[Siegmund]

I sat there clicking on 2S in irritation, because I thought that was our first decision. Also generally found it an eyebleedingly awful interface: screen cluttered and with an advertisement on it, played cards hiding part of dummy, spade pips not showing, the text in a tiny little box that refused to scroll to show me the second half of it, "WesNortEastSout" bidding box labels...

I gather the problem is that you assume we will all have a maximized browser window at a high resolution. I seriously question the wisdom of a site being unusable in an 800x600 area.

[nige1]

Great idea, Fluffy And well done Frances and Phil for finding solutions to the problem It's too hard for me

• When RHO wins ♣A and returns a ♣, declarer can win cheaply, draw trumps and lead a ♦ to dummy's honour. If it wins, declarer can discard his losing ♠ on a ♣ winner and claim.
• But if defenders cash a ♠ before returning a ♣, then declarer will strongly suspect RHO holds ♦A, even if RHO later ducks dummy's ♦ honour.
• If defenders have cashed a ♠ earlier, it may be better to start with a top diamond from hand.

What am I missing?

[FM75]

You must be doing something seriously wrong on the web technical side. Your links do not work in Safari or Chrome on a Mac at 2315 USEDT.

Safari show the server is not responding. It is too late for me to debug this.

Are you running on a real server with legit DNS addressing, or your own PC with an IP address that is dynamically assigned?

[Fluffy]

FM75, on 2013-May-09, 21:23, said:

You must be doing something seriously wrong on the web technical side. Your links do not work in Safari or Chrome on a Mac at 2315 USEDT.

Safari show the server is not responding. It is too late for me to debug this.

Are you running on a real server with legit DNS addressing, or your own PC with an IP address that is dynamically assigned?

Thanks for the info, if you mean the links on links section of the page, they are very simple <a href> ones, hard to imagine what would go wrong there :/

[Fluffy]

Siegmund, on 2013-May-09, 20:43, said:

I sat there clicking on 2S in irritation, because I thought that was our first decision. Also generally found it an eyebleedingly awful interface: screen cluttered and with an advertisement on it, played cards hiding part of dummy, spade pips not showing, the text in a tiny little box that refused to scroll to show me the second half of it, "WesNortEastSout" bidding box labels...

I gather the problem is that you assume we will all have a maximized browser window at a high resolution. I seriously question the wisdom of a site being unusable in an 800x600 area.

I have been working on better display for the last week, you better not know how this things looked like a week ago on smaller resolutions . But even tho, I know there is still a lot of wok to do there, my wife tells me the eyebleeding thing all the time, and I am looking forward to fix it. I am open for suggestions regarding background color.

[Fluffy]

SteveMoe, on 2013-May-09, 15:18, said:

Worked on chrome just now, but wouldn't let me switch to a low Diamond after winning partner's club opening lead. Should beat 4 hearts.
Slick interface. Liked it a lot...

I never though of low diamond as an option, I think you got it wrong, you will quickly end up with -990 if you were allowed too.

Some options are simply not considered, I Cannot consider all, its a many part question problem, you flow down a tree untill you reach an ending pretty much like choose your own adventure books. But not every option is accounted for (except for declarer side when you enter auto-mode, but that is another story).

Here is the tree of the play of this hand (notice the old logo lol):





My first intention was that any user could create a problem hand and share with friends embeding on blogs or forums (when I fix the low resolution issues), but as I advanced on the developement of the problem creation page I realiced how hard it would be to learn how to use it. Still it will be possible to learn in the future if you want to create problems and share with your friends, but it takes time.

On the other hand some hands are extremelly easy, for example this hand:

Hand 3 on practice


has 3 or 4 variations on bidding, but on card play, after the lead it simply goes to autodefence since there are no decisions to be taken, allowing the user full freedom to go down the way he wills

[PhilKing]

Fluffy, on 2013-May-10, 03:02, said:

My first intention was that any user could create a problem hand and share with friends embeding on blogs or forums (when I fix the low resolution issues), but as I advanced on the developement of the problem creation page I realiced how hard it would be to learn how to use it. Still it will be possible to learn in the future if you want to create problems and share with your friends, but it takes time.

Yes, yes, yes!

[ArtK78]

Worked on Chrome.

[Fluffy]

nige1, on 2013-May-09, 20:57, said:

Great idea, Fluffy And well done Frances and Phil or finding solutions to the problem It's too hard for me

• When RHO wins ♣A and returns a ♣, declarer can win cheaply, draw trumps and lead a ♦ to dummy's honour. If it wins, declarer can discard his losing ♠ on a ♣ winner and claim.
• But if defenders cash a ♠ before returning a ♣, then declarer will strongly suspect RHO holds ♦A, even if RHO later ducks dummy's ♦ honour.
• If defenders have cashed a ♠ earlier, it may be better to start with a top diamond from hand.

What am I missing?

you miss that declarer is dumb and insults your partner even further during the play:



http://www.bridgegod...rt.php?artid=40

[Free]

Just wondering here. It looks like you want to generate something very similar to BridgeMaster, except with bidding included and fixed hands for opps. Isn't there a framework already available which you could use for this purpose?

[Fluffy]

yeah, its called bridgegod.com lol. Seriously no, not that I know off.

[FM75]

Nice! Working now.

[Cyberyeti]

Auction threw me, was playing partner for more points and less spades, my partner would have overcalled 2♠ rather than 1 with that hand.

[1eyedjack]

Thanks Fluffy - very nice.
The page would not load in IE9 (I sort of got the impression that version 9+ was supposed to work). error message "Document ready: [object Error]"

Anyway, it seemed to work in Chrome. Eventually worked out how to beat the contract.

But I thought I would mention: At first I ducked trick 1 (my partner would not be leading J from Jxx). Declarer won and cashed 3 rounds of trumps, but the system said that there was no valid card that I could play on the third round of H.

[Fluffy]

looks like you managed to duck the club with the card you were suposed to pitch on the third round of hearts, this was suposed to not be possible, will look into it, thank you.

[wank]

something went awry at my table - i raised to 2♠ directly and partner never bid again.

[Fluffy]

did LHO double or bid 3♥ over 2♠?, I though I had solved the timeout issue

[wank]

Fluffy, on 2013-May-11, 07:19, said:

did LHO double or bid 3♥ over 2♠?, I though I had solved the timeout issue

i mean p then passed throughout which seemed a little odd opposite a raise

[Fluffy]

ahhh, that's fine, your partner passed 2♠ doubled because 2♠ doubled is game (look at the description at the start) , and 4♥ because it is too high....

or perhaps its because that was the most plausible way I found for 4♥ to be the final contract after this start, so you don't miss the diamond position ending

Another option is to disallow 2♠ but show a text message saying that the system partner imposed to you doesn't allow 3 card raises

[Fluffy]

I updated the page to keep scores of the hands played, regardless of if you are logged in or not.

Don't be ashamed and log in, if you score below 50% of the scores you will be shown as anonymous.