shyams

If you were a Government and the falling glass was a policy decision, you would proclaim it as a major victory -- while suppressing information about the associated devastation caused to other policy matters.

The best part about these questions is that the interviewer does not expect a one word answer! "Q: Is this the best moment in your career? Answer: Yes!" And then interviewer looks longingly at player (hoping he will continue), who eventually realises what's going on, stutters and then adds a few more words of gibberish.

Can I ask if this was a MPs game? Wouldn't responder have more reason to bid 6C at MPs?

gwnn is right. Obviously the professor has calculated odds before. The interesting point (I hope) is there is a 50% chance that at least two people will share a birthday in a random group of 23. Useful trivia?

A professor walks into a lecture hall and finds 25 students sitting there. He says "I bet $100 that any two of you share the same birthday (day + month)" Assuming you or the professor has no advance knowledge of students birthdays, would you take on the bet with the professor?

Mostly harmless So long, and Thanks for all the fish Life, the Universe and Everything .... ....

Some non-expert opinions: 1. As jallerton pointed out, I think the bidding and discards matter here. 2. A minor point -- after 8 played tricks, there would be 5 cards in each hand (not 6 as shows). I'd guess East now held ♠Jx ♥Tx ♦-- ♣T 3. Based on carding (esp to tricks 1 and 7) it is clear to East that partner does not hold ♣K and/or ♠Q. And the two discards made by West should (normally) also be enough for East to know what to play at trick 9. My opinion is that table result should stand. I would leave the matter of PPs, warnings etc to the qualified directors.

The Matrix is real. We are all in it...

Here's another situation to consider: I'm playing with a WC player in the club. We land in a slam on a board (after I have blundered and gone down in a cold contract on the previous one). LHO leads, WC partner puts down dummy & within a couple of seconds I call for a card from dummy. Before pulling the card, partner sighs and says "Don't hurry, partner. We still have 10 minutes before the round is called". I take a good 3 minutes on the hand (including declarer's play to trick 1). Despite my limited playing skills, I find a strong line of play and make the very tough slam. Isn't this somewhat analogous to the OP?

Agree with this. Obviously, some learnings from the failed attempt will have to be incorporated into the system but a large-scale knee-jerk over-reaction to the incident is a way in which we allow the bad guys to achieve their objectives.

I think there is very little parallel to draw between the situation facing Israel and the one facing USA.* One country is bang in the middle of the most volatile regions of the world, the other has gigantic oceans insulating it from direct attack. * When Hezbollah/Hamas wanted to attack Israel, they cound buy cheap ("off the shelf"?) rockets and fire in the general direction of Israel with a decent chance of a hit. This is impossible for a US scenario. I think people aspire for the American way of life. Yes, there are a few who will chant death to America -- but some of those would be against your politicians / policy, not Americans in general. I believe you are underestimating the amount of goodwill that the world has towards an average American.

Not sure how many outside of UK knew about the 'battle' between the X-Factor and Rage Against The Machine. This was a campaign started by Jon Morter and friends on Facebook to protest against the X-Factor (equivalent to American Idol) single being foisted on the UK public as the Christmas #1. The link is here After a massive viral campaign that rapidly gained momentum, thr RATM song "Killing in the name" made Christmas #1. Click this BBC link. Please feel free to comment. PS: I downloaded 2 copies of the RATM song; and 0 doses of the X-factor syrup.

I think the Unions need to ensure they get all the publicity and the sympathy of the general public. About 2 yrs ago there was a strike by the Fire Brigade staff which generated widespread sympathy from the public at large. In BA's case, I'd guess there is little sympathy...

If BBC is considered to be fair and impartial, here is a useful article on the matter. I think you will find the latter part of the article (relating to employee pay, BA losses and pension deficit) interesting http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8415370.stm

If the courts rule this illegal, something worse could happen. The cabin crew could decide to take sick leave or some such things en masse.. An unscheduled action (with similar disruptive actions of a strike) would come out much worse than a planned strike.

In my opinion, the strike will help: 1. polarise the opinion of the British people against the flag-bearer airline. 2. increase the possibility of an eventual demise of BA 3. in some distorted way, cost the striking cabin crew more After the recent large scale bail-outs (banks + automobile cos + what else?), there must be an idea in the minds of the Unions that if BA goes bankrupt, the UK Govt will step in and save it. I will be really surprised if it happens. This is one company which (though probably not close to bankruptcy) will probably go the way of Swiss Air, KLM etc.... A major Spanish bank (Santander) already owns some key UK high-street banks. Perhaps in the near future, a major Spanish airline co (Iberia) will own BA.

How would you feel if you found out you broke a Bridge Law by declining to move the board when asked by Director? If you were sitting in the North seat, you have an obligation to move the boards on time in any case. And as per Law 8 A. 2., once Director asks you to move a board you need to do it -- even if you are not North.

Wasn't there a commercial a few years ago where a lot of people (kids?) stare at the screen and say "I am Tiger Woods"? The current drama is has some similarities -- lots of women lined up, staring at the screen and sayind "I did Tiger Woods"

I think the England team is being underestimated by the people making predictions so far. I am not saying they are my pick for a win; but they are definitely stronger than just a QF elimination. Plus here's a piece of history for the superstitious. The penultimate tournament win by Spain was in 1964. They won the next one after 44 years -- Euro '08. The last major win by England was in 1966 -- add 44 years and you get a reason to pick them as the next WC winners.

Isn't minor suit Stayman better with the North hand, instead of 2NT (trf. to D)?

I choose fluffy's line. If SK is with West, we have 9 tricks on all 4-3 heart fits. While the odds between diamonds and hearts are close (for normal breaks) and gnasher's calculations show diamonds is better, there is a chance that hearts can be pulled for 6 tricks (when either hand has JTx).

Would it not be relevant to know what happened preceding the 3NT bid? a. Did you alert partner's 2NT bid? I suppose you were not playing with screens b. Did opps ask the meaning after the alert? In my opinion (with limited knowledge) If partner saw your alert and then changed his response to show genuine 2NT (i.e. 20-21 bal) hand, I think your side is already in trouble. I think partner needs to assume 3♣ to be Stayman! If you are playing online (self-alerting) or behind screens, I think you are permitted to re-evaluate partner's 3NT to mean 2NT was natural and partner forgot. Now a 6NT bid would be acceptable The folks knowledgeable in law matters can correct my opinion (which I suspect is incorrect or incomplete)

No intention to trick, honest :) Partner was so vehement / convincing, I was sure no one will think of 4NT and chose "Other" as the 6th option :)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sqjhkdat86cqj9654&w=s87654h64dkq73c87&e=sakt932hq93d54cat&s=shajt8752dj92ck32]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] At the table, I held the South hand and at my second turn, I bid 4NT. Obviously we had no prior agreements in place for the 4NT bid. After the ensuing debacle, partner insisted 4NT was a stupid bid and a simple 5♣ was best. My thoughts before the 4NT bid was that I was not sure whether 5♥ plays better (partner could hold ♥xx or ♥Hx) and even 6♣ may be on (but only partner can tell). With the actual hand, partner had wasted values in majors and 5♣ was the best contract Thank you for your comments

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=shajt8752dj92ck32]133|100|Scoring: MP Partner deals; vul vs NV North East South West 1♣ - 1♠ - 2♥ - 2♠ 3♣ - 4♠ - ?? With the 3♣ bid, partner denies 3-card ♥. You have no prior discussion whether partner also denies Kx/Qx in ♥ [/hv] Two extra questions: a. If you choose pass, would you expect it to be forcing or non-forcing? b. I hope you agree with the 2♥ bid in round 1. Do you?