Walddk

Vegard Brekke (coach), Tor Helness, Boye Brogeland, Erik Sælensminde, Sten Bjertnes (npc), Ulf Tundal, Glenn Grøtheim, Geir Helgemo.

I am no English major but I have a university degree in English. It depends on how the speaker is thinking of the USBF; as a single entity (singular) or as a group of members (plural). Singular is probably more usual than plural, but this may be one of those British- English vs American-English dichotomies. So as I see it, you can use both as far as the USBF is/are concerned. The same applies to for instance companies and countries. USA lead/leads, Microsoft has/have. Take your pick. Roland

How disrespectful, to Fred as well as the rest of us. I expected no less when it came from you. We are quite capable of expressing our own views without getting "help" from Fred. Roland I'm sure that Fred felt very disrespected when I suggested that his opinion carries a lot of weight around here. Preach on Mr. "You don’t intimidate me, I only take orders from Fred Gitelman." Typical. You ignored the first part of your post and think you made up for it by adding the second part. As to your last comment. Indeed, as far as vugraph is concerned I only take orders from Fred Gitelman. Is that so strange? By the way, I don't have to take any because Fred never ordered me to do anything. "It's your call", is how Fred handles it in every situation, so he seems to be happy with the decisions I make. I have a lot of respect for Fred, and I have little respect for people who think other people are idiots if they don't have the same views as them. Roland

How disrespectful, to Fred as well as the rest of us. I expected no less when it came from you. We are quite capable of expressing our own views without getting "help" from Fred. Roland

Who cares what Miss Manners thinks? But I still recall what you wrote on October 14: "I applaud them for their courage." I assume you mean the VCTM and not the BoD's. If I am correct, you must just be the right person to seek a compromise. Can I do it better? Probably, but it has little relevance since I don't agree with your or jdonn's suggestion. Roland

Good thing you are not employed in the diplomacy. This is absolutely hopeless. Between the lines you are saying that the USBF BoD are incompetent, retarded individuals. And your compromise under 1. doesn't convince anybody when they know that you don't mean what you are saying. Often enough did you write that the VCT did not do anything wrong in your opinion. In your view the BoD's are idiots and the VCTM heroes. Roland

I am not too hopeful. It has become a matter of principles and pride, and no one wants to lose face by giving an inch. Silly? Yes, but it's the truth I'm afraid. In the meantime they keep the lawyers busy, and the bills will be enormous. Roland

This is about to get ugly with personal attacks. Isn't it time to stop it and come back to the topic if you have more to add? Roland

The line I would adopt too. The deal seems familiar. Did we have it on vugraph not so long ago? By the way, when is someone going to create a template for bidding? It is very difficult to read Phil's auction properly, and we have had lots of examples where the auction makes little sense because the bids do not appear under the appropriate players. That's why I always take and explain one bid at a time in the text below the diagram. I am no programmer and I don't know how difficult it is, but I don't think it is brain surgery. Here is an example of how it is done on a Danish web site: http://www.netbridge.dk/bridge/discuss/tre...sp?message=3264 You are asked if you want a template, and if you say "Ja", you get an empty template and click on the bids you want for each player in turn. This is the nice result you see when the auction is complete. Roland

But there are events limited to only women. Can we get rid of those too by suing some NBO? Roland

Another "Assign the blame" topic. How much do you give the VCT and how much is the USBF responsible for? I am reluctant to attach percentages, but it's a fact that the VCT created the incident, and in my view the USBF could and should have tackled the issue within two weeks and more elegantly than is the case now. It has escalated beyond reason. After all, the ladies did not cheat and they did not mug anyone. They are not incurable villains, but it seems to me that they are treated like criminals. Roland

[hv=d=s&v=e&w=sq76h6dkqj108cak107&s=sak2hkqj107d64cq84]266|200|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] Expert game on BBO. You are South and the auction is as follows: 1♥ 2♦ 4♥ p p dble p 4♠ all pass Before you ask, I may just as well tell that this NS pair can't have a 5-card major when opening 1NT. Anyway, you lead ♥K and partner follows with the deuce. You have this agreement: 1) Low card is encouraging. 2) High even card is suit preference for the lower side suit. 3) High odd card is suit preference for the higher side suit. So North has no help in diamonds or clubs; not ♦A, not a singleton diamond and not a singleton club either. Basically, your partner asks you to continue hearts unless you have an obvious switch. Do you? What do you lead at trick 2? Roland

I think so. The Lanzarotti-Buratti cheating scandal in Tenerife 2005 had 277 replies and 21,063 views. So far this thread has 482 replies and 21,183 views. Roland

Where did I say that? The question was: What has partner got for the double? So I replied: A good club suit ... I apologise profusely for answering the question oojah asked. It is obviously responder's partner who should bid 3NT if he can stop hearts. Roland

A good club suit. 3♣ could well be three cards (even a doubleton feature), looking for 3NT if partner can stop hearts. Roland

I may comment after I have been to the pharmacy to get 6 mg of Valium. David Burn playing support doubles!!?? Why is it that I thought that I would never see that on print? I am in shock, and since pharmacies in Denmark are closed at 6:30 am, I guess I must accept to feel miserable for another 3 hours. Roland

Isn't this the textbook OBAR hand? The one with shape pre-balances. Roland

Trumpace's analysis is indeed excellent. Declarer played the hand exactly like that and there was nothing the defence could so. North returned a high club after winning the ace, and when South failed to cover, declarer simply pitched a heart loser. The reason why I posted this in the B/I Forum is that during the hand, before and when South failed to cover the club exit, and even for some time after the hand, several so called experts among the spectators claimed that South fell asleep when he did not overtake partner's jack. They did not spot that the contract is a make no matter what South does once he did not lead a heart. If the "experts" can't see that, I thought it would be a good idea to ask the intermediates. At least they can't do worse. I wish that those "experts" in the audience would keep a lower profile when they can't analyse to save their lives. It's not embarrassing to be an inferior analyst, but in my opinion it is embarrassing that those people are the ones who keep talking. The trouble is that the BI's might believe what they see on print, and that would be a bad idea in way too many cases. Roland

This is one of the most sensible posts I have read in the BBF for ages. Roland

I can beat that. I have zero in ACBL-land, so I guess Jon is about to suffocate from laughter. Roland

3♠. Anything is better than 4NT which I find plain silly. What are you going to do when opener shows two keycards for hearts? Right, guess if he has ♥AK, ♥K and ♦A or the two red aces. To those who suggest 4NT I would like to say that Blackwood is useless unless partner can produce all the keycards you are missing. You don't deserve to be this lucky when you venture 4NT. If the response you get is 5♥ or 5♠, you are not any wiser and must now bid 6NT. That will likely make, but you could easily have 17 top tricks. Roland

We have Paul Soloway in two threads now. He deserves it; a great ambassador for bridge he was. Our thoughts are with his family. Roland

This was exactly what the spectators suggested, but I think they erred. Roland

I agree in the sense that if "we" had the ♥10 instead of the 9, it would be easier. Hint: perhaps the 9 is good enough!? Roland

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=s5haqj87d872caj105&w=saj984hk32dj1054ck&e=skq72h965dakq6c43&s=s1063h104d93cq98762]399|300|Scoring: XIMP East: 4S Lead: D9[/hv] You have arrived in 4♠ as East. It would have been better to let West declare, but that can't be helped. At least you have avoided the killing heart lead. South leads ♦9. Your worries are not over because you can see that ♥A is offside. Is there a chance even if the opponents defend well? It sure looks like three heart losers and one club loser, doesn't it?. The spectators claimed that the contract is always off if South is awake. Were they correct? If you are advanced or better, please use hidden text, and if you are a B/I, don't peek if they do. Roland