USViking

People who know me well would be able to tell you my face to face style is pretty much the same as my internet style. They have thicker skin certain others do, bless their tolerant hearts!

This guy did not treat me with any respect, so I found it unnecessary to treat him with any. Although you are not entitled to any explanation, I will give you one anyway. When I leave before TC it is because of embarrassment and exasperation at my results. That must be because of your lofty, not to say elite standards. Congratulations! It might interest you to know that I tabulated results for several 100 unrestricted tournaments over a 5-month period a year ago (My own TCR was actually close to 100% back then). I can say with a high degree of confidence that the average TCR was only about 60%. Are you sure you are not confusing tournament completion with deal completion? My deal completion rate is close to 100%. That's funny. I disagree. I have never considered it a serious problem and no one here has explained why it is they are in such pain over it. It would be interesting to obtain some generalization about the ratio of tournaments played to tournaments completed. However, I doubt there couild be a business reason for studying the issue.

No, that part was written after I looked at an unprovoked and unjustified personal attack by the guy who probably has several times more replies to this part of the board than any other regular members

Listen, dork, if you want to get involved in a flame war then you've come to the right person. I would not have minded if administration had pointed out that I might be a bit too grasping considering the issue involves free product, and that I could improve the situation by improving my TCR only 7%. Comments from the forum prima donna are another matter, and will recieve no more respect than they offer. This prima donna is obviously the type who if he has nothing legitimate to complain about will make something up just for the pleasure of hearing himself whine. I have taken part in enough touraments to be able to speak from experience, and the “nuisance” value of players leaving early is trivial to the point of non-existence. I agree it is appropriate to reward committed players with their own restricted tournaments. I only question whether they deserve them so much as to reduce what is available to others, especially considering that the queue for non-TCR tournament almost always fills up while the queue for TCR tournmanents rarely do.

I am disappointed that the number of unrestricted free tournaments has been radically reduced in favor of the 80% completion tournaments, and the new 90% completion tournaments. There are now less than 50% as many unrestricted tournaments as there used to be until quite recently, aren't there? My own TCR isn't great, but it is not all that bad at 73%, and I do not feel that I deserve to be punished to the extent of being ineligible for such a large majority of free tournaments. I hope the rate unrestricted tournament is restored to much nearer its old numbers, if not to what it was.

Thank you for the reply. Bidding box perspective as an issue had not occurred to me, and I'm sorry to hear you are getting complaints from two directions, even though I know you are putting in your best effort. I would still like an option to rotate, but won't harp on it.

See link: From Thread in BBO Announcements and Special Events: BBO Upgraded - Version 1.47n is here I can understand doing this for cost-saving or revenue-generating business reasons, but not because of the whims of someone, possibly unrepresentative, selected for new version testing and commentary. I am guessing I am the same as most customers in that I was used to the South hand perspective from day one, I was perfectly happy with the rotated perspective, and I would like to have the option of playing from the perspective I am used to. Could a rotated perspective option be included in the next version?

Anything you do not have to pay for is free, regardless of whether it may also be meant as an enticement-- the two concepts are not mutually exclusive. Judging from the decided comparative infrequency of players in free tourmaments who have earned BBO masterpoints I think it is reasonable to infer that there are many who seldom if ever join for-pay tournaments. Speaking for myself I had played in hundreds if not thousands of free tornaments before I joined my first for-pay, and I did so more than anything out of a sense of guilt at being a complete freeloader for so long. Despite the erratic and indifferent results I confess I enjoyed for-pay much more than I expected, and I can see how the free versions may perform as successful enticement from a business standpoint.

What do you call one free tourney every nine minutes? Then there are a significant number of xtras such as 80%TCR. The BBO free tourney set-up is a fabulous free gift, it can't get any better, please drop the subject.

No, I was saying any one of Michigan, or North Carolina, or Indiana, or Missouri would win it for him. Michigan alone is the most likely, based on prior historical results. Four paths are listed above, and there are others. IMO he can't lose if he wins Florida's 29EV. Not sure what you mean here. IMO it will be much closer than in 2008.

There are numerous reasonable scenarios by which Obama could lose both Ohio and Florida but still win 270 EV. See the following excellent, data-rich site which among many other things will summarize and map state-by-state Presidential preference poll results every week for several months prior to the general election: The Votemaster In the most recent summary Obama is only 7 EV short without six states he won in 2008: Ohio, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Indiana and Iowa; either Michigan (16EV), North Carolina (13EV) or Indiana (11EV) would put him over. NC might be a tough one to win again given that it had gone Republican in every general election 1968-2004, and given Obama's tiny 2008 popular vote margin over McCain of only ~+14k/0.32% Similarly, the Republican presidential candidate won Indiana 1968-2004, and Obama's 2008 margin over McCain there was only ~+28k/1.03% However, Michigan is another story, having gone Democrat 1992-2008, and delivering a whopping 57-43%, +800,000-vote margin to Obama last time around. Another thing to consider is that Obama trailed McCain in Missouri (10EV) by only 3,903 votes out of more than 2.9 million cast, and Missouri is seldom a safe bet for either party. So Romney must almost surely need to win both Florida and Ohio to win the general election, but neither is essential for Obama, although you can bet he is going to devote a lot of attention to both.

The WWII Japanese army substituted the phrase "Turn around and advance" for the word "retreat".

Speaking of bongs, have you cleaned the screen on yours lately? Quantum science has been confirmed by measurement in some cases to several decimal points; it is perhaps the most fully corroborated scientific theory of all time. And among other things, these computers we have so much fun playing with could not have been developed without it: Contributions of Physics to the Information Age

It turns out the neutrino is a subject fit for poetry: Cosmic Gall -John Updike- Neutrinos, they are very small. They have no charge and have no mass And do not interact at all. The earth is just a silly ball To them, through which they simply pass, Like dustmaids through a drafty hall Or photons through a sheet of glass. They snub the most exquisite gas, Ignore the most substantial wall, Cold-shoulder steel and sounding brass, Insult the stallion in his stall, And scorning barriers of class, Infiltrate you and me! Like tall And painless guillotines, they fall Down through our heads into the grass. At night, they enter at Nepal And pierce the lover and his lass From underneath the bed-you call It wonderful; I call it crass. YOU are now being invaded by about 1014 neutrinos each second! (although it has turned out they do have mass)

Without looking it up IIRC neutrinos began to be ejected in the earliest stages of the supernova process before light. IOW the earliest surge of neutrinos had enough of a headstart on the light to arrive on Earth sooner than the earliest surge of light.

I have also been in a pronounced Robot tournament slump lately. It got so demoralizing that I have taken a one week+ break from them. However, I think the poor results are due to an extended lapse in concentration on my part, although I am not conscious of being distracted. I have not noticed any more than usual questionable Robot decisions, and to be fair about it almost all such that I post here turn out to have some reasonable explanation. FWIW I have kept a spreadsheet record: For 249 tournaments ending 2/15/12 I scored 51.48% in MP competition and +156.37 in IMP. For 20 MP tournaments 2/16 through 2/26 the humiliating MP average was 45.77% with 16/20 below 50% and 17/20 below average in player score ranking. During the same stretch I played in 5 IMP tournaments with 3/5 negative results and 4/5 below average player rank. PS-- now that I think about it I have noticed a few more than usual deals where GiB bids with 3hcp less than bidding box explanation (I wish it could be limited to a max 2hcp "lie"). That is not an excuse for the extent of my recent poor showing, though.

Thanks for the response. Two things I did not consider before posting were: (1) the 4NT explanation (I thought RKCB asked for key cards and that was it) (2) that my best 2nd round bid was 2♣ (I was too fixated on the great ♥ suit) I do think that my remarks about GiB usurping the final decision have merit, though, and I hope some adjustment can eventually be made by way of a fix for that.

I cannot remember if I checked the bid explanation for 4NT. Add that to my list. I would have had no idea that (S) constituted agreement that Spades were trump. Add that to my list.

Bid explanation box is cut off by the edge of the graphic, and I do not see where I agreed to ♠ as trump. Do you agree with what I said about GiB's habit of overruling the better hand, even if this deal is not an example?

From Tournament #3035 Duplicate- (MP) deal #1, 2012-02-16 13:29: http://tinyurl.com/6mj3ybu Rank intermediate ability member here, but I have played close to 1,500 tournament deals vs GiB, and this is the first time I have ever heard of a cue bid at the 6 level after RKCB. Is this really a convention which could add value to the product for any but a handful of the most expert members? This auction is also helpful in drawing attention to GiB’s predilection for overruling even a strongly bidding partner’s choice of contracts in most cases where GiB has a singleton trump, or has any singleton if NT is bid. Anecdotally speaking I have the impression such action costs much more that it gains, and I wish some rule could be written, or some simulation could be turned off, so as to allow me to make a lot more final decisions when the bidding clearly indicates I have the master hand.

Thank you for the reply. I am curious to know if really good players such as you would prefer to make exceptions to the overcall requirement for a hand like the one GIB has in this deal, with the 7-card suit being an overriding feature.

Deal #7 from: Tournament #4739 Robot Duplicate- (MP) 2012-01-08 15:14 http://tinyurl.com/79n4zat Explanation for GIB’s double is "13+ total points". Kx in partner’s suit = 4 points? Singleton Queen in opponents’ suit = 4 points? That still leaves us one point short, so maybe the Kx = 5 points and/or the 7-card suit = 1 point. Please, no, really, GIB’s 4th level double is completely indefensible, regardless of what it means. Completely. That 1st round pass was pretty bad too, I think.

A flattish 10hcp and 3-card trump support strikes me as totally inadequate for a jump to game opposite partner who might have an aceless 11hcp, but if you can vouch for the standard then I must concede no blame attaches to GIB. I am not yet ready to accept any blame of my own for the fiasco. Opener could have had many significantly better hands possessing such as KQ♠ or KQJ♠ and/or K♦ and still have had no chance. That would seem to provide more support for my contention that it was reponder who caused the problem here than for your contention that a substandard opening caused it.

Thank you for the reply. I think you mean that you will look into GIB decision to jump rather than invite which is the main thing I was looking for. I am quite sure I would have passed a 3♠ invitation. I would still like to know about whether LAW applied here in GIB decision. I have looked at the 1st two google hits on LAW but they did not help for this deal.

From #9178 Robot Duplicate- (MP) 2011-12-21 16:22 Deal #6: http://tinyurl.com/75u85sl My 2♠ rebid showed a 6-card suit and as few as 11hcp/12 total points. GIB’s 10hcp with AT4 trump support and a side Ace plus a singleton strikes me as suitable for invitational 3♠ but not for a jump to 4♠. Is this another exercise of the LAW (not stated in bid explanation) even though opponents did not compete? If so how weak must a hand be before LAW is turned off? Is it the side Ace which makes GIB assume the odds are right for game? On a separate note I am not sure why 2♠ should indicate 6 cards rather than 5 or more. On another separate note, there were tables where opener bid (misbid?) 2♠ with 12hcp hand. GIB then raised to 3♠ per LAW. However, I assume GIB did so under the supposition opener preempted. If so is it standard to invite preempting opener under LAW?