want them out of their game.

?

On weekday afternoons there is a local club we go to if we are not working (i.e. rarely). The club is run by one of Canada's top players, and has mostly retired people playing, some over 80. There are two clear rules: 1) never open 1NT with a singleton, 2) no wild psychs. We are cool with these rules: they make his customers more comfortable, and it reduces TD calls. This isn't 100% bridge, but club bridge is never 100% bridge (e.g. in any club game, excluding the Flight A IMP league, we call the TD about once every 10 sessions, which is not the rate of possible infractions). There are also clubs that allow infrequent psychs, at most 1 per session, or, in actual practice, at most 1 per session that results in a TD call. At these clubs it is clear not to over psych, and some players will even enjoy having you "banned" from making any subsequent psychs for the session. This is cool too - not 100% bridge but everybody remains comfortable, and there are no psych fests. Even though both these approaches are not ideal for pure bridge, they reflect what is sometimes necessary to impose at the club level to keep everybody comfortable. These approaches are effective when they are done with clear rules, provided by open communications to all players.

Go to "edit my profile", then "board settings", and then for "Number of posts to show for each topic page", select 100 and save

Can anybody explain that?

What exactly is a psychic call?

imo, the reason tourneys ban psychs is not to protect beginners. For beginners, everything is a problem - what to bid, what to play, what's going on. Handling a pysch is just another small problem on top of the mountain of challenges. In live bridge beginners often don't even know they have been psyched, as they are too focused on their own hands and don't yet have the skill set to analyse a deal. The reason tourneys ban psychs is that a lot of their customers hate trickery in the bidding being used, either by their opponents or by their partners. They detest it, feeling it is an underhanded attempt to fool people. At the local club that has banned most psyches, there are almost no beginners. There are, though, lots of players who have played for many, many years, and who hate psyches. They have found that while psychs are legal in bridge, it takes away their enjoyment of the game. The club has banned psyches for these customers, and it has nothing to do with beginners. If BBO allowed it for their ACBL tourneys, that players could put "no psychs please" in their profiles, and you were not allowed to psych with these players, either as partners or opponents, then what you would find is not a lot of novices and intermediates with this. Instead you will find advanced, expert, "world class", and all sorts of life masters, including gold and diamond life masters, with "no psychs please". For its a set of the long timers that hate psychs, and want them out of their game.

On weekday afternoons there is a local club we go to if we are not working (i.e. rarely). The club is run by one of Canada's top players, and has mostly retired people playing, some over 80. There are two clear rules: 1) never open 1NT with a singleton, 2) no wild psychs. We are cool with these rules: they make his customers more comfortable, and it reduces TD calls. This isn't 100% bridge, but club bridge is never 100% bridge (e.g. in any club game, excluding the Flight A IMP league, we call the TD about once every 10 sessions, which is not the rate of possible infractions). There are also clubs that allow infrequent psychs, at most 1 per session, or, in actual practice, at most 1 per session that results in a TD call. At these clubs it is clear not to over psych, and some players will even enjoy having you "banned" from making any subsequent psychs for the session. This is cool too - not 100% bridge but everybody remains comfortable, and there are no psych fests. Even though both these approaches are not ideal for pure bridge, they reflect what is sometimes necessary to impose at the club level to keep everybody comfortable. These approaches are effective when they are done with clear rules, provided by open communications to all players.

A fellow was walking through a cemetery one dark and stormy night. As he got well into the cemetery, he heard a voice say, "Mark! Mark!". Pretending not to let it bother him, he pulled his coat a little tighter and kept walking. Again the voice said, "Mark! Mark!". That did it. He took off full speed and didn't stop till he was well outside the gates. As he stopped to catch his breath, the moon broke through the clouds enough so he could see what had been following him. It was a dog with a hare lip.

I got private messaged by a "user" that appears to be automated: Does BBO want these reported, and if so to who and when?

This was the headline for the article: Article: Victoria's Duncan Smith explains how he earned the status of Grand Life Master The "a) forever" is as in the article, as editors are gone forever.

2c is either ridiculous or Gazzilli: For notes in a 2/1 context: http://stacyjacobs.com/system-notes/major-suit-openings/ Discussion of Gazzilli in a big club system has been on rec.games.bridge, including: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...034e0e17762a454

The laptop must be hungover from a bridge party. Thanks for an excellent post covering everything that needed to be said, although long quite succinct imo, and also giving constructive next steps.

You can look at the approach of ETM TOPS: ETM TOPS In particular, see "Three Way Negative Doubles" - if you play it, you get the added bonus of putting "three ways" on your cc.

Is a 10-12 NT, even white, "going in the wrong direction"?

Why does a poll on variable NT force you to pick only one reason?

Note that OP is a Diamond LM, his partner won a national event in 2007 (without him), and they are both super great bridge teachers. However since they don't have a "gold star" for their profiles, some are assuming they are just regular players, and that their good results are not due to their high skill levels combined with years of experience in serious bridge events - ACBL BBO tourneys being non-serious, of course.

On the hand, there are the interesting plays of ♠ 9 at trick two (i.e. deliberate lead of 9 from K9 into dummy's spade holding), and of the ♠ ten by Fred on the spade play up to dummy. I wondered if playing the ♠ ten was the expected play from Txx after the long thought by declarer, and thus not playing the ten might have been quite right.

This was the Zia Mahmood - Charles Wigoder partnership. There was another player who opened 1NT with 6♠s and quite a weak hand.

Following the "Mine that Bird" (the top two-year-old in Canada in 2008) approach, the pair needs some Canuck bloodlines: Fred Gitelman & Brad Moss Nikolay Demirev & Nicolas L’Ecuyer Hampson & Rodwell Billy Cohen & Ron Smith

Using the recent past winners approach: Geoff Hampson - Eric Rodwell (08) Steve Weinstein - Bobby Levin (07) Ton Bakkeren - Huub Bertens (06) Sam Lev - Jacek Pszczola (04) Fred Gitelman - Brad Moss (03) (Note that Andrea Buratti - Massimo Lanzarotti were 05)

One has to like 1NT-2♣: Alert!, yes?, Stayman. Double, Alert!, yes? Stayman.

Having seen his rgb posting, I asked Chip Martel about this here: http://www.bridgematters.com/martel.pdf I have underlined the Swedish/Polish remark.