shyams

I'd certainly bid 4♣ over 3nt. There are various hands where a grand slam is likely, but it requires partner to cooperate with a diamond cue -- showing ♦K. And I'd very likely continue to bid on to 6♣ regardless of partner's significant BIT

I suspect this might be the common perception of the situation in mainland EU. However, I feel some of it is not true. A. ...they don't want to pay, they don't want the EU regulations & they don't want EU citizens to come an work in Britain. But they want free access to the common market. The "don't want to pay" is not Govt policy (at least it wasn't until recently). Originally, the UK Govt seemed willing to pay in a reasonable price; for access to EU markets, and for previously committed EU projects. The crucial issue is "how much?". The press quoted figures of EUR 120bn-220bn, allegedly "non-negotiable". The UK used to contribute approx EUR 16bn per year and UK institutions / regions got a variety of grants totalling EUR 6bn per year -- so in effect the UK is being asked to finance the next 12-22 years of net contributions as exit costs! B. There are EU citizens in Britain and British citizens in other EU countries. Again, not a problem in principle. As per my cursory study of the document on EU negotiating position The EU wants for all EU citizens in the UK to get: (a) Full settled rights -- No problem, this makes sense. (b) To anyone coming over till the day of Brexit (29-Mar-19 or later if exit is delayed) -- Some may object but so far nothing weird about the request. © And to any EU citizen who may have been resident in the past but no longer resides in the UK; to apply to resettle any time in the future. FYI, the law for non-EU nationals is: If a permanent residence visa holder leaves the country for two whole years, he/she automatically loses all rights given by the PR visa. While the principle behind EU's demand for resettlement is not totally unreasonable, it would have been sensible to permit UK the right to impose some limitations on what qualifies & what doesn't. d) Also apply to spouses/partners, children and dependants regardless of when they arrive in future -- i.e. akin to saying "my Grandma was an EU citizen who lived in the UK between 2012-2018, so in the year 2030 I (a national of X) automatically have rights to live in the UK" -- Getting weird already. (e) If there are any disputes, the final arbiter on whether some person can remain or not in the UK will be decided by the European Court of Justice & not the UK courts --- absolutely crazy!! This basically implies that UK courts are too easily influenced or not independent & so cannot be trusted to get the decisions right! This is nothing short of haughty contempt and disdain of long-established British institutions. I agree with your statement: C. One would have expected that those who wanted the Brexit would have a plan or better a suggestion how to solve those issues. It's evident that the UK is woefully under-prepared entering into these negotiations; and it is obvious to many that M. Barnier is more forceful and impressive in his press briefings. I do want to add one small point: The strongly anti-EU Mr. Varoufakis once said on British TV "The UK will spend the next two years negotiating their right to negotiate". If I recall he said that EU will create so many hurdles and obstacles in the procedural matters that substantive matters will never come to the forefront of any negotiations.

A thread question: Did the title always end as "Thread Thread"? This thread been in existence for so long, but it's only recently that I realised that the title has two "Thread"s!

No one in power has any idea; they don't have a plan, and worst of all they are deluded into believing that the EU will eventually come with a begging bowl asking the UK to continue to trade freely with the EU -- simply because the UK exports more to the EU than it imports from the EU. Guess what?! Perhaps the EU will stop bothering with British exports. If that happens, no one knows what sort of "Plan B" exists. In short, we're in deep doodoo and we're busy trying to determine whether it is real doodoo or simply brown-coloured mud that coincidentally smells like doodoo.

Really surprised (in the manner of a "pleasant surprise") to read in the BBC that the NRA has called for "regulations" on semi-automatic and fully-automatic weapons. I don't know if that is the first step to an eventual ban of such weapons across the US, but at the very least, the Senators and Congressmen will now have an opportunity to create meaningful legislation without fear of serious backlash. Perhaps one day the courts might eventually rule that the second amendment exclusively refers to handguns, rifles and other type of (non-automatic) weapons.

4th best club

I feel it has nothing to do with Chrome version. I have had similar problems to fluffy when I use my Chromebook to access BBO. I occasionally freeze exactly the way fluffy described --- i.e. it happens after I have switched to another tab and come back. My short-term fix was not to switch tabs -- not very practical but something I can live with. And there is a worse issue that I had occasionally encountered with Chromebook. It can sometimes freeze when I switch tabs on the scoring module (i.e. I see "other table" scores, and move back to my table scores -- that's enough to make BBO on Chromebook freeze. However, I have not seen this happen for a few weeks now (fingers crossed).

I remember playing bridge online in tourneys with or hosted by ecepal. She was adored by many on BBO, and was always friendly and helpful. RIP, Ece! My sincere condolences to you, Timo. May you and your family find the strength to handle this profound loss.

duplicate

A while back, when I had a discussed agreement in place, our agreement was: -- Pass: Promises 4+ {occasionally very strong 3} and willing to play 1♣x if responder can tolerate it. -- Redouble: Shows 3, scared to play 1♣x, and asks partner to do something. However, I think the situation never really came up.

1. I like 1NT. Just a bit light to try 2♣. Also, 1NT gives partner room to cue 2♣ and show a monster hand. 2. Dbl 3. Pass 4. 5NT, then 6♠

[hv=pc=n&s=shdc&n=shdc&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1sp1nd2c2h2s?]266|200[/hv] Let's say the bidding goes something like the above. Natural bidding systems in use a. Does South's 1NT followed by 2♠ promise three card support? b. What HCP range would be likely for South? c. Does North's 2♣ after West's X show a two-suiter? Can it be 5-4 or would it need to be 5-5? d. If North now bids 3♠, is it purely competitive or invitational? Any comments/suggestions welcome..

I can't vouch for the accuracy of my recollection. I also don't know how it was done when it happened.... but here goes! Many years ago --- during the days access thru BBO software, not web -- there was a match between American and Australian stars on BBO. One table played the boards at one time, then logged out. The other table logged in and played their boards many hours later. In the period when neither table was in play, one could see two tables with 8 red IDs. I vaguely remember that Paul Marston (the Moscito guy) was one of the stars who played in this match.

I think I knew that robots do play 1NT-2H-2S-4S as a slam try. And my example may not have been best to make my point; it was just the most recent I came across. My point is that perhaps GIB developers can evaluate whether the "slam-try" logic works effectively. I have a sense that bots often use Texas transfer and then pass. As a hypothesis, perhaps the GIB simulation presumes a 2-card fit with 1NT opener -- which is why it overwhelmingly uses Texas instead of Jacoby & game.

An example hand -- and I'm sure BBO could easily find many more -- is given here (click) My problem/request is that GIB should be able to differentiate between good Texas bids and bad ones. If I (South) unilaterally invoke RKCB, it becomes a lottery. If, instead, GIB could show uninspiring hands thru Texas (1NT-4♥; 4♠) and invitational/good hands thru Jacoby (1NT-2♥; 2♠-4♠) that would make life much easier for South to guess when to try for slam. In the example hand above, 4♠+2 was only 33%.

I posted this because I thought the best contract to reach at x-IMPs would be 7♣, even if it means risking a double when things are badly placed.

Cross-IMPs Opps will pass. (Could they double the final contract? Not sure) White vs Red [hv=pc=n&s=saq9752ha82dkjcj2&n=sjthjtdat3cakq974&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sp?p]266|200[/hv]

North was GIB as were East & West. This was a hand from Robot Rebate 55%. At the table, I thought about it, chickened out and passed. I scored ~60% on the board but I really felt bad that I did not bid the grand -- which scores 100%! North had ♠J9xx ♥Q ♦Kxxx ♣Axxx so 13 tricks were at risk only if West had ♦J10xx and East had ♦-. I occasionally complain about GIB's bidding, but this one I thought was a very creative and good bid.

From the website above, "The US healthcare system is expensive, the most expensive in the world. That is due to many factors including the quality of our care, the general cost of things in America, the sheer amount of folks employed by healthcare system, and general fraud, waste, and abuse." IMO, the idea of a wasteful industry which resists efforts to streamline itself may be the crux of the problem. It's not only about the US Govt subsidised cost of insurance, but the idea that insurance is expensive because the healthcare system is profligate. Perhaps this shouldn't be something that the Federal Govt alone needs to tackle. The State Govts, regulatory authorities, citizen groups etc can also help.

Matchpoints - Both Vul Competent partner -- though more skilled at card-play than bidding. Your side is playing 2/1 with the usual gadgets. [hv=pc=n&s=sha9daq763ckq9865&n=&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cp1s2s(NAT%206%2B!S%2C%2010%2B%20HCP)3d(shows%20extra%20values)p6cp?]266|200[/hv] Partner's jump to slam was unexpected. Question is: Is thinking of a grand slam out of question? So, do you plan to bid on?

I lost the 4th set as well. Cepheid wins the match. 4th set: Shyams 9 - 26 Cepheid http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1df796e9.5819.11e7.be39.0cc47a39aeb4-1498225055&u=shyams Well done, cepheid, and all the best for future rounds.

On some days, we would probably repeat the auction. On some other days, I might pass as North. In MPs, I think the correct action is for South to sit it out and take the minus.

IF AND THEN I think the right thing for South to do is to fake a 1444 hand with a 3♠ bid.

Timo, 1. Your analysis provides great food for thought on how regional alliances in the Middle East have shifted to accommodate the interests of the USA. 2. The Qatar-Turkey pipeline did have an alternative proposed route {thru Iraq instead of Syria} but the rape of Iraq over the past 15 years meant the alternative was never an option. 3. There are other instances where actions of the US Govt have been exclusively for the benefit of the US private sector. A beautiful read is "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins. 4. I think we have been indoctrinated by the mainstream media into believing that the "world view" promoted by the Western democracies is the ONLY TRUE world view. In some ways, it resembles the 19th century view on religion -- i.e. "my god" is the ONLY TRUE god. The difference is that the 21st century Westerner gives not much importance to religion, instead the "fight" now is on liberty and democracy. 5. Finally, I find it interesting that a Turkish-American based in the US spends considerable time on posting this. Yet most other Americans barely seem to read it, let alone comment. In contrast, the Trump thread continues to accumulate tons of lengthy posts full of meaningless drivel. Thank you for posting.

IMO, one outcome of this fiasco is that no other EU country will ever seriously contemplate an Exit. We've scared everyone else off any such thoughts.