42

I just came back from cinema where I watched a movie which I can strongly recommend: Så som i himmelen (2004), Sweden, Kay Pollak, Oscar nomination (As it is in heaven). It is about music, a yellow wheat field, the strengths and weaknesses of human nature, love in many facets, how to cope -or not- with fear, passion. Even those who cannot stand happy endings will like it. Better to take a handkerchief or 2 with you, I found it affecting.

I am so fed up with the usual songs they play on the radio: everyday the same songs performers, style, sometimes the wellknown oldies in between. They call them HITs but they MAKE them to those with endless repetitions; and people go and buy that :) One can switch to classic radio, but also there you hear often the same pieces. It is hard to find good music on air, but it exists. I know that it is a question of definition, taste is different. We have already some music threads where people expressed what they hear playing online bridge, or in which mood they are at the moment. In this thread I would like to describe or read about music and artists that are not known by everyone because they are rarely played anywhere else than at home, as well as why you like the music (the interpretation is special like piano played by Murray Perhia, or the voice of someone turns you on, somebody had a new idea of mixing instruments like Glen Miller had in the 40s, or whatever). Unfortunately there is often a disproportion between being "famous" (and rich) and the knowledge and ability of making really "good" (--> quality) music. I will start with my favourites at the moment. The main style keyword might perhaps be (melodic) Jazz. Diana Krall: - All for you. A dedication to the Nat King Cole Trio - The girl in the other room. Songs by her and her husband Elvis Costello - Live in Paris She plays fantastic the piano and sings great! The 3 CDs have each its own style. Joni Mitchell: - Both sides now This album is "a programmatic suite documenting a relationship from initial flirtation through optimistic consummation, metamorphosing into disillusionment, ironic despair, and finally resolving in the philosophical overview of acceptance and the probability of the circle repeating itself" (taken from the booklet). I like at most No. 3 (Comes Love), No. 6 (A Case of You), No. 7 (Don't go to strangers), and of course No. 12 (Both Sides Now). No. 12 can be heard also on Diana Krall's CD "Live in Paris" :) . I like the lyrics of these songs, and Joni Mitchells transmits the message. This CD is great when you need to lick some wounds. Holly Cole: -Temptation Holly Cole (vocals), Aaron Davis (piano) and David Piltch (acoustic bass+percussion) perform 17 pieces of Tom Waits. Not easy, but I like the result. I have some more but no more time right now. Hopefully the one or the other will post here, too! This is not as scaring as some other watercooler themes B) So far - take care :) Caren

Easter is near.... What is your best recipe for a lamb leg? I will simply lard it with garlic, roast it from all sides, use a lot of herbs like rosmary and thyme, onions, pepper and salt, later sherry, put it into the oven and wait 1,5 - 2 hrs (or if I get up early enough 6 hrs while it "cooks" by 80°C). For the rest I am not yet sure, therefore this thread B)

It might make. King of spades onside. Kx or Kxx of diamonds onside. IF all stands right, the whole thing is fishy, isn't it? Perhaps 2 individuals playing in the same room or each of them in a PC laboratory? That reminds me of the joke: "I am schizophrenic - me too"...

Presumably the in the western hemisphere well feared Forcing Easter Macho-NT. S passed because 9NT wasn't available (called TD, complained and vanished the in space).

My thoughts, when I bid 3NT, were that I wanted to tell p that I have a stronger hand than this x Jxx KQJxxxx Ax, with 2 controls in opp's suits, no ♠-fit. I must admit that I have sometimes a worst case scenario in mind, partner might have such a hand: KQJxx AQ xxx Jxx, and we loose ♠A and a ♣ after ♣ lead. So I was hoping to transmit the message that values outside ♠ are really fine when I bid 4♦ after 4♣, showing overlength in ♦s. Perhaps far too complicated :) (btw: 1♦ is limited to 17). Partner had: Q10542 AQJ QJ4 94 and 6♦ was cold, it wasn't bid on the other table, too (no excuse ;) )

Hi! [hv=d=e&v=n&s=s8hk6dak1098752ca5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You open 1♦, but the nasty LHO intervenes with 2NT (♥s + ♣s, 55+, point range is not specified). Your dear partner grabs 3♥ out of his box which shows 12+ with ♠s, RHO passes: 1♦ (2NT!) 3♥! P ??? - should you decide to bid 3NT, it would go P P 4♣. And now? - 4♦: it is not really clear if it is already minorwood since no fit is agreed. The main arrangement so far is, that 4m is always minorwood in an uncontested auction (this is imo a field which needs to be discussed more precisely... any thought and help is appreciated!) What do you think and what would you do? Thx! :) Caren PS: sorry for another dumb bidding question ;)

Diana Krall *wow* :)

Hi Nick! I met more than 1 person who became a completely different character at the bridge table for reasons that we can or cannot understand, but can be called a friend elsewhere; and also persons who claimed to be a friend and turned out to be not. My golden rule is to listen to my feelings rather to look for arguments. Imo everyone has his/her dark side, we will never find the perfect partner. So just take what is good for you and suits well, the rest is the private corner of your friend, you are not responsable for him/her as well as nobody can blame you for things (s)he did and you were not involved. I disagree with Claus, I don't think that "your personal credibility is at risk" (as I pointed out above); who will be interested in (and notice) with whom you chat? It is absolutely your private decision. Internet friendships have perhaps their own mechanisms: it is easy to pretend a kind of nearness, it is easier to talk about nearly everything with someone in the anonymity of the net, it is far easier to hide the "dark sides" than it is f2f. I on your place would decide to chat on but not to force more. Why? Because the person didn't want to be open with you, admitting or denying what was going on, talking about the whole case, (s)he wants to keep his/her secret(s) and therefore a distance. Unfortunately nothing can protect us from disappointment in any kind of relationship :) At least I made a lot of good experiences, especially here in the BBF and on BBO. Caren

:ph34r: I am naive, or? *blush* A cheater trusts himself also 100% when kibbing from a 2. PC... I have no criminal energy, therefore didn't see what could be possible. Sorry for that stupid suggestion....

I disagree on this, but perhaps the skill level of the student is of importance. Why I disagree is the following: since the player / teacher is interested not to loose money because it really hurts, he will not jeopardize his contracts by doubtful decisions but take only calculated risks. Especially this strategically point is interesting for me. A second point is how the player "communicates" with his robot partner. Also here the player must give the best possible information and no creative (torture) bids to a machine when he wants to avoid loosing money, the GIB will not discuss postmortem. If one can talk of "atmosphere" while watching someone on the PC? It is not the kib's money, so he can be relaxed, sitting homey in his own room with a cup of coffee and some sweets. Perhaps it is stressful for the player in case he looses...

Yesterday a very good friend and real expert +++ player was playing moneybridge. He suggested that he would like me to kibitz him, it cannot result in suspicion of cheating in any form because he would only accept a kib whom he 100% trusts, and the kib can only see his cards (btw: I would never cheat, but I know that this is an invalid argument). And private chat to the player could be disabled by default (which is no real instrument in times of messengers, voice over IP and telefone :huh:) I really would like to kib him, is or will that be possible?

Sorry folks, the lead was ♣K.

Since it was very hard to play, I took every minute to relax, so I am not really sure about the lead, I will ask my partner and then correct if necessary. He said he was down 2 and could not avoid it, and I didn't care about declarer play here :ph34r: My questions were related to responder's bidding, and after your responses I have some more: - When doubling 2♣ shows a penalty DBL for at least 1 M: how strong must responder be? Didn't he have one (for ♥s)? - Do I understand responder right that he decided to pass first and then bid a t/o DBL because he wanted to take both chances: to DBL any M contract (opener leaves it in with good ♠s, he DBLs the ♥s), or offering a minor suit contract? So his decision was the most flexible? What is the recommended strength? And the last questions: from where do you take the knowledge about those competitive situations? Can you recommend a book?

The lead was ♥5

500 for the others, partner was 2 down...

Hi! Here is a hand from last weekend where we lost IMPs: [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sjhkq98dj832c7632&w=skq854ha743d109ca9&e=s963hj6dk764cj1054&s=sa1072h1052daq5ckq8]399|300|Scoring: IMP 1NT 2♣! P 2♠ P P DBL all pass[/hv] At the other table our teammates played 2NT. Questions: 1.) Do you agree with bidding 2♣ for both majors here? (I ran 2x into trouble with that during the event, both times with a good hand, as I evaluated it; in the other hand partner was weak with 5♦s + 4♣s, 2-2 in M) 2.) How did you define a direct DBL behind the 2♣ bidder? 3.) What shows the delayed DBL? 4.) What does opener do when his partner had passed? Thx :rolleyes: Caren

Unpossible... Too much mayo and ketchup! Huh? What shall dis be? Raw fish in Germany? On the street? In a bun? At least I neither saw nor ATE that (except Gravad Salmon which is Swedish, or? :P ). Are you sure you don't mix Germany up with Japan? B)

Most things that start with "dis", especially: disregard dishonesty. Exceptions: discussion discrimination discover discreet discount (and a few more). Suggestion: let's call a burger from now on disburger :P

4 was cold, partner held ♠ KQx ♥ x ♦ Qxxxx ♣ AQxx, ♣K and ♥A were onside. Opp found a clearsighted tricky lead: small under the ♠A, his partner came in with ♥A, played a ♠ back and got a ♠ ruff. Our teammates complained that we lost 1 IMP, their opps made "easily" 200... *grmpf* Later in the train we discussed the hand and an expert said that one should always bid 4♥, such hands make most often. Nothing is lost when there exists a (better) ♠ fit because it is the working suit, the ♥ suit in itself is strong enough. Do you like those arguments?

Hmmm, sorry, my first poll and the upper part looks strange, I have no idea how to correct it ;) Caren

Here is another tricky 2-suiter, this time responder has the problem. System is Polish Club, 4th suit F1 after 1/1. Bidding goes 1♦* (pass) 1♥ (pass) 2♣ (pass) ??? * 4+, 12-17, ♣s might be longer [hv=d=e&v=b&s=sj10853hkqj542dcj10]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

Hi! We open 2♥ with ♥ + ?, 5-5+, 6-10. Responder: (no "pass or correct" bids): 2♠ with tolerance for ♠ 2NT --> asking, does not want to play ♠, might be weak or strong 3♣ is nat, nonforcing 3♦ is an invitation in ♥ 3♠ is GF, nat. That is all that has been discussed so far. Now the questions: 1.) Will the hand most often be played in 1 of the 2 suits because it might be worthless elsewhere? With what kind of hand does responder introduce an own suit and how does opener react? 2.) What does 2NT followed by 3♠ show? Is it perhaps a cuebid for investigating a ♥ slam? The weak ♠ hand will bid 2♠ and rebid 3♠, or? 3.) How does responder investigate slam in ♥? Via 3♦ (I like that because responder will learn about min./max., and opener is sure of the trumpsuit) or 2NT? 4.) What does responder want to hear from opener here: 2♥ (p) 2NT (p) // 3♦ (p) 4♦? Cuebid (then also 2. round control with a singleton?) or keycards? 5.) What is your general opinion about opening weak 2-suiters? Thx ;)

"The closest thing to crazy", Katie Melua

The whole CD of Rebekka Bakken: "the art of how to fall"