Findlay Bridge, 12/12/25

After three weeks off, Ron and I returned to Findlay on the 12th for another aftenoon of duplicate. It seemed like a bad day for us, but the results show we scored 46.5% of the possible points. Here is the hand-by-hand analysis.

Board 1. We went down one at 1NT. Despite the negative result, we scored two points out of the possible three.

Board 2. Our opponents bid 3D, making 4. We tied with two others for top board, as one opponent pair, John & Jo, bid and made 3NT.

Board 3. They bid 2C, making 5.

Our two points gave us six for the round vs. Ann & Nancy.

Board 4. They bid 2S, making 4. Our -170 tied for top board, as two of the other N-S pairs got the bid and went down for -200.

Board 5. We set 3NT by two. I led from my 6-card heart suit, with Ron taking his Ace. He led back a heart, knocking out Ed's only stopper. This left me with four good hearts, but only the Queen of diamonds available to get back in, which I did on the 9th trick. I then took the last four tricks with my good hearts. This hand was noteworthy in that both sides bid and made a game! Kudos to Arlene & Mike for bidding and making a game as N-S, and to James & Clarence for doing so as E-W.

Board 6. This was a memorable hand. Ron opened 1D and I had six diamonds headed by the Ace, plus a powerful hand. Slam was definitely worth exploring, and I couldn't think of anything to do but go right to 4NT. When Ron bid 2H telling me we had all the Aces, I wanted to bid 5NT asking for Kings, but then I realized to my chagrin that his response probably would take us past 6D, preventing us from stopping at the small slam. So, I went right to 6D. When we took all the tricks, I feared that we had bottom board. However, the results show that nobody bid the grand slam, so we tied with two others for top board. The 4th pair made 7NT but did not bid a slam! It seems there should have been some way to get to the garnd slam, but nobody has come up with how it could have been accomplished.

We had a good round vs. Ed & Linda, scoring 6.5 pts.

Board 10. We played 2H and made 5, tying for bottom board. Only one pair, Jo & John, bid the game.

Board 11. They played 2NT and made 3. This gave us top board, as everyone else but Dennis & Brent bid and made the game.

Board 12. We set 5C by one. One N-S pair stopped at 4 for top board. Two N-S pairs competed and scored a part score in a major suit.

We scored 4.5 points for the round vs. Dennis & Brent.

Board 13. They played 3Nt and made 6 against our poor defense. (Or, it coud have been Jim & Kathleen's brilliant play, who knows?) Ed & Linda, who were having a horrible day, failed to bid the game and so were bottom board among the N-S players, while we were bottom board of the E-W pairs.

Board 14. We went down at our overly-ambitious 3NT contract for bottom board. The other boards stopped short of game.

Board 15. They played 3NT and made 4. Same with two other boards.

We totalled one point for the round vs. Jim & Kathleen.

Board 16. We played 2H and made 3. Same with one other board, while two pairs bid and made the game.

Board 17. We went down one at 3C. One pair bid and made a major suit game, while another went down 2, so we were right in the middle.

Board 18. THey set our 3H by one, giving us bottom top board.

We socred a paltry 2 points. vs. Bob & Karen.

Boatrd 19. They bid and made 5H. One pair made 6, and one only 4, so were right right in the middle.

Board 20. We played and made 2S, the only E-W pair to get the contract. Two points for us.

Board 21. They played 4H, making 5.

We scored 3.5 for the round vs. Jo & John, the top team.

Board 22. Arlene & Mike got overly ambitious with a 3NT bid. I doubled and we set them by 3, for 800 pts. Even without the double we would have had top board.

Board 23. They bid and made 3NT, but we got top board as the others made either 4 or 5!

Board 24. We bid and made 2NT, for one point.

Total vs. Mike & Arlene was 7 pts.

Board 25. They played and made 4S, while the contract was set at two other tables.

Board 26. They played and made 2H. Two pairs went down, while one made 2.

Board 27. They played 2NT, making 3. We were right in the middle.

We scored 3 pts. vs. James & Clarence.

Donald's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Week

Has any U.S. president ever had a worse week than our current president has just had? I think not.

All week news kept on dribbling out about the"second strike" on the Venezuelan suspected drug boat in the Caribbean, a strike which intentionally killed two defenseless survivors. And each day it just got worse and worse for Trump and his idiot Defense Secretary. Congressional leaders were finally shown the video on Thursday, and all six Democrats came out of the showing and gave statements about how deeply disturbed they were. Significantly, only one of the six Republicans gave a statement. This was Senator Tom Cotton, who disgraced himself with some absurd pronouncements about how the two men were trying to turn the boat back over and continue their voyage, and how one guy took off his shirt and seemed to be sunbathing. But the kicker came on Friday, when it came out that the boat wasn't even going to the United States! Rather, it was headed to the South American country of Suriname, from where the cargo would be on its way to Europe.

The laws of war expressly prohibit attacking defenseless people. To the contrary, there is a duty to rescue them and render aid. And the whole idea that we are in a "war" with drug runners is bogus. Only Congress can declare war, and it has not done so. This whole metaphorical use of the word "war" has led us to an extreme position of "anything goes". In the 60s we had the "war on poverty", in the 80s we had the "war on drugs", and in later decades we had the "war on terrorism". It is high time to discard this careless use of the word "war".

It is only a matter of time before we will all see the video, and the Trump/Hegseth policy of blowing up Venezuelan boats will be revealed for the inhumane disaster it is. Hegseth's blaming the "fog of war" for the cold-blooded killing of two survivors will be revealed for the lie that it is. In fact, what the video will show is that for 41 minutes the two survivors desperately clung to life on a piece of the wreckage, and they were clearly visible. There was no "fog" obsuring them. And, after 41 minutes, a deliberate decision to kill was made. This was no "double-tap" attack, as has been alleged; rather, it was a second strike after a 41-minmute wait.

It seems inconceivable, but Trump actually chose this week to pardon a convicted drug trafficker who trafficked 400 tons of cocaine to the United States! This shows the hypocrisy of the man and his policies.

As if all this wasn't enough grief for Hegseth, this week the Inspector General's report came out about Signalgate. The conclusion was what we all knew already, that Hegseth had engangered our service men and women by sending out battle plans on an insecure public message platform. But this report puts it back in the public eye, and one wonders how long Hegseth can stay in his job, a job he is totally unqualified for. Already there are cracks in support for Hegseth among Congressional Republicans. But Trump llikes Hegseth, so it would be hard for Trump to fire him. Insiders say that nobody else at the White House or in Copngress likes Hegseth, but only Trump's opinion matters at this point.

Hegseth's reaction to the IG's report was that it was a "total exoneraton". This is complete balderdash. The truth is just the opposite; the report found that he had endangered U.S. service people with hs reckless actions.

To make matters worse for Trump, he had a disastrous Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. The rolling cameras caught him repeatedly falling asleep during the meeting. And the presentations of his Cabinet secretaries were as embarrassingly sycophantic as ever, with each heaping praise upon their great leader.

But the most embarrassing part occurred when it came time for Trump to speak. He repeated a litany of lies as is his custom. But his problem here is that the average voter knows first-hand that Trump's statement that he "stopped inflation in its tracks" is dead wrong. And that voter knows that the affordability issue is not a Democratic "con job" as Trump stated. The fact is that grocery prices have gone up since Trump took office in January, Trump's lies to the contrary notwithstanding. Trump has not even lowered the rate of inflation, let alone stopped it.

Why Trump would again claim that he has brought down drug prices "700%" is beyond me. He has been called out in the past for this ridiculous claim (you can't reduce prices by more than 100%!), but he refuses to learn from past mistakes, and insists on making a fool of himself.

Trump ludicrously claimed that his tariffs have brought in trillions of dollars, andd could result in no income tax. The fact is tariff revenue is running at $165 billion this year, up $88 billion from last year. The idea that we could eliminate the income tax is pure fantasy.

Trump repeated his false claim that “Biden gave away $350 billion” in aid to Ukraine, when the actual disbursements have totalled only $94 billion, much of which was spent in the U.S.

Trump made the false claim that Washington D.C. now has "no murders", echoing the claim he made the week before that the capital hadn’t had a single murder “in six months.” Totally false.

Referring to the strikes on Venezuelan ships, Trump made the absurd claim that "every boat we knock out saves 25,000 American lives. This claim is ludicrous. There have been 22 strikes on suspected Venezuelan drug boats. Under Trump's figues, this would translate to 550,000 U.S. deaths saved in a two-month period! But the total of all U.S. overdose deaths in 2024 was only about 82,000. Plus, we know that only a miniscule part of the drug trade comes from Venezuela. Almost all of the cocaine comes from Colombia, and almost all of the fentanyl and other synthetic drugs come from Mexico. Anyone with a third-grade knowlege of arithmetic can see that Trump's claim is absurd.

Perhaps the most despicable claim Trump made during his cabinet meetings was when he called Somali immigrants "garbage", and said they "contribute nothing" to the country.

This past week Trump's inhumane ICE raids have continued full speed ahead. Almost daily there are revolting accounts of the outrages perpetrated by these ICE thugs. Trump promised to deport "the worst of the worst", but 75,000 of those deported have no crminal record whatsoever.

And now, as I write this on Monday following the week that was, Trump made another one of his hateful attacks on a female reporter. When a reporter prefaced her question with noting that he had said he'd release the video of the second strike "no problem", Trump rudely interrupted her and said "I didn't say that". Actually, the videotape shows he said exactly that in his Cabinet meeting. He proceeded to berate her as "an obnoxious, terrible reporter". During one of his many tirades against women, he used the term "insubordinate"; this to me is a telling statement because it shows that he thinks reporters (and especially women) should be subservient and deferential to him.

Finally, on Monday it came out that Trump has done the same thing that he has accused four prominent Democrats of doing, which he says is "mortgage fraud". The four are accused of claiming in their mortgage applications that the proprty being mortgaged will be their primary residence. A diligent reporter discovered that Trump has bought two houses near Mar-a-lago in the exact same way, and has never lived in either of them!

I could go on and on, but I have to stop somewhere. Certainly this president ended the week in very bad shape indeed.

Two Unusual Autobiographies -- Cheever and Ellroy

I have recently read two unusual biographies, unusual because of a specific theme which runs throughout each one. The first one is "Note Found in a Bottle: My Life as a Drinker", by Susan Cheever. Susan writes so beautifully about her personal life that I found myself wishing I had known her in her prime. I'm quite certain I would have fallen deeply in love with her.

She quit drinking in the early 1990s as she was nearing 50. This happens near the end of the book, and she doesn't say much about her new life as a sober person. She says "I live a quiet life now", and she writes of how she finds meaning in life through her two children and her relationship with God. Her book is very moving, and an easy read at only 190 pages.

The second book is "The Hilliker Curse: My Pursuit of Women", by James Ellroy. Ellroy acquired an obsession with women at the early age of seven, after seeing his mother naked, and his whole life after that is consumed with that obsession. By the time the book was published, in 2010, he had finally acquired some peace and stability in a third relationshp, after two failed marriages, but a brief check reveals that he and Erika separated in 2012. Ellroy has not written of the breakup, but in her memoir, "The Big Hurt", Erika Schickel says that Ellroy was "someone whose intensity eventually became unsustainable".

Besides the addiction to women, Ellroy writes of his other personal quirks, like a dislike of travel and a preference for dark, enclosed places. Since reading this book I have checked out some of his novels, and I have noticed that many of his characters share the same traits as he described for himself in his memoir.

"The Last Manager", by John W. Miller

This is an excellent biography of Earl Weaver (1930-2013), the legendary manager of the Baltimore Orioles, published just this year. Weaver grew up in the 1930s in a working class St. Louis niehgborhood located less than a mile from Sportsman's Park, home at that time to both the NL Cardinals and the AL Browns. His father, a dry cleaner, had the contracts to clean the uniforms of both the Cardinals and the Browns, so Earl was in and out of major league clubhouses at an early age.

Earl avidly followed the "Gashouse Gang", consisting of Dizzy and Paul Dean, Joe Medwick, Pepper Martin, and Leo Durocher. This was a time when the Cardinals were known as "America's Team"; it was both the southernmost and westernmost MLB team, so it was the closest MLB city for the whole western half of the country.

Even as a boy Earl learnd to think through strategy decisions the managers had to make. His uncle was a bookmaker, so Earl learned to apply probability theory to basic decisisons like the sacrifice bunt, the hit-and-run, and the stolen base. It took many decades for the rest of the baseball world to catch up, as by the 2010s the new science of sabemetrics, developed during the 1980s, had finally become widely accepted in the baeball world.

Earl was a standout player in high school, and upon graduation his father contacted the Browns about signing his son, but was told he was a "class-A player, tops", because he "couldn't throw or run". The Cardinals were more positive, offerng Earl $175 a month plus a $1,500 bonus. Earl signed, making him a pro at age seventeen.

Earl spent thirteen years in the minors, never cracking the show. His best chance was in 1952, when he seemed set to make the Cardinals as a back-up second baseman. But 35-year-old Eddie Stanky had been hired as the player-manager, and Stanky chose himself over Earl as the back-up second baseman.

Earl started managing in 1956 while still a player. He managed eleven and a half seasons in the minors. He major legue managerial career began in 1968 mid-season when he took over as the Orioles manager. He retired after the 1982 season, but came back two years later for two final lackluster seasons. Despite the last two disappointing years, his lifetime major league winning perentage was .583.

Weaver was a managerial genius, prioritizing on-base average, strike throwing, and elite defense before these things were fashionable. He got the most out of his entire roster with masterful platooning, always working to get the right people in the right positions to excel. Miller's biograophy superbly captures the essence of Weaver's remrkable life.

Trump's Frivolity

Word came down this week that a federal appeals court has upheld a penalty of nearly $1 million against President Donald Trump and attorney Alina Habba, concluding they committed “sanctionable conduct” by filing a frivolous lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey. The three-judge panel which issued the unanimous opinion included a Trump appointee.

What is most significant to me about this ruling is that the appellate court concluded that the district court judge who originally ruled against Trump had properly considered Trump’s “pattern of misusing the courts” when deciding to sanction Trump and Habba. Trump has a long history of abusing the courts, and I'm encouraged to see that the court system is finally holding him to account.

None of the major news networks reported on this, as far as I know, and I had to find out through an article at politico.com. This is an area which the networks need to pay more attention to. People need to be made aware that if you file frivolous lawsuits in this country, you will be punished. We don't require that lawsuit losers pay the winning side's fees and costs, as the Brits do, but we do assess those fees and costs when the losing side has taken a positon which is not based on fact and law, and is not asserted in good faith.

"Detour" (dir: Edgar Ulmer, 1945)

This was a small-budget independent film, made for less than $100,000 in 1945 (equivalent to about $1,800,00 today). Since 1945 it has become a classic film noir, restored so that today's audience can enjoy it. It is now in the public domain, freely available to all.

The plot centers around a piano player who is hitch-hiking from New York to Los Angeles to join the singer he is in love with. The ending, in which the protagonist is picked up by the Highway Patrol, is completely bogus, made necessary by the absurd motion picture code of the time, which requried that nobody can be depicted as getting away with a crime.

The short run time of only 66 minutes adds to the appeal of this movie, as it does not require a large time investment on the part of the viewer.

Findlay Duplicate Bridge, 11/14/25

An eventful Friday afternoon at Findlay dupliate bridge. Ron and I got there in tme to catch the tail end of Jim's lesson time. He was talking about the Rule of Nine, something I'd never heard of. The Rule of Nine is a guideline for deciding whether to convert a partner’s takeout double into a penalty double by passing. You add together three factors: the level of the contract, the number of cards you hold in the opponents’ trump suit, and the number of honors you hold in that suit (counting the 10 as an honor). If the total is nine or more, you should pass and let the double stand for penalties. If it’s eight or less, you should bid instead. The application occurs most often after weak 2 opening bids.

And then it was time to play bridge. We had five full tables, meaning we woud be playing 27 hands. There were many interesting hands, with five slams bid and made. Ron & I scored 47 points, for a decent 43.5% of the possible points. Here is a hand-by-hand analysis of how we did.

Board 1. We set 3NT by one, but only got bottom board as the other N-S pairs got 100, 100, 150, and 200.

Board 2. We went down one at 6 spades. The bidding went 2 clubs, 3 spades, 3NT. 4 spades, 6 spades. I probably shoud have bid 4 clubs instead of 3NT. My jump to 6 spades was an impulsive move, based on my frustration at having missed out on several slams earlier in the session, and based on fatigue (it was the last round). Jo and John were the only couple that found the best contract of 6 clubs. But Jo graciously points out that, but for a bad trump split, 6S would have made and we would have had top board.

Board 3. Ron went down one at 3 diamonds for bottom board.

Board 4. I made 4 spades, tying for top board.

Board 5. We set 4 diamonds, again tying for top board.

Board 6. They bid 2S and made 4. One N-S pair (Mike & Arlene) bid the 4 for top N-S pair, while we tied with 3 others for top E-W pair.

Board 7. They bid 4S and made 5. We tied with 2 others for bottom board. One pair only made 4, while Jo & John bid the slam and went down 1.

Board 8. We bid 2NT and made 4. Ron inexplicably bid only 2NT after my 1NT opening, and with only 15 points I had to pass. We beat a pair who went down, but lost out to the others.

Board 9. I played 4S and made 5. Two others did the same, and we three tied for bottom board. Bob & Karen bid and made a minor suit slam, while Merrie & Richard bid and made 6NT for top board.

Board 10. We set 3NT by one, for 3 points.

Board 11. They bid 2H, making 3. Three N-S pairs only made 2, so got only one point.

Board 12. I played 2D, making 3. Same with 3 other boards. Bob & Karen made 3 of a major for top board.

Board 13. We set Jim & Kathleen's 3NT by one. Game was made at the other tables, so we got top board.

Board 14. I went down 1 at 4S, tying for bottom board. Ann & Nancy stopped short of game, while the other two pairs made game.

Board 15. I played 4 spades and made 5. This was top board as Jim & Kathleen failed to cash an outside Ace.

Board 16. Ron went down one at 3NT, tying us for bottom board. Clarence and Teresa were the only pair to bid and make a game.

Board 17. We set 3H by two, but our 100 points was bottom board, as the other boards were 120-170-200-200.

Board 18. Rom made 3NT. Two pairs did the same, while the other two made 4.

Board 19. They played 4H, making 5. Same with one other board, while two boards were held to 4. Bob & Karen bid slam and were set by Jo & John.

Board 20. They played 3NT, making 4. Same with three other boards, while Jim & Kathleen held their opponents to 3 for top board.

Board 21. I played 3C, making 4. Bob & Karen stole the bid from Jo & John and made a part score for top board.

Board 22. They payed 1NT and made 3. We got -150 points; the others were -110, -110, -140, and -170.

Board 23. We set 3H by one. The other N-S pairs all played Spade contracts, three gong down and one (Ann & Nancy) making it.

Board 24. I played 4H, making 6. Same result on all the other boards!

Board 25. I played 4NT, making 6. My 4NT bid was intended to be Blackwood, but I was told I should have used Gerber as NT had alrady been bid. Two pairs bid and made the small slam.

Board 26. We got top board as our opponents, Bob & Karen, played 3D and made 6. Slams were also made at the other boards, but only games were bid.

Board 27. Ron played 5S, making 7. Same result at two other boards, while two boards only made 6. Nobody bid the slam.