Trinidad

On BBO, you can only see the alerts that your opponents make. You cannot see the alerts that your partner makes. So, if on BBO, someone alerts his own 4♥ bid (because it is kickback), he alerts, types in "keycard ask" and makes the bid. His partner will only see the 4♥ bid, not the alert or the explanation. (This is obviously only true if the alert procedure is used, not if the explanation is given by a chat message.) Rik

I certainly don't. Because, as I understood it, the arrests where made under a law that deems it sufficient that the crime has "some link" (e.g. use of internet provider, etc.) to the USA for the USA to have jurisdiction. I don't want any country to have jurisdiction over what I am doing, other than the country where I am doing it. This means that for what I type on BBF right now from my living room, I could (in theory) be prosecuted in the Netherlands, BBO can ban me, my Dutch internet provider can refuse to serve me, Microsoft can revoke the software license (I am using explorer), but the US government (or that of Iran, North Korea or Senegal) has nothing to do with it. Rik

If Liberland has no laws, then how is it possible to commit a crime over there? You can defraud whoever you like from Liberland. It is not illegal. And it is nobody else's GDB to think anything of that, if the people of Liberland (1 person IIRC) have decided that. Rik

Jurisdiction (and sovereignty) are important principles. That is why jurisdiction has been defined incredibly clearly internationally. (There are few things that virtually all countries agree on so well.) To take your example of an airplane flying over the North Pole: Jurisdiction has been defined. It is not Denmark, Norway, Russia, or Canada. It is the country where the air plane belongs (is registered). So it could be Japan or the USA, or the Netherlands. But it would be clear which one it was. Rik

When you are in Liberland you abide by the laws of Liberland. And others have no business interfering with Liberland's sovereignty. That is how we do things. There is one exception and that is for crimes against humanity (or something like that). If the USA doesn't like the laws of Liberland (or the way Liberland is not enforcing their laws), they can forbid their banks to do business in/from/to/with Liberland. They cannot prosecute you for things that Americans consider crimes when you perpetrated these acts in Liberland. The fact that you used an American account, or an American car, or a Yankees baseball bat does not change that. The perfect example of how it should be done is happening the other way around right now. No European country has been prosecuting USA authorities for murder. According to the principle behind this American law they would be able to do that: European Pentobarbital has been used in executions. This is a clear crime in European eyes, and there is a clear link to Europe. But the USA is a sovereign country. What we consider a crime (executing people) is not a crime in the USA and the people of the USA get to decide on that, not we Europeans. What Europe can do (and actually does) is forbid European companies to sell Pentobarbital to the USA. This is the equivalent of the US government forbidding banks from doing business with Liberland. Rik

Well, given that Blatter got re-elected, that probably is true already now. However, I don't think that Western-Europe is going to forgive FIFA. Part of Western-Europe (like me) may not like the way the USA might be claiming jurisdiction, but I don't think we will see the USA as the bad guy. Rik

Two possibilities: - The country where the money changed hands, or the illegal agreements were made. (I know that is difficult, but such is life.) - The seat of FIFA (Switzerland, I presume) which is the country of the institution whose primary interests were harmed and presumably has in their contracts with all their staff a clause that legal battles are supposed to be fought in Switzerland. FIFA could (and should) take civil action against their people when they take bribes. (I know, FIFA is so corrupt, it is not interested.) So, if these guys were in the USA when they "involved those US banks" then go get 'em. If they were not, then they didn't do anything wrong in the USA, did they? And then the USA doesn't have jurisdiction, no matter how much they would like to have jurisdiction. Rik

At MPs, I would bid 3♠, but at IMPs (and this is IMPs) I would make sure we get to 4♠. Rik

We want rules to be applied equally, don't we? I don't doubt for a second that these FIFA guys are the bad guys. But that means that whatever country should prosecute them for whatever bad they did over there (with their feet on the ground). That is a rule for everybody, good guys or bad. I don't want a law that gives any country the right to prosecute anyone for actions committed outside that country. Period. And I don't want such a law used to prosecute bad guys, because then it can also be used against good guys. Why is this important? Because countries differ. Whoever is a bad guy in one country can be a good guy in another. If we would allow this, then Russia or Iran can arrest American gay rights activists also if they have never been to Russia or Iran. Obviously, the spelling error part was a joke, but more seriously. Do we want to allow the Fins the right to arrest Americans (who don't even know where Finland is) for what they write on twitter? The solution: Find things that these guys did wrong in the USA or find out where they did things wrong and prosecute over there. Not ideal, but better than letting the USA (or any other country for that matter) prosecute whoever everywhere. Rik

Great! That means that the stadiums won't be in Helsinki or Turku, etc., but in Kemi, Kemijärvi, Utsjoki. Soon there will be a rule change in soccer too: Goalies are not merely allowed to use their hands, they can use their andlers too! Rik

Gwnn, I think you are unfair here. Being worried about "Lex Americana" is not the same as being anti-American. Nor does it equate to supporting FIFA. Kenberg has posted his worries about this "Lex Americana". I doubt you can call him anti-American. Most posters here want the FIFA cleaned up. But the way this American law works is very shady. What if the US government passed a law that makes promoting evolution theory a criminal offense? That would mean that half of us could be arrested and extradicted to the USA! After all, we are committing this crime on a server in Las Vegas, NV, USA. So, I think the worries are genuine. Many people in this world are somehow linked to the USA. That doesn't mean that their actions (good or bad) are suddenly under the jurisdiction of the USA. What if other countries would do the same? Many Americans are -without knowing it- linked to many other countries. Suppose the Finnish government would pass a similar law and decides that spelling errors should be punished by a fine of €10 per error. You and I don't have a say in that, and neither does Kenberg. Many of those Google servers are physically located in Lapland. (Good internet connections, low costs for cooling the servers.) With the revenue their law generates, the Fins could afford to bribe all FIFA officials and the stadiums for the next world cup soccer would be in Helsinki, Kuopio, Oulu, Tampere, Turku, Rovaniemi, Lappenranta, and Jyväskylä. Boy, are we lucky that they are more interested in hockey and ski jumping! Rik

Because that is the bid that has been doubled and it is the contract that we will play if the double would be passed out (which is the main characteristic of a penalty double: "partner, please pass"). You cannot force the opponents to play 4♥X by doubling 2NT. Rik

It is simple: If we win, it is skill. If the opponents win, it is luck. Rik

I sometimes open at the three level with a six card major. It will typically be in third seat NV vs VUL and more frequently in hearts than in spades. Rik

Gefeliciteerd!! Rik

So, the UK is willing to leave the EU over fishing?!? This is the 21st century, right? And we are talking about a highly developed country? And fishing contributes how much to the UK economy? So, to supposedly get back the UK fishing industry (as if it has any future to begin with), the UK is willing to make sacrifices in their trades and services (the "London inner city") and hi-tech industry. And sentiments have nothing to do with it... Rik

I hope you agree with me that it is important that a regulation is understood by the players that need to abide by it. Helene is one of the players in the EBU. She is not one of the dumbest (mild understatement ;) ) and clearly has some interest in rules and regularions. Now, if she doesn't understand a regulation, that you think is so simple, then what will happen to those bridge players that are dumber than Helene (the vast majority of the EBU players) or have less interest in the rules? They won't understand the regulation either. That means that the regulation may be simple (at least in your view), but it simply isn't simple enough. Rik

I think the surprise is on the UK. They will find out that there isn't that much sympathy in the EU for the UK. In the 1980's Thatcher negotiated an exception for the UK. The UK needed to pay considerably less to the EC than it normally should have. This happened at a time where the rest of Europe was filled with Pan-European idealism. They didn't understand why the UK was so hesitant about the EC. The Europeans considered the UK disloyal and difficult. But the way to sell it in Europe was: We want to keep everybody in the club. The UK is having economic difficulties. The mining regions need our particular support after the closing of the mines. We need to help a friend in need. And Thatcher got the deal she wanted. (This exception has existed for decades and has been lifted fairly recently.) Now, the sentiment is rather different: There is hardly anything left of the Pan-European ideal. The UK has basically been disloyal and difficult towards Europe since Thatcher. It has not behaved like a friend of Europe. (In fact, it isn't a friend of Europe.) The UK is doing well economically, it doesn't need any help. So, the European sentiment is: "If you don't like us, well then don't play with us." Rik

Really? If someone bids Unusual 2NT, and next hand doubles, the usual penalty meaning is "interested in penalizing at least one of the suits they showed". The question is not about what would be a logical meaning. It is about what would be the non-alertable meaning. The auction goes: 1♥-Pass-2NT (Jacoby)-Dbl The alert regulation says that double is non-alertable if it is penalty. We are doubling 2NT, we are not doubling some heart contract. So, the non-alertable meaning is: "I think 2NT will go down." That means a hand that seems to be able to take 6 tricks against 2NT, not a hand that seems to be able to take 4 tricks against 4♥. I agree with you that it is not sensible to play a non-alertable penalty double of Jacoby 2NT. With a solid six card suit, I would just bid my six card suit. But the double of 2NT is non-alertable if it says "I expect to take 6 tricks against a NT contract". (And with such a hand, nobody would double.) Rik

No, you are doubling 2NT, not some heart contract. So it is a penalty double of 2NT. I was thinking of a solid six card suit or a semi-solid suit and the ace of their suit. Rik

Out of curiosity: What does a penalty double of a Jacoby 2NT (1♥-Pass-2NT-Dbl) look like? Rik

You would think so, wouldn't you? Yet, someone who plays regularly in the EBU, with a very analytical mind (a PhD in statistics if I recall correctly) and a regular contributor to the forums finds it far from easy. I consider that telling. But don't believe me. Believe your own worries. Rik

It is the same as with any friend leaving a group of friends. The group of friends will go on, perhaps saddened by the decision of the lost friend. The impact (whether positive or negative) on the leaving friend will be much larger. But if the UK wants to be alone, the other countries won't stop them. They tried to stop the UK when they threatened to leave in the 1908s, out of Pan-European idealism, but they won't do that now. Rik

Yes, experts do form casual partnerships. And yes, many experts do like to follow the KISS principle and keep it simple. Many even do that in their regular partnerships. But refraining from using cuebids is not KIS, it is simply S. Rik

The UK is part of the world. That comes with benefits and drawbacks. You cannot keep the drawbacks out without giving up on the benefits. Rik