hotShot

Well a problem with the alert procedure is, that you don't get it if the unusual bid is not made. Reading your conclusion it seems that your opps play a weak stayman, where xxxx xxxx xxx xx would be good enough. This treatment has advantages (disavantages too, as always). Knowing his Partner is weak and without a 4 card major, is an extra info you did not have. I don't know about the alert rules at your club, here even conventional "pass" bids are not to be alerted.

As this example shows you have to define what dbl means. If can play it showing 4+ cards in the unbid major, or just showing strength. Each has it up's and down's, but you need to play the same definition thatr your partner uses.

With a well known partner i play that after 1 something - 1NT our weak 2 suiter are still on (in 4rth seat) since only one suit is shown. So i would have bid the minors, first time it was my turn. Now that two suits are shown and my partner will have a hard time to guess about my ♣. So i keep my mouth shut.

I gave my pointrange and a good idea about my distribution. Nothing more to say. A clear pass.

There is no need to give up 5card M's just because playing weak NT, you can open NT with a 4card major any time. It is usefull, because your p is still more likely not be stronger than you are. You need to adapt point ranges for stayman to make it game forcing e.g. 11+ hcp will do. Since transfer forces p to bid, you can bid on the next round when you are strong. You need to decide if the second suit bid ist is a long or a short suit. You need to define a clear range when to pass the bid. And you need well defines escape sequences to avoid playing 1NTX if neccesary. You have to know what 1NT-X-(pass)- pass means. So that you can redbl if you are 4333 minimum and leave partner the choice of play. Can't help you there. You could play Walsh meaning that p has to show a 4 card M first. In that case 2♣ means your p does not have a 4 card M so you don't have a fit there. Or you can define it so strong that you have a game with maximum, so there is no problem. You bid 1NT. Now you play you NT rebid weak, if you NT is weak, your rebid is strong. THere is still time to show yout support.

I dbl, my p may have distribution, and i have the hcp.

ACOL players use strong NT or weak NT, some think that ♠ must be 5. Lots ACOL player have the 2Level replaced with Benjamin and weak majors. "Pure" ACOL is very rare, because it is not protected. SAYC, Frensh Standard, Forum D, .... are systems protected by a national bridge organisation. They define what belongs to the system and what does not. Playing with 5card ♥ has in fact not much of the 4card suit revolution left and should not be named ACOL. But i sympathise, that people that start playing ACOL, and modifying it, still think they play ACOL allthough they turned it in some sort ob better minor .....

The decision is wrong! But lets face it, how many of the BBO TD's have ever read a rule book? I have some "Experts" and "World Class" players on my blacklist, because they tried to persuade me to rule in their favor in an Non-Zero-Tolerance way. Sometimes pretending that "redefined" bridge laws are on their side. Since i know the LAWs (at least a few of them), i sometimes wonder if they don't know better, of if they usually get away adapting the laws as needed. I guess, that a lot of decisions are made to end annoying behaviour. Another problem is of cause, that in the heat of a tourney you don't have the time to check, if e.g. a missing alert did any harm at all.

If i make 5♠, 4♦, a ♥ and a ♣, i'm home. Since my LHO bid ♣ my RHO is more likely to have an extra card in ♦ and ♠. I prefer to play a small ♠. This is right, if LHO played low from Kx or Kxx, it does no harm, if RHO holds Kx or Kxxx. So i's only wrong if LHO holds xxx and RHO single K. This way i stay in control of ♠, so i can try to ruff a small ♦ to protect against 5-1, drop a small club on A♥ and make +1.

Well if we want to support the Pro's lecture, we bid 3♥, so he can tell his client what happens if you bid your hand twice.

I won't assign blame to a player, when it is the system that is flawed. The idea behind conventions is to give up a little bidding space to gain a better description of the hands afterwords. In this case it should have helped to clear any slam ambition prior to 4♠. The 4♠ bid directly after 2NT should finalyse the auction, because otherwise every bid of bidding space between 3♣ and 4♥ should be used to describe hands and to decide about a slam try. Remember that Gerber, BW or RKCB are not intended to bid a slam. Their intention is to avoid the slam, if keycards are missing. The decision to try has to be made before.

Well how long does it take a young new bridge player at his local club to collect 199 masterpoints? a ) if the club averages 5 tables twice a week b ) if the club averages 20 tables every night For how long do these players have to take "candy of the babies" before they are allowed in real competition? Are there realy such limits in ACBL events?

0-3 - Looser a gameforcing 2♣ for me. We go: 2♣ - 2♦ (0-3 HCP any distribution) 2♥ (5+♥) - 3♣ (5+ ♣) With single ♦ and 0-3 HCP at partners hand NT is not an option. 4♣ (fit and RKCB) - 4♦ 0/3 of 5) 4♠ (what about kings) now we have a problem, because it should go ..................................... - 5♣ (one king) pass but since opener showed ♥ length, it is clear you have the right king. So on a good day I'd bid ..................................... -6♣ (let's try 6) pass

Keeping track is only a distraction. This is espacially true at a local club. When you have a wide range of playing skills, you will have a wide range of results. So the first boards you are only guessing how the other results might be, later you can see a few results you might get better estimates. But what do you expect from this counting? If you feel you did not score well, what good will it do to take more risk to compensate? In the end this can turn to some selffullfilling prophecy. If you feel you do well today, will you get more confident (perhaps overconfident?) or do you play more carefull to ensure that result? How can your partner adapt to your style, if you change it during the tourney, how about the other way around? You have a balance with your partner, how will you keep that, if both of you stretch your hands, or if you both feel you need to be a little more carefull? If you have that balance, great! Don't risk it by modifying your style on the base of estimated tourney results.

1) How we would do it: 2♦ (4-5 looser any distribution, 12+hcp) - 3♦ (12+HCP, 5+♦, almost slam forcing) 3♠ (5+♠) - 4♠ (fit) 4NT (RKCB) - 5♠ (0/3 of 5) 5♥ ( How many Kings?) - 5NT ( 1K) 7♠ 2) Playing Jacoby 1♠ - 2NT (strong with fit) 3♦ (single/void) - 3♥ (Asking bid possible answers: 3♠ = void[3NT then is RKCB], 3NT single♦ with 0/3 aces of 5), 4♣ single with 1/4 of, 4♦ single 2 aces without trump Q, 4♥ single 2 aces with trump Q) 4♥ - 4[NT] (what about kings) 5♦ (one K, you know it must be ♥)) - 7♠ 3) After Spliter The treatment described in 2) asking about void/aces is applied here to 1♠ - 4♥(splinter) 4[NT] (asking) - 5♣ (void) 5♦ (now aces) - 5♥ (0/3 of 4 since ♥ is void) 5[NT] (kings?] - 6♦ (one, obviously ♣K) 7♠ You will find, that even with this hand, a lot of player will stop in 6. So 7♠ will be better than average. With ♦ king missing North needs the finesse to play 7NT and South needs to to get rid of 2 ♥. At 7♠ NS knows they can ruff the ♦ until they are high. So i will play save 7♠=, and take no risk in 7NT.

A lot of valid points have been mentioned already, but i like to add something: Learning to play Bridge is a long term task. I bet if you ask Fred, he will tell you that even at his level one still learns and has to learn about the game. Bridge is a "team" event. It needs two players to make a pair and at least 4 to form a team. To be succesfull you need to have a good partner, that fits to your bidding and playing style. There are pairs who would rather get a divorce than a new bridge partner. During the first steps, you can feel that you get better. But when you reach a medium beginner level (you know playing techniques, some conventions and your bidding system), you no longer see yourself advance. Training for a marathon, wich is also a long term task like learning bridge, you can mesure distance and speed, to see how you improve. But how do you mesure your advances in bridge? Playing at home with friends, you win all the time? Playing your local club (i know some with 2-4 tables) , you usually reach a top position?

It's the 2NT bid, where it starts to get of. Don't get me wrong, 2NT is not a bad bid, but it is a bid that you should have an agreement with your partner. You intended to show a NT hand, with stoppers in the unbid suits. Your partner was not sure if he can expect a ♠ stop, so he bid 3♠ to make sure. This is also not a bad bid, but one you need an agreement about... He expected your 2NT to show the lack of a second suit, implying that you have support for ♣ or extra length in ♦. 3♠ should make you decide if the target is 3NT, 5♣ or 4/5♦. Knowing the cards 4♠ was "to play", but to your partner it was showing ♠ control and intrest in playing 6, without a known fit it must be 6NT. What we see here is a clash of to good players, each sticking to his bidding style. This shows again that "common sence" is not at all common. Playing Indi's is all about playing and bidding the "common sence" way. Since there is no such thing as a "commmon sence", you need to find the minimun meaning agreed by most players. In this case 2♠would have been this minimum bid. Your p would have understood that as 4♠ cards wth control and traveled save to 3NT.

Club broadcasts are usually connected with a specific date, after this date, it makes no sence to send it to a member at logon. So give broadcast/mail messages an expiration date, and don't deliver them later.

It is right we don't need more color, but it would be nice to be able to annotate friends and enemies, in a way that is searchable and that the software can react to it. I don't think that this is "urgent", it's more a "would be nice" feature. If the dialog where i make someone as friend had a second box of radio buttons, where i could define: Alert me if my friend comes online Is allowed to play in my tourneys Someone i like to kib This way, i won't have to turn of the friends alert bubble (because most of my "friends" are there for tourney reasons.), because only the true friedns would cause an alert. And a lobby filter, could be implemented that one could chance as needed. Same would be about enemies exclude from further contact disallow in my tourneys cheating suspect (thats perhaps not a good idea)

After it is flashing i will have to restore it and set the focus to it. Perhaps it better to just restore it and put in front, instead of flashing.

Imagine you hold a hand with a 5 card Major and only 5 loosers. This should happen about 4% of your openings. You need very little from your partner to make game. By showing a short side suit (with no HCP in it) your partner can decide if you cover two of his loosers. If you do, playing 4Major with 19-24 HCP is often very succesfull. The "Law of total tricks" says that you are usually save, playing 3Major if you hold 9 trumps. A lot of people play 1M -3M as a preempt below invitational strength but with 4 trumps to have a 9 card fit. If you do, you need other ways to show an invitation with fit. You can use minisplinter or Bergen-raises or ....(a lot more).

The commentators are usually doing a great job. It would be a great help to them, and to us in the audience, if they could post a link to the players convention cards, and a link to some data about the players, if these are available. This link should be visible all the time. This way they woun't have to repeat those links very often, and when we join as a kib,we will have that information available immediatly. I know there is not enough space to do that in the table view, but perhaps the links could be added on the page where the vuegraph tables are listed.

This is one of those hands that might hit a systems weak spot. Obviously you don't play inverted minors, where a simple 2♣ bid could save you now. There are two cases to consider: 1) your partner is weak(minimum), but does not have a distribution that allows him to open 1NT. So what could his distribution be? Partner would have bid a 5card major first since he's weak. So the distribution is ether 4441 or 5431 with five ♣'s. If the single is in ♦ you might make 5/6♣ but never 3NT. If you bid ♦ your p will assume that you stop that suit und you may end in NT with no chance making it. So i would bid 1♥ so that P can bid 1♠ if it's his second suit or he bids 2♣, if he has 3-♥ and 3-♠. 2) your partner has a strong hand He's in no trouble to find a bid, and he will bid on. (And he will have a ♦ stop most of the time.) If you bid 1♦ there is no risk now, but nothing can happen after 1♥ as well. After 1♥ you partner can additionally bid 1NT (strong) or even 2♦ reverse to show his strength. I do not have a problem with ♦ being only 2 cards, if you'd have a sure stop there e.g. KD or Ax. But with xx you need partners input on ♦.

I like the bidding up to 2NT, but i don't think the 4♠ bid is ok. Now you can trust your partner and bid 3NT or you bid 3♠ and leave him the choice. I would prefer 3♠, because the suit is not good.

A rating system would useful only to those you want to improve their skills and need a mesure for that. If you start a sport e.g. running, you can time your effords and see how you improve. If is very hard to mesure your advances in bridge. A true World Class Player has no need for a rating System to tell him/her that he/she is good. The problem is, as far as i know there is no good rating system. A rating system has a effect on people. I don't need to repeat what was said earlier about this. And anybody who wants a rating system should decide, if they can deal with a result that is different from what they expected. If you are not the bridge god, you thought you were, can you accept that? Can you accept to be turned down as a partner, because you are not good enough? And if you are the bridge god, do you really want a bunch of kib's hanging around at your table every time you play? How do you deal with all the "rubbish" players, that try to play a few boards with you?