Rossoneri

How then, would your bidding strategy differ if: a) Opponents were average tournament players B) Opponents are world-class internationals? Cyberyeti: read the hidden text

Thanks for the replies guys. On hindsight, I thought 4♠ was a gross underbid as well, which was why I was not very happy with this sequence. In any case, I bid 6♠ and the X appears on my left. K♦ led and now partner tables his hand: [hv=d=n&v=n&w=skq93h4dt8632c952&e=sa76542hd7cakj743]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] How would you play the hand now after a heart continuation from South? Hint:

Not sure if this information will tilt the choice, but 4NT was meant as RKCB.

I turned off my birthday display shortly before my last birthday, just to avoid all the messages like you mentioned.

You pick up this hand as East: [hv=d=n&v=n&s=sa76542hd7cakj743]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding goes (from North): 1♦ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♠ 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT - P 5♣ - 5♠ - 6♥ - P P - ? What do you bid now? Also, do you agree with the bidding by East so far, if not how would you bid differently?

Was pretty tempted to buy the Jeff Rubens book, but the times when I was out, the book stall was not being manned and when I finally found it being manned, 2 people had beaten me to it! One question I was wondering though: how useful would the book be to someone who has formal training in probability as compared to someone who doesn't?

That's pretty true, although later on in their progression someone has to tell them that this is not an absolute truth!

This was the full hand:[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sk84hadaq974cak42&w=s9732hj965d52cj86&e=saqj5hkt432dk6cq9&s=st6hq87djt83ct753]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] Partner bid 3NT after I bid 3♦ as everyone suggested...Was not a very good board!

I am totally losing the point of this thread and I think it's rather unfair to accuse any of the directors of bias. As it seems that despite at least a few different people posting, there still seems to be a lot of speculation, so I am going to make this clearer. These were the facts put to me by Ng: - Part of what transpired was due to miscommunications/misunderstandings as to the position of the players regarding the use of the multi 2D - They would have agreed to weak 2s if they knew opponents had a problem with multi 2D (They pre-alerted the multi to opponents before every round) - The Singapore team had difficulty accessing printing resources so they adopted this stance, also Ng copied out the defence from the ACBL website in the morning before the match - Admittedly, he should have gotten this prepared before flying over to the US - Against Nickell-Katz, Nickell took out a file with a defence and said they were playing that - Against Meckwell, they pre-alerted and offered their handwritten copy of the defence as well, but there was no director call until a board where one of them actually opened with a multi 2D. - Meckwell suggested they should get a Procedural Penalty for the use of multi (Ng was slightly put off at this.) - Director tried to find printed copies of the defence, could not find any, and allowed them to used weak 2s for the rest of the match.

Thanks for the replies guys, more of a sanity check. We both agreed that if partner had bid 3D I would now bid 3H.

Some of the information shared here came from one of the players concerned, albeit through someone else.

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sj2ha76daq9642c87]133|100|Scoring: MP You are North: 3C-P-P-?[/hv] [hv=d=e&v=b&s=sj2ha76daq9642c87]133|100|Scoring: MP You are North: 3C-P-P-?[/hv]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=st6hq87djt83ct753]133|100|Scoring: MP Sitting south, the bidding goes: P-P-1♦-X P-[1HE]-2♣-2♥ ?[/hv] What do you bid now after 2♥?

This thread isn't about Team Ng complaining, is it? Quite right. When Kelvin (Ng) spoke to me, he said it was his fault for not preparing a copy of the defence in the first place.

I currently have a free student subscription to Financial Times online, but I doubt I will pay for it if I have to.

Wow, one of the great players of his generation surely...RIP Smyslov!

This is kind of sidetracking from the original topic of this thread, maybe we should move this elsewhere?

Midchart Anyway if that's the real story it's pretty disgusting, imo. If I were a director and a player asked me to dish out a PP for informing them the play a midchart convention and providing a written defense (legible or illegible) I'd slap a double PP on them so fast it would make their heads spin. Can't read it, wtf? I'd like to see them give a written defense in Malay. If that is the true story, it's unbelievably... wow. I was told they spent half an hour writing out the defence. In any case, I don't think any of the four in the team know Malay, probably a better chance of asking them to write it in Chinese.

We probably both heard from the same source, but yes, this is correct.

Never used Dealer 4 myself before, but I've seen a computer with Windows XP, Pentium 4 and 1 GB RAM run Dealmaster Pro perfectly fine.

All I can say is: Close, but not exactly what happened. And the pair in question were not disadvantaged in the end as they switched to normal weak 2s.

Congrats David :angry: I'll probably find some time to read it soon now that term is ending.

Instead of arguing now, should we first find out what exactly happened before pointing fingers and accusing anyone of unsportsmanlike behaviour? I personally find some of the comments directed towards Meckwell overboard, when most of us do not even know what exactly happened!

I'm not going to argue - the Singapore team should have known better. Knowing them personally, I'm quite surprised they actually allowed this to happen!

I pick defence as most of the time I'm getting scolded for defensive errors when I'm partnering an expert.