cicus

If a stage fright affected person needs accommodation, I am certain it will be given and there would be no problem! However, that person should have the common sense to request the accommodation in advance, not in the middle of the event. TD's have other things to do than waste time in re-arranging table assignments in a significant event (significant enough to be broadcast). I'm glad you allow me a leeway... alas, in practice the conditions of contest always force me to agree with either playing in vugraph or not participating in that particular tournament. At least I have never seen a CoC allowing me to declare in advance that I am not wishing to play in vugraph.

But being aware of it does not decrease the handicap. So they have to live with that, you say?

Let's say that BBO is broadcasting a pairs tournament. There is one vugraph table. Pairs come and go, everything is ok. Now comes a pair who say they cannot play in front of the eyes of hundreds of spectators because they are handicapped by stage fright. They refuse to play and there is an awkward break in the broadcast. The pair is penalized by the organizers. Is that right? Can they be forced to play in vugraph? What do you think?

Thanks, I do enjoy the service already, and the flaw is not that serious.

Viewing this lin file (USA 2 - Norway from round 6) I found comments relating to the match China - Netherlands: http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/vugraph_li...ch.php?id=10980.

No it doesn't. The bubble pops up when an opponent clicks on the bid to ask for an explanation (they can do this for any bid, whether it's alerted or not). Do you find that opponents do this even though FD has already displayed the explanation automatically? Yes, they often do not notice the explanation because it is at an unusual place. They only see that the alert has no explanation and demand it repeatedly. I think many players are not at all aware that FD type CC's exist.

You can't be wrong when the vast majority of voters bid 4s even at MP's. :)

A normal hand for partner: AQ10xxx, xxx, xx, Ax, and I am sure game is odds-on.

The problem I see here is that the alert button makes a bubble pop up in which you are required to write your explanation. What is then the use of the explanation given by the FD CC? You are giving the same explanation twice. If you just OK it without giving an explanation, the opponents are usually confused and inquire further, because the don't notice that there is already a FD CC explanation visible. Shall I alert and write 'see explanation in the top right corner'? Grrr...

Wrong, they show up in white letters. Invisible kibs show up in white letters in main bridge club tables, team match tables etc... But unless it has changed in the latest version of BBO, I am confident that there are no white kibitzers in the kibitzer list of a vugraph table. Anyway, we can confirm in the next vugraph session. Burak You are right, there are no white kibs at the vugraph theatre.

Wrong, they show up in white letters.

Ah, I forgot about that. Thanks.

Watching vugraph I noticed that the displayed total number of spectators was more than the total number of names I could see. Anyone knows the reason?

Yesterday I had very limited time to try it out so that is perhaps why I did not notice what extra features it has over the windows client. Would you please mention some of them?

Thanks for your answers. I tried the F11 trick in Google Chrome and it works there as well.

You can save specific deals yourself if you want. Click the Options button below the deal diagram on the right of your screen, then Export Deal, then Save Deal As. Also, you can access the most recent 100 or so hands you played through My BBO (button at the top), Hands and Results, and then Recent Hands (in the window that appears). Most likely we will eventually extend this feature so that you can access any deals that you have played on BBO. Maybe we will even include some advanced search options. If you can be more specific about why this is the case then I might be able to do something about it. Fred Gitelman Bridge Base Inc. www.bridgebase.com As for saving hands, I like to have all my hands saved, so that after a session I can browse through them and look for errors or bidding situations to be discussed. One of the good things with the windows program is that it saves the hands by session. As for viewing, the web client has a large area at the right side that contains the whole hand, the bidding sequence, and the scorecard. I don't know how to close these windows and as it is there is very few room left for the deal in play and the chat area. In addition, the upper region is taken up by the browser header, status line and browser tools (of course I can switch these off but that is not all that convenient). Can be that I am getting old and like what I am used to?

There are currently 3 reasons because of which I stick to the old Windows BBO client: 1. Using the web browser client deals I played or kibitzed are not saved. 2. There is no partnership bidding room in the web browser client. 3. The old program is much easier for my eyes to view. Item 3 is of course subjective but how about 1 or 2?

You could play that the single jump shows 4 cards and use the double jump to show 5.

I didn't expect a 6th spade... :) However, 3NT may be a better bid than 4♠.

3♠ would have basically re-thrown the game invitation to me, so the UI definitely suggested passing. Suggested passing? It would never occur to me to pass this hand with 2.5 quick tricks (in fact almost 3). Nearly an opener and it has improved during the bidding.

This reminds me of my younger days when once I played a tournament with the system that we look at our hand and try to guess what contract will be best for our side. E.g. we opened the 15-17 balanced hands with 3NT. Now this is completely natural but highly randomizing. It seems to me this would also have been legal at the Cavendish.

There were two pairs involved.

I simply don't believe that. Even Lev-Pszczola agreed it was at most 20 seconds, and the TD, who should know best that 25 seconds is the allowed delay, decides there was UI? This would mean either that at the Cavendish TD's without full knowledge of the rules are employed or this particular TD deliberately cheated in favour of L-P and he even told them not to appeal. And F-Z, who were also aware that 25 s is allowed, behave like timid children. Please have lunch with someone more reliable. Anyway, "I had lunch with someone who was told etc." is not the way to start a convincing argument.

I finally understood what LA means (BIT was quicker).

I don't think we should be afraid of that. In many cases, when there is no action at the table, commentators and operator talk about different things such as sports, or simply tell stories to entertain themselves and the audience.