ASkolnick

There are many people whoever who do need a religious sect in order to create compassionate acts. By having faith, they make themselves a better person and in turn help other people out. So, I do think, that in many occasions, that these people would not have the same view if they did not have religion/faith to guide them. As for all of the wars, hatred, bigotry caused by religion which there are, there is also a large amount of teachings, learnings, and libraries which were developed because of religion as well. As for the old versus the new testament, I always said "g-d" just got a better PR person. As for the story of Jesus being true or not, I do not have to worry about it. We are still waiting for what we consider our "messiah".

Because I like to stir up the pot. What was actually the purpose of this post? It seems to me this is the perfect case of entrapment. Hrothgar did not care what people's position on Noah's Ark actually was since he already had made his mind up about certain people. There is really no reason that this was posted unless the purpose is to pick a fight with Luke Warm with the Religion versus Science argument. In which case, it worked. Some people tend to lean more towards science. Some people tend to lean more towards faith. There has been many documented cases where someones "belief" or "will" helped them get through many different types of crises. There have been many documented cases where people have used science to get through different types of crises. And in some cases, these things are not butting heads, but are intertwined into a person's being. We could also challenge whether a supreme being(s) actually exists or not? The answer itself may not even be important, it may be more important that the belief itself exists. Maybe because I have that belief, I contribute to society in a much better way, more charitable, help others etc. Maybe if I believe the story of the Ark is true, I have a better understanding of how we should treat each other. I personally believe the stories themselves are to set guidelines or standards of how people should act, the actual stories may have been embellished to make a point.

If you are interested in stopping dumping, change the conditions of contest. If it is in your best interest to do x, do x. Classic Dumping Soccer Style: I believe it was the Gold Cup about 8 years ago. To move on to the qualifying stages, Team B had to win by two goals. For some strange reason, there was a rule which stated if you win in a shootout the score was 2-0. They were up 2-1 in the second half and realized they couldn't score on the other teams defense. So, instead of shooting at the opponents goal, they shot at their own goal. The other team caught on and each team kept shooting at its own goal. Solution: Change the conditions of contest.

I think there should be more credit for the "Win" than the normal 20 VP scale (don't know what the scale was). At least the 30 VP scale give 18-12 on even the smallest of margins. This to me is a little bit of a compromise

I think I will try and categorize the concepts of what is being displayed: You must be strong enough in order to reverse. If you are not strong enough, you should not reverse. Not reversing, does not deny strength. I know this is what most people are saying, but you may want to talk to partner in the following manner. A reverse shows strength. Not reversing, does not deny strength, just shows shape. See the examples below. Hand 1: KQJxx, AQxxxx,x,x Some people will open this 1S because the rebid becomes uncomfortable. There are people who will ignore the spade suit, but I personally think that is wrong. Hand 2: KQJxxx,AQxxx,x,x Bid spades, hearts, hearts. Hand 3: AKQxxx,KQJxx,x,x Bid spades, hearts, hearts. But bid more of them. Don't distort distribution to indicate high card strength.

We also use the "impossible negative" with the "impossible" positive, but only for really strong hands (19+). Minimum 4-4-4-1's, since we play a canape response style to 1D gets answered with 1 of a major.

You see, this is exactly reason I did post it in two different places instead of a "who is" to blame. The question is slightly different on both ends. Post both hands simultaneously and you can easily result. Post them separately and you can see that each hand may have a different perspective. If you read Kantar's books (one of my favorites) on play and defense, they are done in a similar fashion. Similar questions (sometimes adjusted slightly) from both the defense and declarer's side.

The You was supposed to be by the 2nd hand, not the 1st.

I still say the "ban" is silly and the real purpose is to not getting cell phones ringing during tournament time. If it rings, you should be penalized, but it needs to be enforced througout. As for communication, any reason someone couldn't write on a bathroom wall in some area and then erase it? I mean to think that this will reduce people who choose to cheat is nonsense. And if you need to be called, put it on vibrate.

Axxx AQxx QJxx x Opponents silent throughout: YOU 1♦* - 2♣ *Playing Precision, can be as few as 0 diamonds. 2♥ - 3♦ 3♠ - 4♦ 4♥ - 5♣ ???? Your call? Neopolitan Style Cuebids (Both Aces and Kings below game)

You hold: x J ATxxx AKJxxx Opponents silent throughout: 1♦* - 2♣ *Playing Precision, can be as few as 0 diamonds. 2♥ - 3♦ 3♠ - 4♦ 4♥ - 5♣ 5♦ - ???? Neapolitan style cue-bidding (Kings or Aces below game) Your call

Easy 6♣ bid. Tell partner I have a solid club suit and about 8 tricks. If he thinks NT should be best, he can always correct. Not that worried about missing a grand, but 6C could easily be the safer contract if partner has a tenuous holding (non-ace) in spades.

It's slightly strange, but not as "unusual" or terrible as you think. I'm GIB: I have 7 HCP. Partner made a takeout double. therefore we have half the deck, so I need to bid something. Can't bid 2N, not enough strength Can't bid 2D, that's their suit. 2Cx should be penalty, don't have that. Well, might as well bid my major. Not saying why does it not wait for a reopening double, but you may not reopen with a balanced 13 count.

4♣ is what I call a "generic" slam try. Most of the time it is a cue-bid, possible big black suiter but unlikely in this scenario. Since partner rebid 3N, he should have a self sufficient suit, so therefore all follow-ups of 4NT should be RKC for hearts, the "agreed" trump suit.

We also use the Berkowitz structure for the unusual positives.

Keylime, you are OK here because you hold spades the master suit, but I do think it would be a problem if you had hearts and the opponents have spades 1H-1S-2C-4S now you would be in a very awkward position with 3 card support.

If the question is "What do you think it is?", I still think the response should be Gerber. If the question is "How should you play it?", I think a self-splinter is better, For those who say that hand does not Exist. (Keylime is close to what I am saying) AKJxxxxx Kx Kx x What do you open? Probably 1S. If partner can respond, you have the following. With no Aces, chance for game. With one Ace, game is probable. With two Aces, I want to be in slam if partner has either 2 spades or the Queen of spades. With three Aces, I want to be in slam. However, I can't think of a 2nd type hand where this would help.

This is why I really like the dealer program. This way you can organize classes of constraints and work accordingly.

I bid 3♠ actually because of the law. 1) There certainly is a possiblity you have 17 trumps. It's possible and even likely that partner has 5 trumps, therefore one 3 level bid will make. 2) Even if you are down white, unless 3D is down, you are certainly not getting doubled. 3) Maybe you push them to 4♦. Too many ways of winning by bidding, and when we are -4 IMPS on this part score, we say my bad and move on.

I think you cuebid 3♠ and pull to show a good hand. If 2♠ really means, pass 2♠ or bid 3♥ if you have hearts, when LHO does not bid 3♥, one should assume he has spades. Therefore, spades is either a Western Cue or a cue-bid clarified later. I am never playing this in 3N, because if partner has a heart stopper, you have a good chance for slam in diamonds. I am always bidding 4♦ over a 3 NT rebid. The most likely shape in RHO hand in the majors is 2-4, although 1-4 is possible. But partner should be able to evaluate his hand if he has a singleton or doubleton spade.

Part of the reason I do as well, is the same reason as kgr.

Just for the record, unless you change the law, the highest rate you are allowed to tax at is 90%, not 100%.

I think 2S is actually quite clear on the 2nd round of bidding. We can argue about the merits of a takeout double from west. I understand it when it works, but it can also blow up in your face in competitive auctions. I think the chances of you going for 500 are extremely small since all of your trumps are sitting behind the trump length. So, when you exit your hand, you will always have potential to score your small trumps. Its not like you are sitting with K98432. On this auction, partner still rates to have some values, and I think there is a good chance they have a fit.

I have no idea what 2N is, but it is right. If partner takes it as Natural, OK. If he takes at as minors, if he picks the right one OK. Even if it is scrambling, he may realize there is no fit and pass.

Well, at some point someone has to limit their hand. I think 4 clubs is a fine bid on the hand you proposed. It has nothing to do with strength. This is what a "picture bid" would mean. Now, you can look at your cover cards in the red suits, to determine if you have a good hand. Now you know Q empty in red suits are wasted values. In Jim Jacoby's case, it is possible that when declarer bids 4 of major, it shows KJ or KQ+ in the shortness suit instead of just a minimum. Many people would bid 3N with that type of hand instead, but some people play a "serious" 3N which demands a cue-bid. I know I used to play a "not-so-serious" 3N, which meant that was the hand with extras, but also had wasted values in the shortness.