Old York

One of the problems is that BBO is now available to Internet Cafe users through the web/flash version. To kill half an hour they log-in and enter tournaments, either they get bored and go to another tournament or their money runs out. They normally log-in with different identities every time, so Fred's suggestion of blocking new members may help a lot. I have always been suspicious of identities like XyZ123 often with blank profiles etc. It is easy to see that 2 such players at adjacent machines can see each other's cards, and communicate easily Tony

7♠ could be completely wrong. It could be that 7♣ is the correct contract, or even 7♦. If responder is never allowed to show his suit, how can you get there? ♠- ♥KJx ♦QJxx ♣KJxxxx A trump loser is possible in 7♠ Tony edit: No bidding system is perfect, if it was this game would be akin to tic-tac-toe, impossible to win until an opponent makes a mistake

Agree with this. Isn't it easier when you just bid what you have? Once north gives a positive response and supports, bidding 7 is almost childishly simple. The problem with 3C is, that openers first real bid is on the 3 level. Assume for one second, that opener has a bal. hand, he basically has to bid 3NT. And even if you happen to agree, that 3C denies a 4 card major, you still should be able to check for a possible 5-3 fit in the major. Assume for one second, that opener has a 6-4 hand, he can show his 6 carder, but his 4 carder gets lost. And do you really want to play clubs, if opener has xxx in clubs? With kind regards Marlowe PS: I am also a firm believer in bidding, what you have. Responder has the perfect hand for a positive response. Support for all 4 suits and balanced enough to play very well in no trumps If opener has a 5 card major, then it can be bid at the 3 level, plenty of time to bid notrumps later If opener is 6-4, responder can support any suit rebid How often would you open 2♣ with xxx and how often would you want to raise clubs with this holding? A positive response is not a waste of space, it often saves space If 2♦ means nothing, then it is a waste of a good bid The main reason that 2♦ is so popular is that many 2♣ openings have been diluted And how can you hope to bid the grand with the hand I suggested? ♠Jxx ♥KJ ♦xxx ♣Kxxxx Bridge is a partnership game. If you have absolutely no interest in partner's hand, then open 7♠ Tony

I was not keen on the 3♦ rebid, either.... but hard to bid 2♦ For me, the 3♦ rebid shows a good 7+ playing tricks I still like 1♦ - 1♥ 2♦ - 3♥ (invitational with 6 hearts) but will opener get too excited? :( Tony

I agree with 2♥ as a passed hand, you are not showing any tolerance for spades all you have is hearts, so bid 'em.... the bid suggest hearts as a prefered trump suit, nothing more, and 100% non-forcing. Partner's third hand opening could be shaded, planning to pass any bid you made You are very close to 10 total points, but could not open a weak 2♥, it is a slight overbid, but the overcall helps Without the overcall, you would be forced to respond 1NT, not the most descriptive of bids, either.... so 2♥ is a GOOD bid in this situation Tony

A very difficult hand for any system My methods allow me to open 2♣ with this hand, and a 2♦ negative The hand is unbalanced with 5+QT and 22+ total points, 4 losers I will survive :D 2♣ - 2♦ 2♥ - 3♣ 3NT - p Tony

As an aside, does the bidder have any legal right to know who is asking? (private messages will not work, if you cancel a request for explanation it is displayed as "no information available" so UI is still transmitted) It is lawful to receive UI, but unlawful to use it - walking a tightrope? Tony

I would definitely smell a rat if someone asked me to explain any natural bid Asking for an explanation of a 1♠ response cannot be right, something fishy is going on. FD, used correctly, will cure this problem. Full explanations of your bids will be visible to both opponents, but should be invisible to your partner Tony

The 2♦ response is not helping us very much ( forced on us) I prefer to teach natural methods (Acol style etc) Any Acol player should reach this grand slam without breaking a sweat Many Sayc players would consider a 3♣ response, the hand is too good for 2♦ 2♣ - 3♣ 3♠ - 4♠ 7♠ - p At least opener knows of trump support and a biddable 5 card club suit opposite, along with 8+hcp There is no guarantee that partner has ♦Q, but a very good chance that the 5th club can be established Responder's hand could be: ♠Jxx ♥KJ ♦xxx ♣Kxxxx and the grand is good odds, even though the red suits are unhelpful I am a strong believer that beginners should be taught to fully understand natural bidding first, gadgets can be added later Tony

I strongly disagree that we should just live with it. To do so would be to condone bad behaviour. All players (and Directors) must be encouraged to observe the rules of the site, as a bare minimum How we do that is a matter for debate Tony

GiB robots do not stall or block, and are immune to abuse. I strongly suggest that you play against these poor creatures. Recent antics by certain new players within the Acol Club have left behind a trail of enemies and disrespect It is unfortunate that initial experiences elsewhere have left new players with the opinion that this behaviour is the norm, and that they have been unable to un-learn the bad behaviour that they first witnessed in the Main Club Tony

I did suggest that a membership fee may not be needed, but may be difficult to "police" the membership if it is free I just checked the Main Club, 1409 tables, some invisible and over 25% were padlocked... restricted access Tony

Free membership would not be affected in any way. Premier Membership could be offered to those free members who wish to "upgrade" You will be removing a segment of the BBO population from the free sections. That does affect free membership. Private Clubs and Restricted Tournaments are already doing that, many players believe that this is a good thing, very few players believe that private clubs and restricted tournaments are evil Are BBO ACBL Tournaments evil? Tony Edit: added... To quote Fred out of context is unfair, but ..... "....it would create value for BBO user IDs thereby giving people incentive not to have their IDs taken away."

Free membership would not be affected in any way. Premier Membership could be offered to those free members who wish to "upgrade" You, of course, are entitled to your own opinions... however bizarre they may be... and I will defend your right to express them Tony

1. 3♥ Forcing 2. maybe pass would work 3. The hand seems too strong for UNT, maybe start with a double. 4♣ may work after partner's 3♣ shows nothing Tony

Premier Members would be able to join special free tournaments, and have a private club where they could play with other Premier Members It would probably involve an annual fee, but maybe not... dunno Perhaps a discount could be arranged for ACBL Tournaments etc? Tony Edit: It may help if you read Fred's comments on the other thread "Couple Things" and before you ask, no... do not send your cheques to me LOL

I would be in favour of the creation of Premier Membership and would be more than happy to pay an annual fee Perhaps with a few $BBO thrown in as a sweetener? Tony B)

Yuck, please, don't encourage more Survivor tournaments than there already are. 1...... 2...... 3. If I register for a tournament, I want to play all of the boards, regardless of whether the score is good. 4. If the opponents are slow, either time must be added to the round or we might get thrown out of the tournament before the board is adjusted (albeit no so much if the rate is set to zero). Adding time creates bad feelings for the other players who are already waiting much too long That is exactly why I suggested setting the rate to Zero With the rate at zero, low scoring pairs continue to play, np Only disconnected players are removed..... subs are therefore not expected to complete the hands of insane overbidders and sabotage bidders Edit: added... I would love to be able to create unclocked, survivor tournaments.... it would solve a lot of problems At no time did I intend to suggest that BBO was bringing itself into disrepute It is the action of certain undesirables that is bringing the game and BBO into disrepute, I fail to see how that could be misinterpretted.... but then, some forum users just love to take 8 words out of context, and start an argument Tony

In the context of Beginner/Intermediate forum, may I suggest that pick-a-slam is a bit too advanced 2NT-5NT is clearly "Bid 7NT if maximum, bid 6NT if minimum - do not pass" 1♠-5NT is clearly "Bid 7♠ with 2 of the 3 top honours - I have a void so cannot use rkcb" Tony

Many experts and teachers would say this is rkcb with Hearts agreed as trumps. The fact that the rest of the world disagrees makes no difference to them My main pet-hate is using blackwood with a void, or with xx in an unbid suit, this is because many do not learn simple cue-bidding Tony

This problem will get a lot worse before it improves, BBO sentry robots need to be more vigilant and automatic bbo short-term bans need to be much more frequent One answer is to create more Survivor Tournaments, simply set the rate to zero and all red players will be removed at the end of the round. This cuts down on the number of tournaments that are delayed because of a shortage of subs Unfortunately, the option to set as Survivor is not supported in all formats (Swiss etc) Quote: "poor subs inherit them ugly scores anyways so why not gamble?" Not if TD adjusts the board before subbing Tony

It is quite rare to find undos allowed during the play, although some directors allow undos for bidding only. If it is mandatory to accept all undos in this particular tournament, then it must be clearly stated in the tournament lobby description. The Tournament Rules should be available in the lobby, there is a button clearly labelled "Tournament Rules"... however, this is often left blank by some directors. Declarer should have explained that undos are allowed and clicked the undo button again. Calling the TD and asking for Ave was a bit unfriendly. Even so, TD should have taken the time to explain The undo button is a minefield, and rejections often lead to arguments and ill feeling, that is why most free tournaments dont allow them Tony

This ruling was about UI available to the doubler. Obviously he would have to use aggressive balancing style as an excuse for actually using UI, to do otherwise would be to admit using unauthorised information from partner's questions and scrutiny of cc. It can make no difference whether North opens 1♣ or 1♦, East had nothing to say, and should not ask for explanations The instruction to pre-alert such a style seems odd, but may be the only way to prevent a repeat performance, and may deter this pair from making frivolous appeals in future Tony Edit Maybe someone could give a reasonable example of E/W cards that might follow this auction? What is the "normally expected" balancing hand (without UI) ?

The situation has definitely got a lot worse. A large proportion of online players have absolutely no respect for anyone else. The analogy with road rage is clear. the type of person who is meek and mild as a pedestrian, can suddenly become a raving monster as soon as they get behind the wheel, shouting, cursing and criticizing every other road user. This is because of perceived annonymity, and a total lack of accountability Online games players see themselves as bulletproof. So much more needs to be done to stop these people from logging into bbo. Many disruptive players have been banned, and immediately reappear with a new identity. It is hopeless to attempt to exclude enemies, they will always get in through the back door. Restricting tournaments to friends simply means that many innocent players are excluded, and tourneys become too small for any meaningful result. At the moment, there is no answer, the game and BBO are brought into disrepute Tony (Duke of York)

I am neither advanced nor expert, so I would be forced to trust my partner and pass However, I would be sorely tempted to trust my vulnerable opponents and bid 3♠, but this comment could be better saved for the post-mortem, when it transpires that partner overbid his hand because of the heart void Tony