TylerE

Pass. Partner's X here isn't takeout. EDIT: I'm not crazy of the previous X. It should show at least a robust opening, which this ain't.

With one partner I bid 4 card suits frequently after 2♣-2♦(GF). Takes some getting used to but it has it's advantages.

No. Playing sound weak 2's we're off 3 bullets at the very least.

I'm running the same configuration, but without any real issues. It'll randomly crash maybe once a month, but that's it.

Dislike, but just because I don't think your should be raising on a 3 bagger nearly enough to make it worthwhile.

Seems rather harsh to rate 4S so low when for most pairs unbiddable (e.g. 5N is always SOMETHING) is the only one to score well.

2♠.

1N-p-2D-(4s)-p-p-X for us.

2N. Good to play a 3♣ checkback here so you can backdoor into the major fits.

Maybe. Perhaps best to to say the most specific rule would apply. In another words the rule that matches the smallest number of possible auctions would apply.

FD is a good idea, rather poorly implemented. IMO what's really needed is a sort of programming language for bridge auctions, that would generate actual auctions. Syntax could be similar to the shorthand often used to describe general agreements, something like: 1m-1M-1N-2om = 5M, 10+ HCP 1m-1X(!1N)-2N = 18-19 HCP (1w)-Dbl-(1y)-Dbl = 4+ x, 4+ z, 8+ HCP 1M[1,2]-3M = 4M, 10-11 HCP 1M[3,4]-3M = 4+M, <6 HCP 1M[3,4]-2c = 3M, 10+ HCP 1M[3,4]-2d = 4+M, 10+ HCP Those 7 rules define basic versions of NMF, opener's jump to 2N, responsive doubles, and a basic major suit raise complex. To implement those in FD would require literally hundreds of sequences. At one point when I was fooling around with a relay precision I actually wrote a program to bulk generate an FD card for some of our relay auctions. Even with just a few steps in the relay, the FD card was several MB in size, with thousands of auctions, despite being describle in simple english in a few paragraphs.

Think of it in terms of intervals: There are fewer people who have completed 100% or more of their tournements than those who have completed 50% or more of their tournements.

Bid_em_up and I are online right now, and will be for the next hour and a half or so.

I could do it early tomorrow afternoon. Would need to finish no later than 2:30ish though. So call my availability like Noon-2PM EST. Could go earlier, but I'd need to know so I can be up.

Inquiry - We'll need to rescedule. We waited from 7-8 and then my partner had to leave. We could try again same time tomorrow.

After talking to my partner, the only time he's available is 7PM Thursday EST. His next availability after that is on Saturday.

3♥, WTFE?

Looking for a host tonight sometime in the next hour and a half or so, or 7-11PM on Thurs, EST.

Haven't caught a host online and I'll be out of the house Tues and Weds.

I'm gonna say 30 N / 70 S (Voted for S because of the differential). Freely raising on a doubleton when you have a better descriptive bid (2N) is...well, LOL. EDIT: Although I know no one will believe me, I only read the initial post before replying.

How hard would it be to add logic such that if GIB on opening lead has a 100% cashout for at least -1 vs. a NT contract, to always force that play.

Plus without negatives the "karma" system becomes a simple popularity contest.

You may want to check out the user style (http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/42400-alternate-style-for-forums/) I created. It addresses some of these issues and generally makes the forums a lot less stressful to read.

New version released...got rid of the blank line on topic pages. Much better now! Please delete the style from Stylish, then go back to the userstyles.org link in the first post and reinstall to get the new version.

The way it's around here, which seems fair to me, is as follows: First 3-way: Random draw (last 3 teams numerically, random team #s) Subsequent 3-ways: Bottom 3 teams in overall rankings If playing an odd number of matches: Before the last round, the very bottom team is awarded a tie, the other two bottom teams play a normal match.