BunnyGo

I'd be surprised if there weren't betting in vegas too.

I know...was just venting. Had it not been for the other call, I'd've not brought it up.

On a related note, the 4 teams that qualified through this (these teams had a combined 2 wins in the qualifying stages) were then seeded against each other in the quarter-finals (I don't know why). Thus guaranteeing a medal to a team that won at most 1 match in the round-robin phase, and only had to beat 2 teams that did the same to win the medal (1 in the QF, and one in the bronze medal match).

I think your analogy is flawed. There are no bridge competitions I know of that are one hand long. We compete over matches too, and I'm happy to debate whether throwing one intentionally in a round robin for seeding rights is ethical (because I do not know what the answer should be, so debating would be interesting).

The one I found was badminton specific, but I do not know if there is a general one too. And I do not think there is a debate as to whether they violated 4.5 as the admitted they played below their best game on purpose.

In a related incident today, the Japanese world champion soccer team played one of the lowest ranked teams to a draw today. After the match the coach publicly admitted he did this to avoid the US and/or France in the next round. I do not know if this is allowed in the soccer rules.

According to the NYTimes what the players did *was* against the rules "Players’ Code of Conduct, Sections 4.5 and 4.6, for “not using one’s best efforts to win a match” and “conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport.”" and so I must disagree with Phil and the others. One is to do everything to win within the rules--when the rules say (and I looked them up to quote more exactly) "Section 4.5 Failure to use best efforts: Blatantly and deliberately playing below his/her standard of strength." (section 4 is "inappropriate conduct"). So whether we agree with the tactic in theory, when it is specifically banned, it is no longer acceptable. So I find the players wholly at fault for the incident, no matter how badly people think the event is organized.

After looking at this single dummy, I tried double dummy. I don't understand the issue. If declarer just plays to finesse diamonds, he's guaranteed no works than 2 club losers, 1 heart loser and a diamond loser to make. It seems the right way to continue at matchpoints too as there seems no better way to get 10 top tricks. I now look at the spoiler, and had already considered that. I do not understand how declarer could fail to come home with 4 spades, 2 hearts, and 3 or 4 diamonds (depending on the finesse). If it's matchpoints, then perhaps there is a way that declarer gets greedy, but I do not see it.

I think Id double with or without hesitation. the club void and 2 aces (even if i only expect 1 to cash) is nice.

In that case I'd bid 4 of a minor (or 3NT if some sort of slam try) instead of 4N when I cannot happily bid slam opposite a 5S response.

I do not understand the auction as written, as one partner has made an insufficient bid. But I do agree with wyman. If 5S will be too high, don't bid 4N.

I bid 1NT. I wouldn't be surprised if some players would pass. Other bids seem weird beyond consideration.

There are other times besides just blowing up a trick in the suit--say you really don't want to win the trick because you'll be endplayed if everyone ducks. Or maybe you want to force partner to win the trick for her own good--even if it costs a trick in this suit.

I got enough responses f2f that made it clear that anything considered "close" to the hand I passed was to be opened. I was trying to post hands that I expected to skirt a border of pass and not pass. Thanks so far for the responses...very helpful.

Ok, so taking a year off from playing has severely dulled my sense of "what other players would bid". I held (2nd seat all red): A7632, AJ42, T72, K and thought it such a bad 12 count that pass would be reasonable since I could easily compete later--so I did. Lose 4 IMPs. All but one person I asked afterwards immediately said "Aces and majors, I bid." So, I'm here to ask, "how far do people take this?" Hand 1) T7632, A942, A32, K Hand 2) A943, A7632, 832, Q Hand 3) T742, A7632, A32, Q I'll start with 3 hands. I think these all have huge deficiencies, but fit the rule "2 aces and both majors". Do you open these in 1st/2nd (if colors matter, please say so)? Is there really no hand with 10+ points, 2 aces, and 9 cards in the majors that people wouldn't open? This was the impression I was given yesterday. In hands 2 and 3, if you pass would having the club K make the difference in your mind? The 9 or T being the J make the difference?

Nope, you understood me just fine. I just had to sign on to double check whether it mattered for me if I had "cut" the text out or just deleted it letter by letter, but it didn't. I'm running on safari if that matters.

I've found that deleting (ofter by "select all" followed by "cut") and then typing a period will resize the chat box. It's a far from optimal hack, but it works.

It meant he had a 3=4=2=4 hand with 2 aces and a jack....who knows what he was thinking. Sadly it rattled my partner enough that with AT, xxx, QJxxx, Qxx she raised me to 2NT after 1C-1D-1N. Then I misguessed the hand because I figured he had to have something (length or strength) for his jackassery. Still got 4/7 MPs, but it pissed me off as this pair (together or apart) are always jackasses who think they know how to play.

If you believe in telekinesis, raise my hand.

So I'm back in Michigan, and have now been reminded about the players I left. I was playing with a random partner tonight, a rank novice (third or fourth game ever) who did quite well. Defending a 3nt hand at the last table of the night, I was trying to telepathically will my partner into endplaying dummy for the setting trick (declarer had plenty of winners but had so badly butchered the hand she couldn't get to them). As my partner was thinking, declarer tables her hand. I call the director, who comes over, and I explain, "my partner is on lead, and declarer has claimed by tabling her hand." This is agreed to by all. Director says, "yes so play has stopped." and I say, "yes, and any lead but a heart sets the contract now." At which point I start getting chewed out by the director that I cannot say this since my partner is on lead. After firmly--but politely--disagreeing with her, she proceeds to ask my partner what she would have led. My novice partner, having never had a director call like this mumbles"...not a diamond, but probably not a heart either." The result was at least down one, but she was so terrible about it. I wish, just once, she'd actually know a rule when I called her. Earlier in the night we had the auction: (P)-1C-(P)-1H (P)*-1N-AP Before opener's second pass, third seat shouts, "I PASSED? You bid 1 club?!" I call the director, and she says that they must bid as if there were no outburst but there's nothing else to do (this is the same player--and his partner--who've been verbally abusing their opponents, and I mentioned this too). She says, I know of no other rule for rectification. So after the hand I walk over to the director and say, "it's a pretty big and glaring breach of the rules, I'd be surprised if a procedural penalty were not in order." She seems to not know what one is. In any case, it was a bad warm up for this weekend. See some of you in Philly!

I dispute this statement. I think the core of this issue is that most people agree that there is no good rating system that will work in a free for all environment like BBO.

Put on a sweater. (sorry couldn't resist)

Well...we can't afford to lose a spade. I see no reason not to play for the finesse. Assuming I can pick up the spades for 0 losers then I'm in decent shape. I'll play on clubs, preserving entries in diamonds to the third and maybe fourth club. If they never break hearts, all the better. If they do, I just have to guess based on cards played where the honors are.

I thought you were exaggerating until I looked; ouch indeed.

It depends a lot on the specifics of the hand. The default is "yes, open 1♣." But the words, "have to" are a bit strong. If I have a bunch of KJT combinations, or AQT, or things I want to protect, I may open 2NT to make sure I declare. If my spots are very good, I may be upgrading anyways. However, I don't often do this; the default is to open 1C.