headers
Henk Uijterwaal | 1 Nov 2007 01:01
Favicon

BLML Usage statistics

BLML usage statistics for October 2007

Posts   From
-----   ----
  109   hermandw (at) skynet.be
   87   richard.hills (at) immi.gov.au
   77   svenpran (at) online.no
   65   ehaa (at) starpower.net
   62   guthrie (at) ntlworld.com
   53   grandeval (at) vejez.fsnet.co.uk
   45   Gampas (at) aol.com
   42   ereppert (at) rochester.rr.com
   37   jfusselman (at) gmail.com
   31   gesta (at) tiscali.co.uk
   29   agot (at) ulb.ac.be
   25   dalburn (at) btopenworld.com
   20   wjburrows (at) gmail.com
   20   mustikka (at) charter.net
   19   twm (at) cix.co.uk
   18   john (at) asimere.com
   16   swillner (at) nhcc.net
   16   geller (at) nifty.com
   16   brian (at) meadows.pair.com
   14   cibor (at) poczta.fm
   13   hirsch9000 (at) verizon.net
   12   ardelm (at) optusnet.com.au
   10   ziffbridge (at) t-online.de
    8   richard.willey (at) gmail.com
    8   mfrench1 (at) san.rr.com
    8   daisy_duck (at) btopenworld.com
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henk Uijterwaal | 1 Nov 2007 01:01
Favicon

List of BLML Abbreviations

(Automated, regular posting)

              Usenet Bridge Abbreviations

ABF        Australian Bridge Federation
AC         Appeals committee
ACBL       American Contract Bridge League
AI         Authorised information
ArtAS      Artificial adjusted score
AssAS      Assigned adjusted score
ATF        Across-the-field [matchpointing]
ATTNA      Appeal to the National Authority
BBL        British Bridge League [now defunct]
BGB        Bridge Great Britain
BIT        Break in Tempo
BLML       Bridge-laws mailing list
BoD        Board of directors [ACBL]
BoG        Board of governors [ACBL]
BOOT       Bid-Out-Of-Turn
CD         Convention Disruption
C&E        Conduct and ethics [often hearings]
CC         Convention card
CHO        Center Hand Opponent [ie partner]
CoC        Conditions of contest
COOT       Call-Out-Of-Turn
CoP        Code of practice
CPU        Concealed partnership understanding
CTD        Chief Tournament director
DBF        Danish Bridge Federation
DIC        Director in charge
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Steve Willner | 1 Nov 2007 03:11
Favicon

Re: Logical Alternative

[definition of "logical alternative"]
> From: "Grattan Endicott" <grandeval <at> vejez.fsnet.co.uk>
> +=+ Perhaps someone could find time to look up the 
> WBF Code of Practice.

Thanks, Grattan, for the very gentle correction.  As you say, the 
definition in the new Laws is identical to the one in the CoP.

I'm now confused about the history.  The ACBL had "seriously consider" 
for many years.  The CoP (and 2007 FLB) adds "some might adopt."  Has 
the ACBL added that as well?  If so, when did it happen?  Or is 
"seriously consider" alone still in force here?

Regardless of history, I expect the new, much more stringent, definition 
is going to have a significant effect in most of the world outside the ACBL.

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Steve Willner | 1 Nov 2007 03:18
Favicon

Re: When not asking a question changes your agreements

> From: "Stefanie Rohan" <daisy_duck <at> btopenworld.com>
> I don't understand how a player can profit from this manoeuvre.

I can give you a practical example.  My partner and I use an artificial 
1D opening bid, alerted rather than announced.  Some opponents have a 
"sophisticated" defense: an immediate 2D bid is "Michaels" (showing both 
majors), whereas asking for an explanation of 1D and then bidding 2D is 
natural.  Very clever!  (Neither meaning for 2D is alertable in the ACBL.)

As a practical matter, I would not expect to get any redress if 
opponents profit by this method.  (In some games -- not ones I regularly 
play in! -- I'd expect to be told off for using unfamiliar methods.)

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 84 comments |
headers
Ed Reppert | 1 Nov 2007 03:51
Picon

Re: An EBU L&E decision.


On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:48 PM, Tim West-Meads wrote:

> Feel free to tell me where the laws limit the "any instruction" of  
> L90b8.

One purpose of an AC is to provide a check on a TDs bridge judgement.  
Your interpretation of Law 90B8 would negate that purpose. Therefore  
I reject your interpretation. If a TD told me, as an AC member, to  
ignore that purpose, I would resign from the committee rather than  
follow that instruction. And I would report the incident to the  
appropriate authority (which, I grant you, might not mean much).

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Wayne Burrows | 1 Nov 2007 07:29
Picon

Re: Countdown [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

On 30/10/2007, gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk <gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Grattan Endicott<gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk
> [also grandeval <at> vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
> ******************************************
> "The intellectuals' chief cause of anguish
> are one another's works."
>                 ~ Jacques Martin Barzun.
> '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Collier" <dcrc2h <at> hotmail.co.uk>
> To: <blml <at> amsterdamned.org>
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [blml] Countdown [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
>
>
> > >Richard Hills:
> >>
> >>For a definitional dog in the night time, look at the nothing
> >>between the definition of "Contract" and the definition of "Deal".
> >
> > I see it, but I don't understand what it means. The word
> > "convention" appears in the new Law 40B. What are we
> > supposed to deduce from the lack of a definition?
> >
> +=+ "The Secretary was invited to state what difficulty
>         he had with the present definition of convention.
>         (----------------  omissis ---------------------)
> Mr Martel and others agreed that the current definition
> is flawed but felt that the suggested definition may
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Gampas | 1 Nov 2007 09:38
Picon
Favicon

Re: An EBU L&E decision.

In a message dated 01/11/2007 02:52:19 GMT Standard Time,  
ereppert <at> rochester.rr.com writes:

>One purpose of an AC is to provide a check on a TDs bridge  judgement.  
>Your interpretation of Law 90B8 would negate that  purpose. Therefore  
>I reject your interpretation. If a TD told me,  as an AC member, to  
>ignore that purpose, I would resign from the  committee rather than  
>follow that instruction. And I would report  the incident to the  
>appropriate authority (which, I grant you,  might not mean much).

Shucks. I thought I was on safe ground when directing our Christmas Social  
each year when deciding that on one board play will be anticlockwise and on  
another North will be a member of the silent Eustacian order like Brother  
Anthony. Not to mention the other rules I brought in on the other 14 boards we  
play. E.Reppert seems to think I cannot make any decisions on the Laws of Bridge  
I like and these can be overturned by an AC.

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Robert Geller | 1 Nov 2007 09:44
Favicon

Re: Disclosure -> Kill-file

>+=+ We would avoid those problems if we were required to announce  
>the meaning of our own bid at every turn...... +=+ :-)

<snark>
Why take half measures?  Instead of making the call "double" let's just
change the rules so you can say, "I double that for penalties" or "I double
that for takeout" or "I'll make an optional double of that".    This minor
rules change would eliminate all the problems that come up over MI and UI now.
</snark>

-Bob

Grattan Endicott writes:
>
>Grattan Endicott
>grandeval <at> vejez.fsnet .co.uk
>[also gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk]
>*************************
>"A finished product is one that 
>has already seen its better days."
>                 {Art Linkletter}
>vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Guthrie" <guthrie <at> ntlworld.com>
>To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml <at> amsterdamned.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 1:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [blml] Disclosure -> Kill-file
>
>
>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
gesta | 1 Nov 2007 11:45
Picon

Re: Countdown [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


Grattan Endicott<gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk
[also grandeval <at> vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
******************************************
"The intellectuals' chief cause of anguish
are one another's works."
                 ~ Jacques Martin Barzun.
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Wayne Burrows" <wjburrows <at> gmail.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml <at> amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Countdown [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

> On 30/10/2007, gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk <gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Grattan Endicott<gesta <at> tiscali.co.uk
>> [also grandeval <at> vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
>> ******************************************
>> "The intellectuals' chief cause of anguish
>> are one another's works."
>>                 ~ Jacques Martin Barzun.
>> '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Collier" <dcrc2h <at> hotmail.co.uk>
>> To: <blml <at> amsterdamned.org>
>> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [blml] Countdown [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
>>
>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Tim West-Meads | 1 Nov 2007 14:42
Picon

Re: Countdown

Eric wrote:

> > Perhaps I should ask a different question - does "normal" include 
> > the bizarre/inconceivable for the class of player involved?
> 
> It would seem to, per the new wording of the footnote.  A play 
> can't  be "bizarre/inconceivable" -- or, for that matter, 
> "irrational" --  while simultaneously being neither careless nor 
> inferior.  

Of course it can.  A trump squeeze might be technically superior (say 60%
chance of success against 50%) but happens to fail.  It might also be
"inconceivable" (ie beyond the wildest improbable dreams of ever being
understood/recognised/attempted) by my dear Mrs Guggenheim - who thought
it obvious that she was simply taking the heart finesse again ("it worked
the first time dear").

Hamman wouldn't have claimed in the same position of course - he would
have played the trump squeeze out and gone off.

Tim

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |

Gmane