wyman

When you're a student, you sleep 2-4 in a hotel room that costs -- and I'll say we splurged -- $100 a night. Often times, you got lucky and crashed at someone's grandma's or aunt's house. For the LV NABC, I remember that most of the crew stayed at the Sahara, and that cost like $30/nt. We've played in Cleveland regionals and slept 4 to a room @ like $70/nt. Entry fees are $20/session, but you get the junior discount that makes it like $10/session at NABCs. Some places you pay like $5-8/sess at regionals. Others students play free. Say 3 sessions @ 10, and a hotel room for $25-30, though. You can easily do meals for $30/day, often less since you're finding a free (or $2) bagel somewhere for breakfast, going to Chipotle for $8 for lunch, and having dinner at Fridays for like $12. This still leaves you $8 for a couple beers, but you don't need that, since the older guys from your area who know you're dirt poor buy you a beer or two at the bar after the evening session. You only go to NABCs you can drive to, so you split gas costs -- negligible. And sometimes you're lucky enough to be playing in a Flight B/C "major" event, so you get a little stipend from your district. Total that up. It's far less than $100 a day. No, I don't think it's reasonable that I have to shell out $4/day to check my phone. Especially not when you have people who are getting PAID to play the game at the table next to you with the cell phone in their jacket pocket. --- I now have a job and do pay closer to what you suggest to go play in tournaments, and yes, $4/day is negligible. But just because it's a small amount doesn't mean that it's right. And if I'm lucky enough to be there for 5 days, seriously I've shelled out $20 to the phone police. I give enough money to charity, and I do so on my own terms. Charging me at the NABC to be one of the upstanding people that doesn't skirt a stupid rule that really doesn't inhibit cheating anyway, and then telling me not to complain because the money is going to charity -- that's insulting.

It is quite a trip, especially in rush hour traffic, but they do have games a few nights a week. It is not quite the hour and half+ up to Essex, but you still have to leave an hour and change at rush hour. I also have a sour taste in my mouth (though I later met the owner and he is a nice guy), as I showed up for a published game (after making plans with a friend from out of town and driving the hour and change) that was apparently cancelled. We weren't the only ones who showed up either. I scrambled to find a game that started even later and drove another 40 minutes to show up only a board late to that game, so it all worked out. In any case, keeping a website up to date, for example, would help with such things. Aversion to -- or failure to use, for whatever reason -- technology that the younger generation finds standard is perhaps another reason that kids are unlikely to take up the pastime. edit: to be fair, bccnj actually has a fine webpage with an updated monthly calendar, and this must have been a one-off type thing. I still stand by comment about clubs in general not having a good enough online presence and about this discouraging young people.

I'll make a few observations: 1) I live in central NJ, in New Brunswick (home of Rutgers U), and work in Princeton (home of Princeton U). This region of the country (NY/NJ/Phil) should be like bridge Mecca, and in many senses it is. And I live and work in the towns of the best universities in the state. Academics and students abound. And, there are a huge number of games in my area. The catch? They are all during the day. Let's say 5pm on a Tuesday rolls around and I am able to leave work (and find a partner). I work 30 minutes south of where I live. I have to drive over an hour and a half (and beg them over the phone to sign me up) in horrible rush hour traffic to get to a game north of where I live that starts at 6:30 (for a 1 hour drive home), or an hour south of work for a 7:00 game in the other direction for an hour and 15 minute drive home. Evening games within a 30 minute drive of either work or home? There is only 1, and it's on Wednesday. 2) Cell phones were commented on earlier. I have no problem with the no phones (or at least phones off) in NABC+ events rule, but I have a huge problem with the fees for holding your phone at the site. In Philadelphia, it was $2 for one phone, $3 for 2, and $5 for 3. And this was for one session. First of all, why does the marginal cost increase for the 3rd phone? I'm already mad I have to pay you at all, and now you're infuriating me with a nonsensical pricing scheme. Second of all, we had a foursome with 4 phones that all fit in one ziploc, and the guy told us that we could keep them all together and "well, 2, 3, 5, ..., just charge them 8." I told him we'd go ahead and just pay for 2 and 2. I don't see why he thought that the pricing was Fibonacci (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I didn't ask what he'd charge me for 5 phones...), but maybe he was Rain Man or something. Third, half* the field just turns their phones off and keeps them in their pockets/purses/etc anyway. This is anecdotal ("dude whatever just put it in your pocket but turn it off", "that's what cargo pants are for", ...) but supported by the number of cell phone penalties given out even to top pros of late. They kept it in their pocket but forgot to turn it off. * half is my hyperbolic way of saying "much of" Fourth, can't you just penalize the offenders heavily? That's effectively what's happening anyway (see (3)), except the honest people have to pay money. Fifth, seriously, I already paid you for the morning session, and now you're charging me again for the evening session? Same ticket, same bag, is it really a big deal? Sixth, and possibly most infuriatingly, is it really supposed to make me feel better that you're giving the money to charity? Now it's like "well, we really didn't need to charge you, since we're not keeping the money anyway, but we are going to go ahead and charge you anyway, since we're dicks, but we'll make you feel like the dick for complaining, since it's going to charity." 3) I truly think that the whole "the youth want instant gratification" argument is false. There is a youtube video of a guy counting to 100,000. The video is 77 hours long. What I'm saying is: the youth are finding ways to do large projects, however inane they are. Maybe they learn to play poker well (which takes a lot of work). Some of them take courses on coursera. Some have built their own iphone apps. Some have played countless hours of angry birds (which actually takes an incredible amount of time to do). Point being -- they are finding things to devote themselves to, not all of which are about instant gratification. And arguing that poker or some of these video games are instantly gratifying is roughly the same as arguing that bridge is -- since you get to win or lose tricks, hands, rubbers, whatever. I'll stop here since I fear this is turning into a rant...

I don't think this question is that weird. I mean obviously you have the right shape and point count, but man, that is a pretty awful suit to bid 3H with, especially r/w. Would far prefer to have xx/KJ109xxx/xxx/x. I mean maybe we agree to play WJO, but that doesn't mean that this is a 3H bid over a first seat 1D. Since hands with the right shape, point count, and distribution of honors come up once in a blue moon, I also prefer jumps here as fit, but unfortunately OP gets to set the CoC.

My understanding is that, today, your partner's approach would be wildly nonstandard. But there is likely a reason that your understanding and mine are similar, so take that for what it's worth.

This. Opener has enough extra shape or strength to compete to the 3-level, and responder has a 6-9(10) raise of diamonds. What else could he be so darn excited about?

I'd pass. How bad could it be? X should show ownership and set up penalty doubles. Awesome, now partner can't make a tox of spades, I can't make a tox of hearts, and we haven't discussed whether we're forced and how high. My high cards are close to a dbl, but with the number of shapely 14s that are opened 1N now and this awful 7, I'm really not comfortable even claiming ownership. And I'm certainly not comfortable doubling and then having to bid 3D when 2H comes back to me. And I'm definitely not good enough to rip 2M.

Ditto, this is a 3♥ bid for me (over 1D), close to a 4♥ bid.

I'm a bidder, slightly unhappy if LHO dbls (but even then it might be ok), but on balance I think 2N is right here.

Enormously. Partner should have a really suitable hand for us here, and we'll easily find out the spade situation. [to give a sense: at this point, I'd rather bid 6C than 5C. But this is magnified by the fact that this is MPs and 5C is a priori very unlikely to be the right spot. I'd Q at imps too though]

Maybe they have an understanding? Live and let live, bro!

I don't see how it can be RKC. Opener is 0354 + a card that isn't a heart. Responder doesn't have 5 hearts, has a min GF, and wants to play 3N. He really doesn't want to play 4H in a moysian and deal with bad breaks because he has like AKQx / 9xxx / Kx / Jxx. I think it's to play.

Doesn't 2N show (roughly) this hand shape after (2H) p p ? I'm ready to be wrong, but I don't see what else it could be.

Is it forcing?

I'm not picking 10 either, so there. Can't pick just one Stones album -- need a multi-volume greatest hits or sthg Born to Run Nevermind Thriller Rumours Hotel California Legend (surprised i haven't seen this yet) Best of CCR Back in Black There has to be a Stevie Wonder compilation that fits this bill as well. Elton John Greatest Hits The Doors Bon Jovi Who's Next Oh, and I'd be remiss to not mention: The Chronic, Ready to Die, Doggystyle, Straight Outta Compton, and All Eyez on Me. The above is a pretty good list, so remember that before you read the following and lose all respect for me. For a complete shift: the last few days I've been hitting the Deadmau5 Pandora station really hard. I have no idea why, but I'm loving this lately. Totally mindless, just a beat -- a soundtrack for my day while I'm working. eta: DMB: Crash? Maybe that's just for people in college around this time, but man do a lot of DMB songs evoke serious feelings of nostalgia for me.

Does GIB give any signals? Why the D4 (and not the 3) at T2?

Seems like if I hold this 16 and partner makes an inverted raise, the only aggressive contract I'd be worried about is 6D. Surely we're not supposed to stop short of game here. Blasting 3N takes care not to use the UI that an aggressive contract, like 6D, might make. I also think that putting "forget" in quotes here is a bit dramatic.

Other than the 1988 (perhaps) and 2004 usages, all of these may suggest death. The 1899 version is less clear, though it's not hard to imagine that the implication is still that the man dies (but is miraculously brought back to life because it's a show...). I don't have a dog in this fight, just pointing out that i dont think what brr said is inconsistent with what's written.

1S. I fill in 6-17(18) in my "Simple Overcalls" box.

[ ] General [ ] Bridge [?] Discussion

I've heard varying (undocumented) accounts of the OBL situation, one being that Obama was against it and only approved it under serious pressure from military advisors. Given estimates of how likely such a mission was to work and the international fallout if it failed spectacularly, one might argue that this is extremely reasonable, but that's beside the point. In this scenario, if one were to assign a number between -1 and 1 to the "how responsible is Obama for the death of OBL?" question, one might conceivably argue that we killed OBL in spite of Obama, rather than because of, in which case the number we'd assign to Obama's responsibility might well be negative. Since the number we assign to Mitt is very likely 0 (or very near 0 -- butterfly effect and all), I can see a rational person honestly answering Mitt for this question. Do I think that this is what those people were thinking? Of course not. But I try to give humanity the benefit of the doubt where possible.

And while teaching cardplay, they need to learn to finesse and lead toward honors. You do not need to show them squeezes! (I know you...)

iFelicidades, amigo! Good luck and much happiness!

Entirely the opposite. I called JLall a fish (which is a poker term for a person who plays terribly and exploitably), since he is actually betting Obama heavy but he's on here telling people how underpriced Obama is and how awesome @fivethirtyeight is. I was suggesting, jokingly, that he might be better off slandering Nate, touting (1. attempting to sell (something), typically by pestering people in an aggressive or bold manner: "Jim was touting his wares". 2. Attempting to persuade people of the merits of (someone or something).) Romney, but continuing to bet Obama, so that he might get that skrilla ($, €, ¥, 元, £, ฿).

Fish. Slander Nate, talk about how undervalued Romney is on intrade, and get that skrilla!