[mr1303]

1) After each hand is played, point out to your partner the mistakes he made. If he didn't make any, allege that if he had played differently, you would have made one more trick. The cards will be all mussed up, and nobody can prove it.

2) When the opponents go down one on a contract, smile patronizingly and say "Too bad. Of course, the contract could have been made by a triple squeeze. I could see that coming up on the second trick." No one will argue with you, as practically all triple squeezes that ever happened are invented by people who write books on bridge.

3) When you gum up a hand and someone notices it, explain that one of your opponents had you in the Cavendish Coup position, and congratulate your opponent on his play. (There is no such thing as the Cavendish Coup, but you will still get your opponent to agree that that was what happened).

4) When you make a hay-wire lead, and are asked about it, say it is the new Culbertson Psychic lead, and profess disgust at its not immediately being recognised as such.

5) When you make a finesse and it fails, and perhaps is not necessary in the first instance, explain that by mathematical laws it has been established that that particular finesse works 87 times out of 104.

6) Refer to all other bridge players you know as "lousy, "terrible", "quite indifferent", "very loose bidders," "exerable players," "too conservative," "too daring" etc. This will make people believe you are better than they are.

7) If you go down anywhere up to -800 due entirely to your own bidding and play, congratulate your partner on the nice save you made. If you go down more than that, get out of the mess the best way you can; we've tried it and failed.

8) If, before the hand is finished, you have spoken harshly to your partner for not having bid game and in the play it turns out you do not make game, explain that had he bid game you would have played it differently to make it.

9) If, at the conclusion of a hand, it appears obvious that you should have taken a certain finesse, and your partner asks why you didn't take it, say: "Finessing only works hal;f the time, and sometimes loses to a singleton king or queen. By not taking a finesse, I beat the Law of Average, because now and again I will catch the singleton kings and queens." At first glance, this looks fairly logical, and your partner will be kept so busy figuring it out that in no time at all, you will be able to say to him: "Come on partner, wake up; it's your bid"

10) If all else fails, under no circumstances ever apologise for anything or admit being at fault. Blame everything on your partner. He probably did something wrong anyway...

[JLOGIC]

heh, sadly some truth

[daveharty]

11) My BBO --> User Profile --> Skill Level = "Expert"

[TWO4BRIDGE]

12) Mention "splinter" in the B & I Forum .

[barmar]

Sounds like the Abbott to me.

[Phil]

11) Post on the Forums.

[Free]

Moderators may as well delete this post entirely, everything was edited out anyway...

[Zelandakh]

Previously it was always frowned upon to make personal attacks on a particular player. Please try to stay (reasonably) curteous on these forums no matter how much you disagree with another's viewpoint.

[awm]

Put "bridge professional, online lessons available" in your profile, even if no one has ever paid you to do anything bridge-related.

Put "+++" in your profile even if you're not a regular vugraph commentator.

Insist on playing as many conventions as possible even in a short-term partnership.

Make a lot of "do something intelligent partner" doubles -- then blame partner if he does the wrong thing.

Brag about how well you know various famous players, even if they probably wouldn't be able to pick you out of a crowd or remember your name.

Any time you do badly in an event, gripe to as many people as possible about how badly your partner/teammates played.

Any time you do well in an event (but don't win), gripe to as many people as possible about how if your partner had just played/defended/bid some hand better you would've won.

[TylerE]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-July-24, 07:34, said:

12) Mention "splinter" in the B & I Forum .

Actually, this one I'll disagree with, quite strongly. While certainly lots of really esoteric stuff (Voidwood, etc) does get brought up that shouldn't, plain vanilla splinters are probably about the 3rd or 4th convention new players should learn.

[matmat]

so many things I still have to learn to achieve this highly coveted expert status!

This post has been edited by matmat: 2011-July-24, 14:11

[A2003]

mr1303, on 2011-July-24, 04:06, said:

1) After each hand is played, point out to your partner the mistakes he made. If he didn't make any, allege that if he had played differently, you would have made one more trick. The cards will be all mussed up, and nobody can prove it.

2) When the opponents go down one on a contract, smile patronizingly and say "Too bad. Of course, the contract could have been made by a triple squeeze. I could see that coming up on the second trick." No one will argue with you, as practically all triple squeezes that ever happened are invented by people who write books on bridge.

3) When you gum up a hand and someone notices it, explain that one of your opponents had you in the Cavendish Coup position, and congratulate your opponent on his play. (There is no such thing as the Cavendish Coup, but you will still get your opponent to agree that that was what happened).

4) When you make a hay-wire lead, and are asked about it, say it is the new Culbertson Psychic lead, and profess disgust at its not immediately being recognised as such.

5) When you make a finesse and it fails, and perhaps is not necessary in the first instance, explain that by mathematical laws it has been established that that particular finesse works 87 times out of 104.

6) Refer to all other bridge players you know as "lousy, "terrible", "quite indifferent", "very loose bidders," "exerable players," "too conservative," "too daring" etc. This will make people believe you are better than they are.

7) If you go down anywhere up to -800 due entirely to your own bidding and play, congratulate your partner on the nice save you made. If you go down more than that, get out of the mess the best way you can; we've tried it and failed.

8) If, before the hand is finished, you have spoken harshly to your partner for not having bid game and in the play it turns out you do not make game, explain that had he bid game you would have played it differently to make it.

9) If, at the conclusion of a hand, it appears obvious that you should have taken a certain finesse, and your partner asks why you didn't take it, say: "Finessing only works hal;f the time, and sometimes loses to a singleton king or queen. By not taking a finesse, I beat the Law of Average, because now and again I will catch the singleton kings and queens." At first glance, this looks fairly logical, and your partner will be kept so busy figuring it out that in no time at all, you will be able to say to him: "Come on partner, wake up; it's your bid"

10) If all else fails, under no circumstances ever apologise for anything or admit being at fault. Blame everything on your partner. He probably did something wrong anyway...

How to become from Expert to Novice level?
Even if I am quiet at the table, opponents are questioning about the bid which drags into answer something.
How to avoid answering questions initiated by opponents and from partner?

[SelfGovern]

A2003, on 2011-July-24, 15:15, said:

How to become from Expert to Novice level?
Even I am quite at table, opponents are questioning which drags into answer something.
How to avoid answering questions initiated by opponents and from partner?

I'm not positive that I understand your question... but it sounds like you are asking how to answer
when opponents ask what your bids mean.

The answer is that you are required by etiquette and the laws of bridge to explain any agreement you
and your partner have. You are NOT required to tell them what your hand is, but simply to explain
your agreement with your partner. That includes, when appropriate, telling them not only what the
bid shows, but what it shows you do not have -- that is, if a particular bid says you don't have a
fit, you need to include that as part of your explanation.

If you truly have no agreement -- even an inferred agreement -- then it is proper to say "We have
no agreement." That said, the agreement you have may be an implicit agreement, such as, if you
agreed to play 2/1, there's an implicit agreement that 1NT in response to a major is forcing and
artificial, that a jump to three of your partner's minor is preemptive, etc. ALERT when appropriate,
and explain fully.

You are not supposed to answer your partner's questions at the table... admittedly, we sometimes sit
and start playing too soon... that's happened to me a few times, and I will ask the opps if they
mind me answering P ("Is 4NT Blackwood, 1430, or 0314?"). Since they *may* object... it seems best
to not trot out a convention until you've had a chance to discuss.

[diana_eva]

Welcome to the Forums, Thomas

[cherdano]

The previous posts contain a lot of wisdom, but unfortunately completely neglect the most important aspect of being an expert.

How to write BBF posts like an expert (without having to be one)

• To show how subtle your judgment is, never forget to mention if changing a 7 to an 8, or moving a Jack from one suit to another, would push you the other way on a close decision.
  
• Always refuse to answer questions that don't give the vulnerability (even if it would not affect your decision at all).
  
• Never forget to mention that you prefer low-variance bids, as obviously you expect to beat the other team.
  
• As in 1., you should explain now and then why you would make one bid in a long match and another in a short match. If you aren't sure which bid would actually be better in a short match versus in a long match - don't worry, your readers will be impressed by your fine distinction in any case.
  
• Make sure to only interact directly with a few of the best BBF posters that you choose to consider your peers. You can still address others, either by generously giving friendly advice, or by explaining the errors in their posts just to prevent other readers from being misled, but a back-and-forth is beneath you. (If you find it difficult to stick to this rule, it might be best to install a Firefox extension that masks the name of all forum posters except for your chosen peers and whereagles.)
  
• When you reply to play problems, always mention that your line will be influenced by your superior table feel, and that it will probably lead you to the solution you are going to present - that way, you can never be proven completely wrong. If there is no good basis for using table feel, it is best to reload the thread until rhm has posted, and immediately make a follow-up post explaining that you were just typing up a post with the same solution.
  
• If you can't stick to the previous rule, it is best to avoid play problems altogether. If you feel you have to contribute, it is best to mention that you only thought about the problem as long as you would at the table. (How very generous of you to allow others to follow your at-the-table thought process!)
  
• A lot of general advice on posting like an insider also applies to posting on BBF. Use acronyms where possible. "Unfortunately, I haven't discussed NSDs with my current partner yet." "The PLM on your left forced his client to play CP leads (yeah I know he is crazy)."
  
• Similarly, mention all your famous bridge friends that you frequently discuss bridge problems with. If there are only very few of them, do not worry; after you mention your famous ones a couple of times, readers will assume your other bridge friends are famous also by association. It might be best to imply that they are actually seeking your advice: "Rosenberg asked me about the following play problem." "Rodwell was wondering about the following convention."
  
• Finally, always post with confidence, and avoid unbecoming modesty. If another post makes a strong case that you are wrong, it might be best to ignore it - see rule no. 5. Rather than arguing on the merits, it is often best to ask everyone to trust your long experience with similar situations. Of course, you should never admit that you were wrong.

[Phil]

!H cherdanno.

[matmat]

cherdano, on 2011-July-25, 10:21, said:

The previous posts contain a lot of wisdom, but unfortunately completely neglect the most important aspect of being an expert.

How to write BBF posts like an expert (without having to be one)

• To show how subtle your judgment is, never forget to mention if changing a 7 to an 8, or moving a Jack from one suit to another, would push you the other way on a close decision.
  
• Always refuse to answer questions that don't give the vulnerability (even if it would not affect your decision at all).
  
• Never forget to mention that you prefer low-variance bids, as obviously you expect to beat the other team.
  
• As in 1., you should explain now and then why you would make one bid in a long match and another in a short match. If you aren't sure which bid would actually be better in a short match versus in a long match - don't worry, your readers will be impressed by your fine distinction in any case.
  
• Make sure to only interact directly with a few of the best BBF posters that you choose to consider your peers. You can still address others, either by generously giving friendly advice, or by explaining the errors in their posts just to prevent other readers from being misled, but a back-and-forth is beneath you. (If you find it difficult to stick to this rule, it might be best to install a Firefox extension that masks the name of all forum posters except for your chosen peers and whereagles.)
  
• When you reply to play problems, always mention that your line will be influenced by your superior table feel, and that it will probably lead you to the solution you are going to present - that way, you can never be proven completely wrong. If there is no good basis for using table feel, it is best to reload the thread until rhm has posted, and immediately make a follow-up post explaining that you were just typing up a post with the same solution.
  
• If you can't stick to the previous rule, it is best to avoid play problems altogether. If you feel you have to contribute, it is best to mention that you only thought about the problem as long as you would at the table. (How very generous of you to allow others to follow your at-the-table thought process!)
  
• A lot of general advice on posting like an insider also applies to posting on BBF. Use acronyms where possible. "Unfortunately, I haven't discussed NSDs with my current partner yet." "The PLM on your left forced his client to play CP leads (yeah I know he is crazy)."
  
• Similarly, mention all your famous bridge friends that you frequently discuss bridge problems with. If there are only very few of them, do not worry; after you mention your famous ones a couple of times, readers will assume your other bridge friends are famous also by association. It might be best to imply that they are actually seeking your advice: "Rosenberg asked me about the following play problem." "Rodwell was wondering about the following convention."
  
• Finally, always post with confidence, and avoid unbecoming modesty. If another post makes a strong case that you are wrong, it might be best to ignore it - see rule no. 5. Rather than arguing on the merits, it is often best to ask everyone to trust your long experience with similar situations. Of course, you should never admit that you were wrong.

$#!+