[jdonn]

self-removed... I'm just too mean I guess

[DrTodd13]

mike777, on Apr 25 2008, 11:32 PM, said:

yes

over the past 20 or 30 years...many discuss bidding a counterfert over fert.

My reading of the bridge literature over past 30 years says:
1) This makes for fewer bridge paying membership, far fewer.
2) Those who play this style disagree.
3) Hamman/Wolff/Murray/ many many others write often about this issue. IN fact some of these WC stop bridge.
4) Most if not all uni level players disagree.

This post is nearly so incomprehensible that I don't know what you are trying to say. The use of the word "many" in conjunction with "fert" surely has to be an exaggeration. In both absolute and relative terms, most bridge players around the world probably couldn't even tell you what a fert is. Far fewer sit around trying to figure out how to defend it. Why should they? It has largely been banned all that time. Anybody into bridge enough to have learned what a fert is and to discuss defenses against it is surely not going to leave bridge, particularly paid bridge. You won't face it in competition anyway so why would paying members quit because of it?

[the hog]

mike777, on Apr 26 2008, 02:32 PM, said:

yes

over the past 20 or 30 years...many discuss bidding a counterfert over fert.

My reading of the bridge literature over past 30 years says:
1) This makes for fewer bridge paying membership, far fewer.
2) Those who play this style disagree.
3) Hamman/Wolff/Murray/ many many others write often about this issue. IN fact some of these WC stop bridge.
4) Most if not all uni level players disagree.

Mike can you rewrite this pls. I really don't know what you mean.