MomoTheDog

Lighter doubles are not part of GIB's CC. http://online.bridgebase.com/doc/gib_system_notes.php

Also, in the exported text file, it will be great if the IMP or MP score is attached to each hand played.

BBO really needs an automatic download feature for travellers to be displayed directly on the screen or saved into the hard disk. (not just a pair own's results). It is slow and cumbersome to navigate the results via the web. This in my opinion is the most important feature that BBO is lacking.

Without specific agreements, I can't see any other way other than this to be natural IMO. Whether this is the best use of the bid is of course an entirely thing altogether.

One of my favourite books in my bookshelf is the ACBL Bridge Encyclopedia. Unfortunately, it's starting to grow dated especially in articles related to online bridge, which has grown immensely since the last edition (2001). Does anybody here know if a new edition is in the works?

I've read recently about Rusinow and Journalist leads and they seem to have distinct advantages over standard leads in that they clarify a lot of ambiguities. These leads also appear pretty simple. If they are good (with little disadvantages from what I understand) and are theoretically beneficial, why aren't these leads adopted in a more widespread fashion by the bridge players over the world?

I open, seize the initiative of the opening bid!

This is an excellent opportunity for youth players, especially for countries where youth bridge is not fully developed. I'm not sure how I can help, but if you need me for youth BBO teamgames, I'm available.

Also sent personally to bridgebase. [hv=d=s&v=e&n=s98742hj42dt8c754&w=sajt3hkt98dkqj3c6&e=shaq7653da965cjt9&s=skq65hd742cakq832]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bidding went (south-west-north-east) 2c-pass-3c-pass pass-pass-pass This was in a tournament. I am west, the 2c was NOT alerted and the opponent did not say ANYTHING inform us about their bidding systems (which was precision). I have an obvious takeout double if I was aware their methods was precision (2c = opening hand, 5 or more clubs). This would have very easily allowed us to reach 4h by E-W regardless of what north bids. The tournament director is "*********". I informed his about the damage caused by their failure to alert. He then said, "looked at it cannot adjust because you either x or bid" I have no idea what he meant, and I continue to plead my case, but everything I said was ignored. I am very unsatisfied by both the outcome and the way this tournament director handled this case.

With a pickup partner, one should aim for practical straightforward bridge. It's a clear 2nt opener for this reason as it quickly defines opener's hand.

Some very informative responses here. Thanks guys and girls.

BBO is filled with Polish experts who play the Polish club but do not adequately self-alert their bids - which slows the game down immensely. What advantages does this method have over a far more natural Precision or even popular SAYC/2-1/acol methods? Doesn't stuffing a multiple different meanings to openings make it easy for competent opponents to profitably preempt them? As I understand, the Polish club is incredibly popular at all levels of bridge in Poland, but why is it popular if their methods are so convoluted, unnatural and confusing (not to mention being incredibly hard to learn)?

Partner is almost certainly asking for a spade lead.

This is not only correct, but it is often the most practical thing to do.

This is penalty unless you have some super-specific agreement. It is more useful as a penalty double at this spot.