jjbrr

No matter how many times the BBF regs say "sorry, but this hand alone is not conclusive enough," the tinfoil hatters will still think they've been cheated. They will still suspect every time something weird happens that the opponents must have a wire. They will still make a lot of noise about how everything is rigged and everyone from Country X is a cheater. They will still complain that 99% of experts are actually novices. This is why I think even a single containment thread where posters can post suspicious hands is a big waste of time. Matmat's post about a thread where people can post suspicious hands just isn't practical, because the evidence will never be strong enough to answer definitively.

Keep hands about cheaters out of BBF entirely imo. Nuke the actual thread in question. It's clearly just a "look how smart I am, I caught some cheaters" thread, which is a waste of time. It can't possibly be constructive to encourage discussion where the only result is a bunch of people with tinfoil hats who think everyone on BBO is a cheater and online bridge is rigged. Even in the face of a lot of evidence we can't prove definitively the users cheated, and even if we do we really can't do anything anyway, so what purpose would it serve? Make sure people are aware that they can send hands to abuse@ and let that be enough.

I haven't read this thread, so I apologize if this has been addressed already, but do we know who exactly is going to make money from bridge becoming an Olympic sport? Is it Rona pushing the hardest with the Olympic committee or is there another Chairman of the Olympic Movement or something? Maybe someone really is crazy enough to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole just for the sake of doing it, but I assume the motivation is money. I'd just like to know which politician to complain about when bridge becomes the butt of every Olympic joke ever told.

Weber Smoky Mountain is the correct answer to any question about smokers in this thread.

yeah south should bid a slam if partner freely bids 3C

If it goes 1H dbl 3S 4S it's not clear what everyone should do now. I guess N could try 5C and S can just bid the slam?

did west really crack 6H or was it east? I'd have bid 3S over the double, though i agree with Phil that 4D if fitted is OK as well as 2NT. I also agree that psyching 1S on this particular hand is losing bridge. The hand is strong enough that slam is certainly reasonable opposite some minimum openers, so there's no reason to bid defensively. Just tell partner what you have.

I don't like 1NT with the north hand at all. Did you notice that it contains a singleton and a 5-card suit? What's the hurry to get to NT? I think it'd likely start double 2C 3S splinter, but N might just try 3NT, assuming the opponents don't bid.

wat

4♠ is justified, but South must have misclicked 3♠ when he intended to click "Pass"

I'll be there, and I actually have plans to play this time! Don't call it a comeback.

http://gif.mocksession.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/HOPESOLOKISS.gif.pagespeed.ce.GYMc4l2n6f.gif

It really is amazing how his final appeals were handled (or not handled).

One more then I'll stop bumping this thread: New Yorker - Trial by Fire A story of a man convicted of killing his three children via arson. It may have been discussed in another thread about the death penalty, but it's a fascinating read.

Inquiry et al, can you see what a user wrote in a post before it was edited? If so, can you not just reserve the right to either restore the post or to post the original content in the thread if a poster pulls a Cayuga?

I'd pass. If you double, partner will play you for a hand stronger than the one you have, and your clubs aren't even that good anyway.

Yes, ample opportunity. And please do; the comedy that ensues is wonderfully entertaining.

On the forum I frequent most often, users can edit their posts within 15 minutes of making the post. After some period of time (10 mintues?) the edit tag always displays when the post is edited, otherwise the poster can choose whether or not to include it. There is also a short text field offering the poster to give a reason for the edit that, when filled in, displays in smaller text beneath the post. I'm in favor of something like that, but requiring the edit tag always seems completely unnecessary. Edit to add: This may be against the terms of service of BBF, in which case Inquiry or someone can delete this text/post/me/whatever, but here is a link to an example post with the edit tag and a reason provided by the poster for the edit. This link goes to another forum, so if you're at work and afraid of sites you've visited, or if you find the internet in general to be a frightening place, you're better off just staying in BBF.

No. I frequently edit just because I noticed a typo or grammatical error or something tiny. There's no reason to add a tag to make it look like I changed the content of my post. If I change the content of my post, I make a clear note of it. I don't really understand the purpose of this if over half my posts end up with an edit tag. Edit to add: If you do change it so that the software requires the edit tag, is there also a feature that easily allows the poster to give a reason for the edit?

Hi Kamal. In the context of a structure with 4-suit transfers, the bids look something like this: 1NT-2♠: 2♠ shows any hand with long clubs that would at least prefer suggesting ♣ as strain instead of NT. Opener can either say he likes clubs or he doesn't like clubs. The distinction is up to you and your partner; I like partner to say "I like clubs" with Hxx and an otherwise normal 1NT opener (because when I transfer to clubs I almost always have a 6-card suit, and Hxx opposite a 6-card suit frequently produces at least 5 tricks). After 2♠ showing ♣: 2NT says opener has worse than like Hxx. You might agree something like Ax or Kx is enough to say "I like your suit" in this spot. If opener and responder have less than standard values for a game and a suit that doesn't fit very well, we might suffer too many losers. If they fit well, even with a HCP total well below 26, they could easily have 9 tricks given the good fit in the minor. It's all a matter of judgment. After 2NT showing ♦: all the same rules apply. Again, I'd like to emphasize this point: you don't get a game bonus for having 26 combined HCP. You get a game bonus for bidding and making game. If you can diagnose that you have a strong fit likely to take 5 or 6 tricks, you can bid 3NT on lighter combined HCP. Does that help?

sharp provolone isn't used nearly as much as it should be imo. roast pork, sharp prov, hot peppers, fresh baked sub roll. life is good.

free matmat

It's pretty normal to bid 1NT with balanced hands, especially when you play conventions to uncover 4-4 ♠ first after 1m-1♥-1NT

If you think partner is likely 4315, why wouldn't you correct to 3S?

I wouldn't. We have bad trumps and bad hearts. The auction suggests a trump lead, which might be bad for us in game.