Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Robert Geller
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the long run it's probably best to adhere strictly to the published condition of contest once the event has started. Maybe changes to the CofC before an event starts are OK if players who don't like the new CofC can withdraw and get their money back. From the OP it wasn't clear whether the changes were made before or after the event started.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately safe mode didn't help. I'll do a refresh when I get a chance.
Oct. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I have time I'll refresh firefox and see if that fixes the problem.
Oct. 16, 2018
Robert Geller edited this comment Oct. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My only addons are bitly (a link shortener I just added after the problem occurred) and pubpeer (which let's you see comments about scientific papers on the website PubPeer when your reading the paper on the journal's site). BTW, I just rebooted my machine and the problem persists.
Oct. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. Yes

2. Yes, but… I just looked at this page. http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/counterpunch-2-z35zbvpeqe/
What happens is that for less than a second the hand diagram displays normally, but then the characters in the hand diagram almost immediately jump to being super-tiny size. That's probably happening here too.

3. No, the hand diagrams display OK on this PC with the windows browser (explorer or edge or whatever they call it these days) which I don't normally use.

4. The hand diagrams display OK on my iPhone with both Safari and Firefox.
Oct. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm also using FF 62.0.3 and you can see from my screenshot that there's a problem. Does anyone at BW have any ideas?
Oct. 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unfortunately when I try to look at Avon's hand diagrams with my default browser (Firefox, the latest version) the hands are too small to be seen. Here's a screenshot:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/cqo7l8e4jt83ehd/bridge_winners_hand.png?dl=0

Any chance this problem can be fixed?
Oct. 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When Sagan was discussing “extraordinary claims” he meant claims that well-established principles of science were wrong. For example, claims that things can travel faster than the speed of light, or that in addition to the well known four forces of physics (strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational) there was a “fifth force.” Both have been claimed in the past 40 years based on scanty evidence and both were debunked.

In contrast, collusion by bridge partnership has, alas, been confirmed to have occurred in at least several instances. Thus the claim that a specific pair colluded is not an “extraordinary claim” in Sagan's sense.

Although a few of the alleged perpetrators are still alive no one is proposing at this late date to haul them in front of a disciplinary committee. Thus we BW members are functioning as a “historical court of public opinion.” I would suggest that the criterion for making a decision in such a case lies about halfway between “preponderance of the evidence” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” In my opinion Avon has succeeded in meeting this standard. Others may of of course disagree. But let's not say that proof even stronger than “beyond a reasonable doubt” is required.
Oct. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John Swanson's“Inside the Bermuda Bowl” has a riff on this. Many years after 1968 Swanson was faced with a similar problem, but led the ace from his five-bagger and hit pard's singleton for two ruffs, to beat the contract. At the end of the hand he celebrated his successful defense by yelling out “Pabis-Ticci!”
Sept. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He wrote a nice two volume applied math textbook on boundary value problems that still is useful. Never played bridge against him…. Quite a character apparently.
June 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The automated warning on BW described my post as “potentially objectionable.” I can't see why. Could someone frm the BW staff please explain.
Oct. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Under President Alfred Sloan, General Motors required disputes with dealers to be arbitrated. The arbitration was binding on GM, but the dealers were free to litigate after the arbitration. If ACBL arbitration was binding only on the ACBL but not the other party that would be a good solution, I think.
Oct. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm a U.S. citizen who has lived in Japan since 1984 and I've been a Board member of the Japan Contract Bridge League since 1990, so I have somewhat divided loyalties. Anyway, my congratulations to the U.S. team on their victory, but I also think it's great that the Japan team made it to the final–my congratulations to them as well.
Aug. 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thorp was AFAIK the first person to write a book about card counting at Blackjack (in 1966). He was Assoc. Prof. at MIT then.
https://www.amazon.com/Beat-Dealer-Winning-Strategy-Twenty-One/dp/0394703103
July 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At the bottom of p.33 of Bob Heller's report:
“The CDR, or Code of Disciplinary Regulations, is undergoing an overhaul this spring. A progress report was to be made in Kansas City, and a final version could be ready for approval as early as this summer in Toronto. League counsel Linda Dunn is heading the project, with Appeals & Charges chair Georgia Heth. They have received plenty of input from others. The goal is for a more simplistic and less legalistic approach.”

The dictionary speaks:
simplistic:
treating complex issues and problems as if they were much simpler than they really are.
“simplistic solutions”
synonyms: facile, superficial, oversimple, oversimplified, schematic, black and white; More


I HOPE Heller just misused English and really mean “simpler” but with what we know about the ACBL I can't be too optimistic…
March 19, 2017
Robert Geller edited this comment March 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
João Faria
> There is a decision took by the competent organ.
> Let's live with it.

Except that it was actually a decision taken by an INcompetent organ.
March 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the discussion on this thread has missed an important point. Please see clauses 2.5 to 2.7 of the conditions of contest for the European Championship.
http://www.eurobridge.org/repository/competitions/17montecatini/microsite/EBLGeneralCoC2016.pdf

This states clearly that the credentials committee may decline to invite any player(s), and that they need not state their reasons.

Thus, not withstanding the not guilty verdict against B-Z, the credentials committee can, if they choose, decline to invite them to participate in future European Championships. Let's see what happens.
Feb. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is one question here. In the U.S. a jury verdict of not guilty is final. In other countries (Japan for example) the prosecution can appeal a verdict of not guilty to a higher court (of course the defense can appeal a guilty verdict as well). What's the situation with this not guilty verdict? Can it be appealed?
Feb. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Amir Farsoud
> Just as a clarification, Robert, my problem,
> and apparently many other peoples as well,
> is not with banning ferts, or any other
> specific bid or system, but rather with
> banning innovation, thought and progress
> by placing completely arbitrary bans on
> anything, even though there is nothing
> in the actual rules of the game that would
> forbid that bid or system.

Sorry, but the above statement is incorrect. Law 40 (see excerpts below) authorizes the regulation of “special partnership understandings.” You may think this law should be changed, but at the moment it is in effect, and thus regulation (including barring) of “special partnership agreements” is lawful.

*************************************
EXCERPTS (below) FROM LAWS OF BRIDGE
*************************************

http://www.worldbridge.org/Data/Sites/1/GalleryImages/general/laws/2007lawscomplete.pdf
40B. Special Partnership Understandings
1. (a) In its discretion the Regulating Authority may designate certain partnership understandings as “special partnership understandings”. A special partnership understanding is one whose meaning, in the opinion of the Regulating Authority, may not be readily understood and anticipated by a significant number of players in the tournament

2. (a) The Regulating Authority is empowered without restriction to allow, disallow, or allow conditionally, any special partnership understanding
Jan. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Amir Farsoud:
> Just as a clarification, Robert, my problem,
> and apparently many other peoples as well,
> is not with banning ferts, or any other
> specific bid or system, but rather with
> banning innovation, thought and progress
> by placing completely arbitrary bans on
> anything, even though there is nothing in
> the actual rules of the game that would
> forbid that bid or system.

You are just setting up a “strawman” argument, where the only choices are (a) ban all change, and (b) anything goes.

Surely there's something between these two extremes. The obvious solutions is for advocates of particular new methods to put in a bit of time and efforts to teach people how they work and how to defend against them (BBO demonstration matches would be ideal for this purpose) rather than to attack anyone who asks for any kind of system regulation as old fogeys who don't understand progress.
Jan. 8, 2017
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
.

Bottom Home Top