peachy

The Red Ribbon is a GCC event while Blue Ribbon and Mini-Blue are not. I don't have an objection to Mini-Blue, at least no more of an objection than what I have to Mini-Spingold or other mini-events limited to 5000 masterpoints as long as they don't award Platinum points. But AFAIK, they do :rolleyes: I hope I am wrong about that.

Nothing bizarre about it. In an earlier post, I quoted the relevant part of the ACBL regulation but here it is again: " Natural opening bids at the three level or higher which convey an unusual message regarding HCP range or any other information which might be unexpected to the opponents must be Alerted. EXAMPLE: 4H,S openings which are natural but are weaker than might be expected because the partnership has some other method (an example is the Namyats convention) for showing a good 4H,S opening. "

On the King lead, I unblock the J because that is the partnership agreement. On the Q lead, I play the 2 = encouraging.

Board 13 in #2272. I am not sure if it was my fault or what, but I was left to play in a cuebid: GIB Me GIB GIB 2S P P Dbl P 2NT P 3C P 3S All Pass Is this something to fix? There was no explanation scripted for the 3S call except "9-" but I assumed that 3S won't be passed. Assumed wrong :) And it might have been a bad bid anyway when I did not have 4-card hearts but had 12 HCP.

Yes. But this was in the ACBL. Everybody in this forum knows that that isn't happening here unless a foreigner tries to go by that rule. And I really mean "tries"; he may have to force the card from under the opponent's buttocks... Secondly, if you have a suspicion that a failure to alert has occurred [exactly what happened here], the ACBL regulation says you should inquire rather than claim damage from MI afterward when you could have protected yourself by asking. I don't know how Phil was able to gauge that they might have had Namyats on the card, but it does not matter IMO. Anyway, things are not the same in EBU and ACBL.

[hv=s=s9h2dakj1094cak842]133|100|[/hv] In the original thread, I was absolutely astonished nearly everybody advocated an inverted vlub raise or a direct ace ask (by whichever method we had). Our auction was (P) 1C (P) 1D (1N*) P (2H) 3H (P) 3N (P) 6C (P) P (Dbl) P (P) 6D AP Made seven on C9 lead, but in this auction I might have made seven anyway whether in clubs or diamonds, after the revealing 1NT overcall, but wouldn't we all like to be in diamonds in any case or at least find out if we should be in grand where grand requires finding out if partner has diamond queen - which is why I chose to respond 1D. Am I really so much different than the mainstream in that thread? And what is the harm in 1D response anyway? We did not have SJS or any other JS available for strong hands. System was 2/1 Walsh. Opener had AKxx-Axx-Qxx-1065.

I don't think you should be upset with BBO at all. BBO just gives the right to organize tournaments to pretty much any member in good standing, upon their application for that privilege. Many tournaments on BBO do not have a director who understands the laws and BBO does not require that they do. It is a free world. Here is some practical advice, hope it helps you to have a good time :P If you want high quality directing, many for-fee tournaments, especially the ACBL tournaments, are better than the free ones. [you have choice] If you are unhappy with a particular game or TD, don't go there again [you have choice] If you are unhappy with all tournaments, don't enter them. Host a table or set up a team game yourself, or enter individual Robot tournaments [you have choice] If you enter a speedball tournament, don't delay the game [it is rude to delay. Also, TDs are busy enough without having to assign Ave-/Ave+ and adjudicate whose fault the lateness was] If you want to decline a claim, don't ask for the hand to be played out [that would be against the laws]

I cannot imagine any hand that would move now but would not have moved over 1H. There simply aren't any.

And not calling the TD is a sure way they will never learn the rules of the game. TD call need not be a stressful or embarrassing event in the game, it can be fun, friendly opportunity to brush up on rules of the game. And a good TD will make it such. And a newcomer with a normal ego will be happy of the opportunity to learn them.

The UI [knowledge that partner has two aces] suggests bidding slam. This player probably was not even aware of the fact that he/she is not supposed to use UI and he bid 5S because was afraid six would not make. Doesn't matter, there is no LA to 5S.

This can never happen. If the Dbl is cancelled, the reult will be whatever tricks they make in 4S undoubled. If the Dbl is not cancelled, there is no way the Dbl will be passed, it would be insane to pass it.

I expect ability to play in a non-spade contract as well as defensive values. The Dbl is often left in with balanced hands that have a trick potential, not in trumps necessarily.

If Namyats was on their card, then in ACBL a 4H or 4S opening must be alerted. It was lucky that you found out by asking, but the initial offense was their failure to alert the 4S opening. It seems completely unfair to assign UI to a question which was necessary to find out what their bid means. Besides, in ACBL, the regulation specifically says "ASK, DON'T ASSUME" Here is a quote from the regulation: " Natural opening bids at the three level or higher which convey an unusual message regarding HCP range or any other information which might be unexpected to the opponents must be Alerted. EXAMPLE: 4H,S openings which are natural but are weaker than might be expected because the partnership has some other method (an example is the Namyats convention) for showing a good 4H,S opening. " As to your call, 5C looks completely automatic. 6C is a second choice.

But, when reporting a problem it's frequently helpful (though not always possible) to suggest a solution. As long as the discussion sticks to the question of what action GIB should take in this situation (and what the explanation of that action should be), it's right for one thread. My solution is to make the explanation fit the bid and vice versa. Since this is a difficult hand to bid in the GIB system, might something like "tends to be 4+ spades" be appropriate for changing the explanation. My 3D bid denied GIB the chance to bid a Dbl-negative - not that GIB needed that option in this hand - which is why I asked if GIB is able to make judgment calls. Being a "computer", I thought it was sticking to the scripts and not deviating. Or at least that this is how it was intended.

[hv=s=s9h2dakj1094cak842]133|100|[/hv] Online IMPs, all players experts or close, 2/1, none vul. Partner opens 1C in second seat. (P) 1C (P) 1D (1NT) P (2H) ? 1NT was explained "majors" Agree with 1D? What is your bid? What is your plan? ====== Step 2: I bid 3H, lefty passed, partner bid 3NT. What now?

I prefer the way hands are currently presented. No suit symbols, in order of SHDC, and all spots showing if they are known, with lower case x's for spots that are not known. Particularly for defensive problems, and sometimes for bidding as well, the actual spot cards should be included because they often matter. I am starting to get a feeling I've been had, for answering this post...

I should have said "Do not expect a good player to Rdbl with all 9+ hands". It is an agreement that you may wish to have with your partners, to Rdbl with all 9+ hands. But that agreement is not wise, and I would not agree to it if asked to play that way.

Vulnerabilities do not matter in this case. You should not expect partner to Rdbl with all 9+ (or even 10+ which is a more common range), and you should expect partner to begin bidding his suits immediately. 1-level new suit is forcing for 1 round, over the Dbl.

I have reached the limit of how many people one can list as enemy. Got this message yesterday when I tried to mark an annoying jerk as enemy. Didn't know there was a limit. I use the old version of BBO. Is there a limit in the web version?

It is right to duck with Kxx or Kxxx in dummy. The question was about which card GIB plays from dummy on the Opening Lead from this combination: KJx, KJxx.

I think in problem reporting, it is best to stick to one (1) item at a time. My intention was to report a potential program bug to ari & company, not to start a GIB system discussion. Interesting as it the discussion might be, it is best to start a new thread, IMO.

I don't think we have grand. 6C, reasonable hopes to make it. If this was wrong, then I will have to apologize and move on.

http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...HQ|pc|DT|pc|H5| Was this a judgment call by GIB (if GIB is able to make judgment calls :) )or is the explanation wrong? Should it be fixed?

Find the best game. Often, 5-3 spades is better than 3NT when we don't have so much in excess HCPs or number of tricks that it does not matter. Here, it might matter, which is why I would investigate with NMF.

I find it completely normal that a team or a pair is penalized if one of the members of the team or a pair is in violation of rules that specify PP or DPs, or if the TD uses his authority to assign such for any reason. It would IMO be silly to have individuals carry their PPs or DPs "in their pocket", so to speak, and the team or pair to remain unaffected. What is the point of that?