Have sent on Stars for 1%. If you prefer it by bank transfer you can send back and pm bank details - makes no difference to me. Best of luck, have a great trip.

Schedule fine

Yep

Will also have a percent if you have one going spare.

Books don't contain any of those ridiculous words that are of no use whatsoever apart from trying to belittle people.

Disagree

I don't contest that there are some arseholes who use big words just to show off.

I'd raise the point of people who go to the gym to get buff. Some of them are arseholes pumping the iron and doing the crunches just to show their bods off and they think it makes them better than other people, but that's not the only reason to go to the gym. Some gym goers are definately not arseholes, they have a variety of reasons to attend and doing so enriches and improves their quality of life.

Similarly, with the words.

In general I'd agree, there's no point in using a simple word which approximately describes what you're trying to say when there might be a more complicated one that is precisely correct.

But I think it's a question of degree - it takes a long time for a word to be officially classed as obsolete but there are quite a few which aren't really used for anything other than semantic showing off.

Agree in a way, and some of the words here may only be used for showing off. But disagree that there's no point using - or at least, knowing - the more complicated and more precise word. Or indeed a more complicated word that isn't necessarily more precise but which just conveys a subtly different idea. You could probably argue that no two words are exact synonyms, since word meanings change gradually through their use, and so the contexts in which they've been used previously come to be part of their definition. Words also have their own sound and register, which differentiates the effect that they have and so consequently their meaning.

At the root of it though, it doesn't really matter whether specific words are often used or not in spoken or written form. They still, if you know them or are aware of them, interrelate with thought, and therefore, all things being equal, more words will make/allow you to think better.

I'm not sure the idea that reading lots of books helps you with this test is necessarily really true. I suspect most people who do well in it do so largely because of their knowledge of other languages. If you did Latin and French (but mainly Latin) at school then you're going to understand and therefore hold on to a lot of these words once you've seen them somewhere (or even just know the meaning of them without ever having seen them before - deracinate, adumbrate, legerdemain, uxoricide etc), so accusations of cheating may not be very well founded. I wonder whether a wider knowledge of classical languages is a big reason why the over-50s have a greater vocabulary, as they say is the case at the end of the test.

[Epsom salts or magnesium sulphate]

Magnesium sulfate is more commonly known as?
Epsom salts or magnesium sulphate

You sure it's not talcum powder?

I'd probably just get it in most of the time, but it's definitely close. Pretty hard to get Wiz to like a shove here with any realistic ranges, given how tight people (presumably) play these spots these days. Quite hard to analyse anyway, but especially without any ideas of gameflow etc - UTG +2 may well fold more often than you'd think, which if we win gives us the perfect spot with the big stack on the bubble. If he calls and we win then we've got double the second stack but have burst the bubble, so we have more chips but maybe not such a big edge. So yeah, think 99 is a fold and TT is a toss-up probably.

steven hall = moskvich?

No, but good luck anyway to a member of team Stephen Hall. This is probably my best chance of getting a win on my HM.

And good luck Suzanne.

The thing to look out for is that if the phone is locked to an operator, their version of Android may have the tethering dis-abled.

Yep, this is partly what I was concerned about. I gather that the iphone, since some recent update at least, demands that you contact t-mobile when you try to set up a hotspot thing. That's an iphone that comes from Carphone Warehouse as it happens. Don't know if there's likely to be any difference with Android..? But will try them and see if I can get some sense out of them, thanks.

Thanks for all the other helpful responses above too.

Anyone clear this up for me? Need to get a new phone, probably htc, want to be able to use it as a modem occasionally. Don't necessarily much mind which network it's on. Some support monkey at t-mobile just told me that you can't do tethering on t-mobile. Their T&Cs also say this. Does that mean you really can't, or only officially can't? Can they stop you doing it if you don't use much data? Do other networks have the same policy? (I think 3 is fine with it?)

Seems hard to find sensible and reliable info on this, so if anyone knows the answer I'd really appreciate it, thanks.

Reassuring email today from Boyle Poker:

"Have you been hearing about some “major” poker websites hitting the rocks recently? We’d like to assure all our valued customers that this is not, and never will be, the case with Boylepoker.com.

Boylepoker.com are licensed and regulated by Alderney Gambling Control Commission who set the highest standards of security and integrity with which their licensees must comply, guaranteeing that your funds are totally secure."

Well that's OK then!

Binion's has that 'big chips on top' rule as well. Thought it was a bit odd, though I think the colours there make them harder to see if they're on the bottom.

[some bloke called Kevin]

Can't remember who I've got in total, but suffice to say I've never really heard of some of them. Yang, Laird, Casey, some random Korean, some bloke called Kevin and a few more.

Yay, nice job from that bloke called Kevin ...

Dont understand the monty hate at all.

Really? I find him unlistenably terrible. Fortunately I think they had to give him a break for a bit after he wet himself with excitement at the fact that all Yang's clubs have different coloured grips.

Have stuck a few pins in various places for a few quid and a bit of interest. Can't remember who I've got in total, but suffice to say I've never really heard of some of them. Yang, Laird, Casey, some random Korean, some bloke called Kevin and a few more.

Anyway, general question though for those of you who know what you're doing: would you rather have one quarter the odds on an each way bet paying six places, or an outright bet on a top five finish (ties paid in full) at one fifth of the odds to win?

To hopefully make that a bit clearer... Some guy is 100-1 to win. Bet each way at 100-1 paying six places? Or bet on the 'top five' market at 20-1?

I guess overall it doesn't make much difference, but maybe it depends how long their odds are - ie how likely they are to actually win it? Presumably lots of guys at long odds are much more likely to come fifth than first - whereas players at shorter odds are maybe as likely to win as they are to come fifth?

Very interesting qstn. To be honest it all depends if u think yr selection is value at the win part of the bet or not. If so then by all means embrace that top 6 ew bet which will give you 25-1 on the place rather than the 20s you mention. If yr just after the place part get on that speciality bet at slightly inferior odds imo.  Personally wld feel sick if i backed some1 to place and they won, but im greedy.

Yeah thanks for that, that's kind of what I was wondering. I guess finish distributions of the top players are likely to be quite different to those of the also-rans, so wondering whether there may be a cut-off somewhere where the win part of the bet stops being any value.

Also the fact that the top five bet pays out ties in full - in a low-scoring tournament like the US Open I imagine it's more likely than normal that several players could be tied for fifth? Though that's just a guess, maybe you actually end up with the field strung out in the same way, only with lower scores. Dunno.

Good luck all anyway.

Have stuck a few pins in various places for a few quid and a bit of interest. Can't remember who I've got in total, but suffice to say I've never really heard of some of them. Yang, Laird, Casey, some random Korean, some bloke called Kevin and a few more.

Anyway, general question though for those of you who know what you're doing: would you rather have one quarter the odds on an each way bet paying six places, or an outright bet on a top five finish (ties paid in full) at one fifth of the odds to win?

To hopefully make that a bit clearer... Some guy is 100-1 to win. Bet each way at 100-1 paying six places? Or bet on the 'top five' market at 20-1?

I guess overall it doesn't make much difference, but maybe it depends how long their odds are - ie how likely they are to actually win it? Presumably lots of guys at long odds are much more likely to come fifth than first - whereas players at shorter odds are maybe as likely to win as they are to come fifth?