gordontd

If they want to, they probably already have one. Now you want them to change it. Good luck with that.

Sure: why not just leave people to play what they want? They will anyway.

Having now read the whole thread, I don't think it's to do with geography at all. I just think you are plain wrong :)

Wow! I can disagree with you three times in one sentence!

What does North deserve, and why?

+1

There are also some interesting bidding consequences of playing rubber. If you have 60 below, then 1NT is enough for game and so the range of a 1NT opener tends to expand to become about 13-20. This can be accommodated without risking missing slam, because now a 2NT response would be a slam-try. Similarly, with 80 below, 1♣-1♠-2♠ shows a really strong hand. And, in order to get the honour bonuses, players will often bid more with solid suits than would otherwise be justified, and bid NT with unbalanced hands with all four aces.

For a complete rubber you get 500 or 700 depending on whether it was a three-game or two-game rubber. For an incomplete rubber you get 300 for each game (obviously this cancels out if both sides have a game). For a partscore in an incomplete game you get 100. You can get game in more than one attempt - eg 60 and then 90 below the line, but if your opponents get game in the meantime, it cancels out any part-score you may have had. Slam bonuses are 500/1000 for non-vulnerable slams and 750/1500 for vulnerable ones. Many players play "Chicago" or "Four-deal" bridge, where the scoring is more like duplicate than traditional rubber bridge.

If you look at the Rubber Bridge Laws of 1993 you will find:

Yes, 5NT is a choice of slam - a choice of 6NT or 7NT. Partner can bid a four-card minor at the five-level after 4NT, or a five-card minor at the six-level, when accepting a 4NT invite. The problem with your given hands is that partner probably won't be accepting an invite.

I have a couple of partners with whom I play Baron after a 1NT-2♦-2♥-2♠ start. It's also not uncommon to bid four-card suits upwards when accepting a 4NT invite.

And also to sasioc.

I'd have thought both 4NT and 6NT (if you're feeling optimistic) are options. Is partner going to expect such poor clubs for a 3♣ rebid?

This business of writing something down on a piece of paper has no legal basis, and had the player followed the correct procedure EW would likely have been better off. I must say though that I would need some more evidence before I accepted North's assertion in any case, given the hands they each have and the way the auction proceeded.

Select the score (or non-score) in Bridgemate Control Software, right-click on it, and select "Delete".

For Bridgemate I you erase the (NP) score in Bridgemate Control Software and it goes back to the relevant round - even after the session has ended.

Yes. You are mistaken about needing to make the final score entry in the program. I expect this is a cultural difference. Personally I can see not reason why, in pairs events, players should be kept in the dark about how well they are doing. Maybe it's because you run lots of barometer events, when I can see a reason for not showing the scores. Teams events are a different matter.

I agree with you about entering artificial adjusted scores in the Bridgemates wherever possible. I use NP when I allow a late board to be played: it lets the table score the remaining rounds until they play the board, at which time the NP result is erased. I also saw someone else use it last week when they had a movement that needed to be curtailed because it had been held up and would be finishing late. He entered NP for the final two boards of the final round at every table. Of course there are other ways of getting the same effect, but this is the simplest one. The important thing about NP is that that it doesn't allow the players to see the other scores on the board, which is why it is suitable for late plays.

Do tell :)

Maybe your Leeds club has decided not to use announcements any more, though it would seem a surprising decision. Or maybe your TD just got it wrong.

...and gives the player whose turn it actually was the power to take away that power from his partner :)

Actually, it's not that likely to do that because people usually misboard after they've played the hand. It would help with when the board was misdealt to begin with, but that's a very rare occurrence indeed.

Of course! Unless you have a lot of TDs, I can see this taking up most of the TD's time. Certainly I think we would need to have fewer tables per TD if they were going to move the boards for every four tables. And my earlier point still applies about having four columns of tables.

A nice solution, but who takes the boards from O1 to C11? Surely the players don't go past their team-mates at C1 or O11? And, if you have caddies to do it, doesn't that count as "resources"? And of course you need a room that lends itself to four columns of tables.

I wouldn't. A/A+ seems reasonable.