scoob

or the option to have notices appear in the chat area rather than in bubbles or not at all.

[hv=d=p&v=t&s=sjhaqj875dakq93ck]133|100|Scoring: IMP Parttner opens weak 2♠, RHO passes[/hv] how do you proceed.... 1) with standard bidding 2) with non-standard bidding

try combining the two. odd discard = encourage even discard = lavinthal

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=saq976haqj6dktcj5]133|100|Scoring: IMP You: 1♠ (3rd seat) Partner: 2♠ Opps: quiet [/hv]

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s9432hk93d5c96542&s=sahaq8752daj74caj]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

ok, i've yet to discuss it with my partner, but i'm fairly positive that he'll agree with keeping 4-card majors out of our 1NT open - but i appreciate your input on that matter all the same, and it will be kept under consideration. in the meantime, this is what i've come up with: ------------------------------------------------------ 1NT: 13-15hcp; balanced 4432/5332/4333 with no 4-card major Responses: 2♣: GF with a 5-card major 2♦♥: NGF xfers 2♠: 4/4 minors; poor major stops 2NT: relay to 3c; pass or correct 3♣: GF with a unbalanced minor After 2♣: 2♦: ♥ fragment 2♥: ♠ fragment 2NT: 3/3 majors ------------------------------------------------------ please feel free to rip into this structure mercilessly!

http://img53.exs.cx/img53/6565/derailed.jpg

Imagine a sub-event at your favourite regional/national/whatever where the masterpoint awards are payed out from a purse of masterpoints collected from entrants, like a poker ante. Larger awards, less inflation, and a higher level of competition perhaps? Discuss.

2♠ - 2NT 3♣ - 3NT 4♦ - 4♠ 6♣ 2♠ strong in clubs 2NT 1 or 2 trump support; 1 or more controls 3♣ ace ask 3NT 0 aces 4♦ king ask 4♠ 1 king within the structure of this relay sequence, opener could have asked about voids and/or queens as well as or instead of aces/kings, in whichever order suits their fancy. 3♦ rebid instead of 3♣, or 4NT after 4♠ to ask void; 5♦ after 4♠ to ask queens, etc.

1 4-card major at most, and I can't see us every opening it NT unless it was honorless (because of other opening options). That pretty much only leaves 5332 & 4432 shapes to work with, I guess.

Currently we're using a very basic 2-way stayman, but the fact is that most of our 1NT opens contain no 4-card major, or only a raggy one. I'm looking for some ideas on a replacement treatment. Help?

great links, Al - thank you!

i see nothing gained here by reopening best case scenario, partner bids 2♦ and opps compete to 2♥ worst case, i push opps into 1 or 2 NT, or a 9card 2♠ - none of which i'm not wild about defending

i could be wrong, but i was under the impression that as soon as an internet forum begins moderating/censoring it's material, it becomes liable if/when any libelous remarks are posted and not removed; whereas a forum free of moderation/censorship of any kind cannot be held accountable. *shrug*

I believe the actual amount of the discount is zonal, and determined by the sponsoring organization. When I play the regional back home in Penticton, the regular entry of $12.50 is reduced to just $5.00. The discount applies because I am 25 or under, but does not reflect whether I am in school or not. I'm gonna miss that discount next year. :)

playing 2/1, favourable vuln. [hv=s=sqxxhxxdaqxxckjxx]133|100|[/hv]

i generally play o/e roman discards, so this doesn't come up often, but when it does i try to make a point of signalling something which my partner should be able to surmise is entirely impossible. ie, encouraging a suit that dummy has strong honours in, etc.

you know, it is entirely possible to answer someone's question without scathing rhetoric, you should try it some time, just for kicks.

this sounds like an alternative perfectly acceptable to people on both sides of this argument.

very interesting tidbit of knowledge, thank you dave

this is a public server, that we do not pay for nowhere on the site should any of us expect any form of privacy. i say go ahead and log everything that you feel you need to in any way that you need to. even screenshots can be manipulated (if you don't believe me, provide me a screenshot of yourself chatting and i'll have you proclaiming your love for Cher inside of 10 minutes)

i'm confused (or i missed something - both explanations are more than possible)... wasn't the director called for an entirely different reason than "don't understand the explanation?"... the director was called because at least one of the opps said "no table talk"... that's a far cry from not understanding the alert you're correct, but this topic has since been derailed :)

perhaps an option when setting the table to require a certain # of boards committment from all players? enforced, of course.

transfers over a 1NT overcall are not standard in SAYC http://www.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/sayc_card.pdf http://www.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/sayc_book.pdf

while you're at it, ask him how long before we see an MS *nix platform would it be difficult to give users an option to choose their connection type which determines how/when the various states are sent to them?