bearmum

3♥(I DO have 6 of them !!) -------- IMHO TOO strong for 2♥ and a minor bid at 2 level could get passed :rolleyes: if P is weak with 6 cards in your minor and 2 ♥

Since I last looked it has improved VASTLY - easy to use and easy to read - BIG thanks to the programmer :rolleyes:

I agree -- nice clear layout and good links INTERESTING --------the link to "hand Records" goes back to the OLD way of seeing the hands you played :rolleyes:

I guess it will change (in relative terms) when USA goes on to DST in about 3 weeks --- and assuming YOUR time doesn't change. Of course IF you live in Eastern Australia OR NZ the relative time change will be 2 hours (as we go OFF DST here 1 week BEFORE USA starts)

I got message "the two dates cannot describe an interval greater than 1 week" ;) The format is good BUT preferred to be able to pull up the last "X" hands

I Totally disagree PRIVATE chat SHOULD be "PRIVATE": B) ;)

I think jilly's suggestion would be terrific IF directors COULD instantly "see" what has been said at the table (especially if abusive to any player at the table)

"QUOTE" 1) We will not contact invisible members for you or even confirm they are on line 2) We will not give you alterative aliases for your friends (or enemies) if they have more than one I wasn't asking for that Ben :) "QUOTE" Most importantly, we will not share with people the actions taken against a user, rather it is a warning, a suspension, or a site ban. Wasn't asking for THAT either :rolleyes: "QUOTE" This means when you report someone for being "rude" or "cheating" or "leaving table during play" or "malicious bidding", don't expect a report back from a yellow. But you can rest assured, as uday said above, if someone is being vulgar in the main lobby, or is distorting the scoring by jumping to 7NT on every hand and then redoubling, or going from table to table, making some silly bid, then leaving that table to join another and doing the same thing, a YELLOW will take immediate action even if they report back to you that they did. How can you tell in this case? The idiot doing this stuff's name will go red and they will not be online again, at least for a while. I was reporting somebody in a tourney ( not in MBC) and ALL I am asking is a REPLY saying that SOMEBODY has received my report --- and are at the VERY least looking at it --- otherwise WHY should anyone bother trying to report abuse???? :blink: :rolleyes: :unsure: :ph34r:

Edited quote Ben I am not sure if you are refering f2f or online bridge BUT surely 1. in f2f it should be on your CC that you "frequently" psych NON vul in 3rd position (and MAYBE should be brought to the attention of opps as it takes a LONG time to read CC s) 2. ONLINE surely YOU should be self alerting tha same thing ? 3. Waht are "frequent psyches" ?? :) NOW the question I have IF both you and your partner KNOW you "frequently psyche" in 3rd position NON vul does that not mean u have a "special agreement" with partner [and is that not against the SPIRIT of the laws {rather that the letter of the laws}]

It shouldn't be the job of those reporting to gather multiple hand records. I might feel an action is suspicious, but not end up playing against this pair (or individual) again for weeks (or ever). There should be a central depository of reports and when a certain name keeps popping up a closer examination of events should take place. ITA :D :D :D Why should it be up to a single person to collect more than ONE suspect board?? IF and I DO mean IF all reports to abuse@ u know where have ANY relevance - SURELY it it to collate "suspect cheating " boards ---[and I also realise that a LOT of the "cheating" allegations will be totally frivilous] but UNFORTUNATELY that's the only way a "casual" player (like me who rarely plays tourneys with the same player more than maybe twice and in Main room maybe play with a "friend" more than that :) ) can hopefully stamp out unethical behaviour ( and that is MORE than cheating)

1♠

I just want to know IF I report somebody to "abuse@uknowwhere.com" do I EVER get an reply saying that they have received it?? I only asked because I sent one that happened in a tourney - tried to copy chat too (and THINK I succeeded) sent tourney number AND hand number ------------ and have had NO reply from abuse even to SAY the have received it :( IMHO the ONLY way that BBO can deal with possible "abuses" is at LEAST to let those who send reports REGULAR updated as to WHAT BBO is doing about them :) OTHERWISE why in the world have a reporting system ????? :)

LOL here is one for U Shoe :rolleyes: *:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_:-.,_,.-:**:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_:-.,_,.-:*.

I really don't appreciate your comment HOG -- for ONE thing FREQUENT Psyches are (IMO) against the SPIRIT of the great game of Bridge :rolleyes: :blink: :ph34r: I WAS answering a question regarding ONLINE play :P and if tourney directors should have the right to BAN Psyches :o In F2F bridge (where there are more established partnerships) I really believe that it is a little easier to expose psyches ( and POSSIBLY to call director if you feel that psycher's partner HAS "fielded" it and hence you have been disadvantaged) You also have the right to report relatively frequent Psychers I think?? On line this whole thing (calling director for possible disadvantage) is really NOT practical -- which is WHY I think (unless TOP FLIGHT {brown sticker conventions etc etc allowed}) Psyches should be ALLOWED to be banned IF director wishes --- after all you can ALWAYS refuse to play in the tourney :) :blink:

OK I guess you have a point BUT - IF I had that hand I would bid 2♥ NOT XX because I BELIEVE my partners 1♥ bid NOW no matter WHAT the opps bid surely I could NOT be accused of "fielding" my partner's psyche?

I think THIS is a good idea :D

WHY take ANY notice of "rating" system online ? - just play the game and enjoy :D

ASSUMING you don't open 1NT with a 5 card M BOTH bids show 15-18 with a weakish 5 C major (INHO :D )

Q♥ :D

I guess MOST folks play Stayman and Blackwood ( either nat or RKCB) amd I think THESE are SO common they don't count as "conventions" --- rather necessary tools B) [Do you really want to NOT to play Stayman with TWO 4 card majors and 9 points opposite a 15-17 NT?] Playing with pick-up partners I feel that one can agree:[in a REALLY short time] Blackwood or RKCB 1304 or 1430 Transfers- majors only or minors 2? Two suit takeouts ( Michaels/ 2NT?) or NAT over opps NT Systems ON (or off) over interference over OUR NT Other than that I agree SOME esoteric conventions are ONLY useful with a REALLY regular partner :D BTW helene ALL of the "conventions" you quote I have NEVER played in nearly 40 years of playing duplicate :) [bUT I am sure that some of them are REALLY useful IF the partnership KNOWS (a) what they mean and the correct responses to them :) :D :D

To me B) "sound" means at LEAST an opening bid - so at IMPS and MP's I will PASS ---- ESPECIALLY as RHO shows 15-17 :D

I only used part of Ben's quote to which I am replying :lol: I KNOW the rules Ben about psyching STRONG opening forcing bids [and MOSTLY agree with them] BUT is not the definition of a "psyche" (something like) "a bid which GROSSLY misdescribes your hand as to strength and/or suit"?? ( which a psyche of a Precision 1♣ is (because IMHO cos it's ONLY forcing for ONE round ) In my opinion the way of exposing a psyche is easier to a REGULAR partnership as a casual partnership (mostly cos only can agree to MOST basic agreements ) 1. REG pards have the tools within their agreed bidding system to do so :) AND the "casual" partnerships [one of whom might psyche] his partner may not even REALISE they are "fielding" a psyche :lol: Which is why I am TOTALLY happy if director BANNS psyches

IF all you want an opinion on is if UNDO should be allowed in ACBL Tourneys - my vote is NEVER MAINLY becaues ACBL points are awarded for these tourneys I think that in ALL Pay tourneys undos should NEVER be allowed {JUST my opinion :) }

Bidding and VUL would be nice :) as opps have Ten hearts between them ---- did ONE of them bid a weak 2♥ (or MAYBE 3 ♥??)

I guess that BBO directors do the best they can - but IMHO online directing would not be the ideal way to learn how to direct in F2F games because ALL countries seen to have different alert procedures (eg here in Australia Stayman is alertable and isn't in USA). The way to learn how to direct is to go to training courses (if available) and take some sort of test - then start directing at a local club ( firstly with only a few tables I suppose ) and work your way up from there ??