hotShot

When I use the Windows Client and my partner turns red, I can get a sub without bothering the TD. How do I do that using the Web-Client?

You are addressing something that won't happen. North can expect opener to have 12+ HCP and responder to have 6+ HCP, so he knows his partner is in the range of the agreed minimum and 17 HCP. South can expect opener to have 12+ HCP and responder to have 6+ HCP looking at his own 13 HCP he knows that North won't have more than 9 HCP. Both North and South can see that this is a partscore battle. You win in bridge if your opps make wrong decisions, you win more often, if you make sure that opps decisions are difficult. 2♠ usually makes Easts decision more difficult, unfortunately not on this board.

Every game has it's rules and usually you expect the players to be familiar with those rules. I find it odd that a of lot bridge player don't know the rules or don't care about them. But when it comes to alerting the problems are caused by design. The WBF rules are clear, but national organizations and local clubs are allowed to modify them. Even if someone thinks he is familiar with the rules, he might be familiar with the alerting rules of his local club or national organization but unaware of the international regulations. Basically the rules say that you have to alert: a] agreements b] implicit agreements c] partnership experience BBO's alerting procedure is the same that would apply if you play a big national/international tourney that uses screens. In both cases you alert your own bids. A big problem with BBO is that more than 90% of the pairs you will meet, are first time partnerships that have made very little agreements or even none and that they don't have any partnership experience at all. Those who have read the site rules of BBO will remember that they say that everyone should assume BBO basic (something very similar to SAYC)if nothing is agreed, but you can't expect people to know that even if they were familiar enough with the English language. Many are unaware that by agreeing to play "name a system here" they made agreements about a lot of conventions and sometimes even about signaling and leads. If you really think you have no agreement, than you should disclose just that.

[hv=pc=n&s=sakt876532h2dtck6]133|100[/hv]

North has a normal raise to 2♠, but South has 5 HCP in openers suit (J is wasted), 4333 shape and only ♠K. South is misshaped and a little weak for his overcall and this time poor bidding is joined by very bad luck.

Can you remember the first version of Windows? Around here it was Windows 1.03 and you had to buy a mouse and connect it to your computer to use it. This was a big deal because: "Real experts don't need mice..." What was the first version you used?

I really hope that someone who is playing a tourney once a week on his/her BBO night can earn a completion rate.

Thank you for the translation, this solves the problem.

Competition does not work properly in many sectors. One of them is energy.

After drawing the last trump and cashing ♣AK you reach this position. [hv=pc=n&s=skhdq72ct95&n=s98742hda4c&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1np2hp2sp6sppp]266|200[/hv] If the ♣Q dropped, you're home. If the ♣ are 3-3 you ruff a round of ♣ and you are home, but the problem is, that this does not work if the ♣ are 4-2, because you only have 1 entry (♠K) left to reach the ♣ so you can't ruff a 2nd time and reach the remaining ♣ to get rid of you ♦ loser. You can try a ruffing finesse against West, but then you would lose to East's Qxx. So we have to ask ourself, if finessing the Q♣ is a better plan.

Indent is a paragraph option. You find it in the 2nd icon line on the right, it is the 1st icon of the block from the left side.

I take it that in such a tournament, competitive auctions are disallowed, within the first 3 bids of the opening side? I think the idea of FD is great, but there are some fundamental problems to be solved. FD defines every bid trough the full bidding sequence and I think each sequence can only exist once. There are more than a lot of sequences to define and since they have to include opponents bidding, you get in trouble. Assume you open 1NT(15-17), LHO bids dbl and your partner bids 2♥. Is this transfer to ♠, if e.g. opps are playing Lionel and dbl promised a 2 suited hand with a 4+ card ♠ suit? Assume you open 1M and LHO overcalls 1NT. Is it irrelevant for your further bidding if this is 16-18 balanced or a 2-suited hand with the other major and a minor. If your FD definition contains overcalls, is it irrelevant if e.g. opps 1♣ opening is from ACOL, SAYC, WJ2005 or precision? What if opps open 1NT do your methods change depending on the NT-range (somewhere between 9-11 and 16-18). If opps bidding has a different meaning than the bid defined in your FD file, FD starts to misinform opponents, and you will probably not notice that this happened. TD's will have much work handling all those MI cases that come up.

It's great to get a helpful reply.

The usual argument for a higher salary is responsibility that comes with being in charge e.g. "managerial responsibility", "disciplinary responsibility" or "financial responsibility". The other arguments are longer education and risk. The longer education argument is often a pseudo argument as e.g. physicians get paid during some phases of their training, and even if they would lose 10 year of payment that would only allow a 33% higher salary to compensate in the remaining 30 years. The risk argument is also not very conclusive, esp. if we see that manager who drove banks or insurances (was it AIG) almost into bankruptcy still got/get bonus payments. It's my impression since management salaries are published, it more of a vanity thing and not rally justified by performance.

Who has more responsibility? 1) a pilot of a 300 million dollar airplane that carries 300-500 passengers 2) a manager of a company worth about 300 million dollar that has 300 employees? How does that express in salaries?

But it is still additional, so more CO2 leads to more warming!

Actually both options are impossible. Since responder is limited to 11-12 a quantitative 4NT makes no sense at all. Since no suit is set ace ask would be blatant nonsense. With the give options quantitative seems a little less unlikely.

Our agreements about T/O dbls is that they promise points, while (jump) overcalls can be (very) light. A 1♦ overcall is not annoying enough, so within our style, I bid 2♦ promising 5+card in diamonds, a shaped hand and about 10+ HCP.

I'll double and pass 1♠. If partner had something he would have bid accordingly.

Easy pass for me, because our 2 level preempts can be really weak.

If you understand interest rates, than you know that paying more taxes now to reduce the deficit, will be cheaper than paying taxes to reduce the deficit and for the interests for years.

As TD, I would not allow the double since the BIT clearly suggests not to pass. As member of an AC, I would grant that it's close enough to give the money back......

VUL @ IMPs both opps and partner are likely to try to reach game. So I'll bid 4♠.

Every beginner should have learned, that once you found that you are strong enough for slam, you use some flavor of Blackwood to avoid bidding slam, if 2 key cards are missing. If South 4NT bid was not a misbid, it promised a hand strong enough for slam given partners well defined 2NT opening. Looking at 4 of 5 key cards, it is obvious to North that the lack of 2 key cards can't be the reason for South hesitation prior to the 5♠ bid. If South 4NT bid was a misbid, a TD should not allow North to pass over a hesitated 5♠, bid holding 4 key cards. If South 4NT bid was not a misbid, holding 4 key cards, the only logical alternative to 6♠ is 7♠.

Let's apply a little bridge logic, please! [hv=pc=n&n=skjt32ha2daq2caq2&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=ppp2np3h(transfer)p4s(super%20accept%2C%20no%20other%20special%20meaning)p4n(RKCB)p5d(1/4%20out%20of%205)p5s(considerable%20BIT)p]133|200[/hv] Partner transfered to ♠ and I have 5 card there, so we have a 10+ card fit there. Obviously opps have to have at least a 9+ card fit. If this 9+ card fit is in a minor, partner will only hold 1- cards there. Even a ♥ single is not unlikely. This possible single, if South actually holds one, could make investigating the grand difficult. North could have wasted values in that suit. South asked for key cards and got the best answer possible, only to discover that he picked the wrong track to investigate the grand. 5♠ is a cry for help on the way to the grand. South hesitation clearly suggests bidding 7♠, 6♠ is the normal and ethical bid, pass is no LA.