ArtK78 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 By the way, "judgment" does not have an "e" after the "g". :) Yes it does. Actually, both are correct. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judgement No. "Judgement" is a misspelling of "judgment." Your reference refers to it as a "variant." "Variant," in this context, is a polite term for a common misspelling. You may notice that it is never spelled with the extra "e" when it is used in a sentence even in your reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 By the way, "judgment" does not have an "e" after the "g". :) Yes it does. Actually, both are correct. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judgement No. "Judgement" is a misspelling of "judgment." Your reference refers to it as a "variant." "Variant," in this context, is a polite term for a common misspelling.You are arguing with the dictionary, and I say you are wrong. If it was simply a common misspelling the dictionary would feel no need to mention it. You may notice that it is never spelled with the extra "e" when it is used in a sentence even in your reference.I think you know that proves nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 I'd guess +300 is as almost as likely as -790, so I'd double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zasanya Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 I completely agree that this depends on your opponents too much to answer in the abstract.When P bids 3♣ isn't he promising some strength ?If he has only ♣ and if he doesn't suck :lol: then wouldn't he pull the double?Whom should we trust P or Ops? What? lol? Partner will pull our double? Who does partner trust, opponents or us?The first double suggests 12+ hcp and short ♠ and tolerance for other suits.The second double if made ;) should suggest extra strength say 16 with probably an honor in ♠?P also knows that he has shown only 6-9 hcp and opponent have heard his ♣ call and yet they are bidding 4♠ .So he pulls dbl if majority of his hcp are in ♣ and doesnt if he has scattered values with something in red suits.Does this argument make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 I completely agree that this depends on your opponents too much to answer in the abstract.When P bids 3♣ isn't he promising some strength ?If he has only ♣ and if he doesn't suck :lol: then wouldn't he pull the double?Whom should we trust P or Ops? What? lol? Partner will pull our double? Who does partner trust, opponents or us?The first double suggests 12+ hcp and short ♠ and tolerance for other suits.The second double if made ;) should suggest extra strength say 16 with probably an honor in ♠?P also knows that he has shown only 6-9 hcp and opponent have heard his ♣ call and yet they are bidding 4♠ .So he pulls dbl if majority of his hcp are in ♣ and doesnt if he has scattered values with something in red suits.Does this argument make sense? The second double suggests 4 tricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Does this argument make sense? No. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 In reply to the OP I don't feel nearly as comfortable as everyone else who is doubling.... unless the 4♠ bidder is some kind of bozo. Not because the odds are bad but it just seems like E has some big pointed suit hand. I definitely wouldn't expect overtricks though if it did make, so the EV odds are there. I prefer bidding 5♣. Isn't this basically a 2 ways to win problem? But I certainly wouldn't argue with double unless I were resulting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 5C for me. My hand is balanced but I think that there is a lot of distribution in the other three hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 By the way, "judgment" does not have an "e" after the "g". :lol: Yes it does. Actually, both are correct. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/judgement No. "Judgement" is a misspelling of "judgment." Your reference refers to it as a "variant." "Variant," in this context, is a polite term for a common misspelling.You are arguing with the dictionary, and I say you are wrong. If it was simply a common misspelling the dictionary would feel no need to mention it. You may notice that it is never spelled with the extra "e" when it is used in a sentence even in your reference.I think you know that proves nothing. You are arguing with a lawyer about the proper spelling of the word "judgment?" LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wclass___ Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Double. Why should we do sth abnormal just because opponents bid vulnerable game? Double is surely the most descreptive bid and partner shouldn't expect more from it. Partner also knows about those 200/790 and my double should help him doing his best. If 4♠ really makes(and partner passes), 5♣ should be at least 500 anyway. If you always trust vulnerable opponents, 4 trick suggesting double isn't a good agreement. You will hardly ever have AKQJ of trumps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 You are arguing with a lawyer about the proper spelling of the word "judgment?" LOL. LOL at me having a chance to win the argument. LOL at you thinking you are right. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 partner is NEVER pulling if we double... and unless rho is a lunatic, he has an expectation of making... and our hand doesn't strongly suggest that he is mistaken... he is (one assumes) bidding on shape... why couldn't he hold AQxxxx xx KQJxx void? Wouldn't we all be happy to bid 4♠ here? Place the heart K on our left, and we have no hope of a plus on defence (or offence for that matter, but any minus in 5♣ will gain against 4♠) I think this is a good hand on which to fall back on the tried but true philosophy of 'when in doubt, bid one more'. Having said that, against weak players, double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 I meant to say "judgment" does not have an "e" directly after the "g." Correct but "judgement" does and it is a valid word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 I suppose we should await input from our British posters, but a quick bit of research revealed that judgement is a common form of the word in the UK, to the point that, outside of legal circles (I am not referring to particularly orthodox geometry) it is the more common spelling. It is still limited to a single 'e' in legal writing, and, as I can vouch, it is spelled with the single 'e' in anglo-canadian writings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 To think this was all brought on by a bad joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) You are arguing with a lawyer about the proper spelling of the word "judgment?"I don't normally take an interest in arguments about spelling, but this excerpt may help: Judgement n. Also (the usual form in legal use) -dgm-Perhaps this is just further evidence lawyers don't inhabit the same world as the rest of us? Edit: the entry goes on to say that the word comes from the French "jugement", so it certainly had an 'e' at some point in its life. The dictionary also quotes the King James Bible (from the early 17th Century), which spellt it "iudgement". Edited July 9, 2009 by gnasher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Try using the word "judgement" in a word processor and run the spell check. I know that mine changes it to "judgment." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 partner is NEVER pulling if we double. This I find very weird. Apparently we have to make an unilateral decision - there is no way we can get partner involved. Is the 3♣ bid really that well-defined? Wayne said it could be as few as four clubs (although given my three spades he must have at least five) and that they play no Lebensohl. Partner could have 0-2 spades (with weaker opps and/or different vulnerability I suppose he could have 3 spades) and 5-6 clubs (I suppose 7 is unlikely). I would like to be able to ask partner to make a decision that could be different with 0-6 blacks from 2-5 blacks. I would take double as suggesting a 2443 or 1453 shape. There is no way I would be bidding 5♣ with only three of them given that my double already "promised" three clubs. Now I happen to have four clubs but I have Kxx of spades so I would say the O-D is slightly lower than what partner would expect for a double. I'd rather pass than bid 5♣ since I expect neither 4♠ nor 5♣ to make, unless p has extreme enough distribution to bid 5♣ on his own. If dbl is penalty then I pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Only vested interest grammarians and lawyers could possibly discuss spelling. Spelling: the massive waste of a grade schooler's time. Instead of letter-for-sound as originally intended letting written expression immediately follow the letters-for-sound and freeing school time for compositional thinking, let them suffer SPELLING. Instead of lie detectors(maybe retesting) cutting massive expense from law enforcement and crime investigation, let lawyers hold their vested interest in arguing and paid for each argument. Smart people wasted on counter-productive lawyering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Try using the word "judgement" in a word processor and run the spell check. I know that mine changes it to "judgment." I wrote "judgement" in Word and all it did was change the initial lowercase "j" for an uppercase "J". Maybe you need to get an English spell checker rather than an American one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Try using the word "judgement" in a word processor and run the spell check. I know that mine changes it to "judgment." I wrote "judgement" in Word and all it did was change the initial lowercase "j" for an uppercase "J". Maybe you need to get an English spell checker rather than an American one.Nor did it correct me in Word Perfect Corel, American. It only changed to Cap J because it was first word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Try using the word "judgement" in a word processor and run the spell check. I know that mine changes it to "judgment." With that post you certainly deserve to lose the argument against Jdonn, no matter what he is going to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Try using the word "judgement" in a word processor and run the spell check. I know that mine changes it to "judgment." With that post you certainly deserve to lose the argument against Jdonn, no matter what he is going to say. Something like "a spell checker and a lawyer against a dictionary and the King James bible......hmmmmmm......" And yes, aside from the absurdity of the argument to begin with, obviously he hasn't been to another country to know that there are tons of other English spell checkers and the ones in America default to 'American English'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 partner is NEVER pulling if we double. This I find very weird. Apparently we have to make an unilateral decision - there is no way we can get partner involved. Is the 3♣ bid really that well-defined? Wayne said it could be as few as four clubs (although given my three spades he must have at least five) and that they play no Lebensohl. Partner could have 0-2 spades (with weaker opps and/or different vulnerability I suppose he could have 3 spades) and 5-6 clubs (I suppose 7 is unlikely). I would like to be able to ask partner to make a decision that could be different with 0-6 blacks from 2-5 blacks. I would take double as suggesting a 2443 or 1453 shape. There is no way I would be bidding 5♣ with only three of them given that my double already "promised" three clubs. Now I happen to have four clubs but I have Kxx of spades so I would say the O-D is slightly lower than what partner would expect for a double. Couldn't double be 19 Balanced? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 9, 2009 Report Share Posted July 9, 2009 Couldn't double be 19 Balanced? You mean 19 balanced with a spade stopper? I suppose it is less frequent on this auction. But even so, here we have a balanced hand with a spade stopper, and dbl is fine with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.