HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: paulb@harlqn.co.uk (Paul Butcher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: what's a reverse?
Date: 18 Aug 92 08:24:07 GMT
Organization: Harlequin Ltd, Cambridge, UK

In article <1992Aug6.220054.430@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> prm@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Paul Raymond McMullin) writes:
>I always thought that a reverse was when you bid a suit that partner has
>"passed over", thereby showing extra strength and length in the two suits,
>probably 5-4 or better.  This suggests that 1C - 1<red> - 1S would not be a
>reverse, because partner hasn't "passed over" the spades yet, but 1S-2H-3C
>would be the "high reverse" that others have noted.

The definition I use, and the one I teach the beginners I've coached
is;

	A reverse is any rebid by opener high enough so that if
	responder wishes to show preference or support for opener's
	first bid suit he must do so at the three level.

I think this probably means the same thing as Raymond's definition, but I
find it easier to remember and apply.

PaulB->msgCount++
From: willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Two level overcall with void
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:17:06 GMT
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA


[You hold:   S - Axx, H - void,  D - xx,  C - Q J 10 9 6 5 3 2 
RHO opens 1H; scoring and vulnerability not known.]

In article <Bso8q8.KGo@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R.
Bharat Rao) writes: 
> On this kind of hand, I firmly believe the only question is "how
> high?".  Pass is unlikely to work out and a psyche has limited
> usefulness as you have spades.  I would bid 4C, but I can see the
> merits of either 3C or 5C.

It might help to know vulnerability and form of scoring, of course.

Just for jollies, here's a different hand from the January 1992
Bridge World, IMPs, favorable vul.: T95 KQJ7432 A86 -.  RHO opens 1D.
What do you do?

The anonymous author says "We would accept a preemptive jump to three
or four hearts.  However, we mildly prefer a simple overcall of one
heart.  We are loath to transfer captaincy to partner so readily when
we have a void and strong side-suit controls."

The two hands are similar in that both have six losers, but the
second hand has more high card strength than the first, suggesting
the simple overcall.  However, a preempt could be more effective on
the second hand since opponents have not yet bid either your void
(may be their best fit) or a major.

For what it's worth, I was a 4H bidder on the second hand and at this
vulnerability and form of scoring would say 5C on the first (4C in
most other cases).  But I don't think a simple overcall would be
"wrong" on either, especially against weak opponents.
-- 
Steve Willner            Phone 617-495-7123         Bitnet:   willner@cfa
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 Internet: willner@cfa.harvard.edu
  member, League for Programming Freedom; contact league@prep.ai.mit.edu
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: NT with a partial stopper
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:51:10 GMT
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA

In article <1992Aug19.150031.27773@cfa.harvard.edu> willner@cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes:
:
:In article <1560@idacrd.UUCP>, desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
:[most of article deleted.]
:>   The hand is AK/Jxx/AKxx/KQT9 and the auction is 1H-?.
:>  Everyone (even Bob, I think?) would agree on double after 1H-P-P-?.
:
:Don't be so sure about the last.  Followup over 1S is still a big
 
Bzzt. Wrong.  I most definitely *balance* with a double on this hand.

:problem.  Sure, you cue bid, but what do you do when partner persists
 
"Sure, you cue bid"?

A cuebid would show SPADE SUPPORT in most partnerships, and in absence of
discussion [playing with a stranger known to be a good player] I would
take it as a very strong spade raise, not a general force.

If all partner can do is bid 1S over your double, then I believe the
best call is PASS. 
--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bid this one for me
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:08:59 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Aug21.110226.1660@gacvx2.gac.edu>, jengelha@nic.gac.edu (Jeff Engelhardt) writes:
> North dealing
> 
> N:	A K Q J 9 6 5 3 2
> 	4
> 	J 9
> 	4
> 
> S:	T
> 	A K 8 3
> 	A 7 6 5
> 	A K Q T

As Bob pointed out, this is the hand Namyats was invented for.  But, if we
don't happen to be playing Namyats, the opening alternatives are 1S, 2C, and
4NT (Blackwood).

I think 4NT is the best choice because it has a good chance of shutting the
opponents out and getting precisely the info we need.  4NT obviously works
out fine in this case (4NT-5S-5NT-6H-7S-7NT).  It also works out fine if
partner has 0 or 1 ace (if we can't make 5S, they can likely make 5 of some
other suit).  If partner has two aces, we'll try 6S, but we might come up
short a trick.  Oh, well.

On the other hand, either 1S or 2C begins to misdescribe our hand, isn't
likely to extract the info we need from partner, and gives the opponents
plenty of room to discover whether they have a good game or sacrifice (or
maybe even a slam).

- Tim
From: spencer@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: partner knew RKC was bad
Date: 14 Aug 92 03:25:06 GMT
Reply-To: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: Live Organ Transplants

I should have mentioned, as several people have pointed out, that
my partner realized that RKC was not the most intelligent thing to do
here, and similarly that 6S with two potential heart losers was bad too.
(I'm playing okbridge with him in another window as we speak, and just
asked him exactly why he did it, and he says, quote, "Silliness.  I KNEW
I couldn't, but I did."  So there you have it... someone will surely
advise me to find a new partner :-) )

----------- The opinions expressed in this article are solely mine. -----------
<Insert lame attempt at disclaimer humor>
sss/PU'94 Dept of CS (spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu)/JvNCnet (spencer@jvnc.net)
"Let me explain.  No, there is too much.  Let me sum up."
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: dberman@cs.washington.edu (Deborah Berman)
Subject: Re: A Matchpoint Decision
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 19:35:54 GMT

I would take my +120, because using Standard American bidding, the opponents
would find their great spade fit, and you could not have hoped for such a 
good positive score (even though 4Clubs makes, if they compete to 4S it
only goes down at most one, and 5Clubs goes down.)  Be happy with your positive
score.

If you try to establish a diamond trick, the opponents will cash their 5 Spade
tricks (at least five), and you will make at most 1NT, it seems to me.

Debbie

-- 
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend...
   Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  (Groucho Marx)
From: msl@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Mark Laventhal )
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:41:34 GMT
Subject: Another missed slam
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge

Here's another example of missing a good slam:

	W(dealer)		E

	AK			QJT9x
	QJxx			
	Qx			AKJxx
	KJxxx			Axx


The bidding:
	W	N	E	S
	1C	2H	2S	P
	3N	P	P	P


Slam should be bid in one of the three suits, but which one, 
and how do you get there?

Who should have bid differently? (both?)
Should East have bid 3H instead of 2S?
What kind of auction would you envision after
	1C-2H-??

Thanks,
Mark
From: bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Try this one
Date: 22 Aug 92 21:21:21 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
X-Subliminal-Message: You can quit reading news anytime you want.

In article <1992Aug22.114625.4482@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
|In article <1992Aug22.13602.23148@ms.uky.edu> jhaywood@ms.uky.edu (Joel D Haywood) writes:
| 
|However, even in the actual auction I have a nice, simple call
|over 2S and that is 5NT. Why is my next call even in doubt?
|

What if you don't play GSF?  Maybe in some people's systems, 5NT in this
auction is invitational to 6S or 6NT.

Nothing is ever as simple as you typically make it out to be, especially to a
beginner.

Saying "I would bid 5NT, grand-slam force" would be more appropriate.

Have a nice day.


ben
--

Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: karel@ph.tn.tudelft.nl (Karel Strasters)
Subject: Re: How to bid this one?
Organization: Delft University of Technology
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 08:43:39 GMT

bs@faron.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:

>:>Last night (pairs event) i got the following west hand, N dealer , All:
>:
>:>AT9
>:>AKJ92
>:>-
>:>AKQ75
>:
>:>How to open this one (we're playing dutch acol, but i'm 
>:>interested in any natural system) ?
>:

<stuff deleted>

>:>And how to respond with the following east hand:
>:
>:>QJ3
>:>Q
>:>QJ95
>:>T8643
>:
>:>It is a clear 7C, but how to get there? (keep in mind that this hand
> 
>How about a simple:

>1H       1NT(forcing)
>3C (GF)  4C (extras; 5C is signoff)
>5D (1)   5H
>5S       5NT (2)
>7C

>(1) Void showing splinter [remember 4D would show control as well]
>    Implies at least 2nd round spade control since it forces to 6C

>5H shows a heart card, 5S is a cuebid, 5NT is trump asking.

I hace doubts about the 4C bid in a pair's event. Do you want to pass the
3NT level on that hand? Partner is showing (at least) a 17+ 5-5 or a 
18+ 5-4 suiter. That is why i put the pair's statement in the first post.

I agree it's possible (not easy, but possible) to reach 7C after a 4C response.
But reality is that most players will opt for the 3NT bid in a pairs event,
(i would). Is it possible to reach 7C then ?

Our auction:

1H*      1NT**
3C***    3NT
4C       4H^
4S^      5C
6C       -

*   i felt bad about that
**  not forcing
*** GF
^   mixed cues

Notice that east does not relay his 5krt support and does not take into account
his golden Q of H. I think it should be enough for a slam trial instead of a 
5C bid. Opener could have a 6-5 after this auction!

-- 
========================================================================
Karel C. Strasters (karel@ph.tn.tudelft.nl)
Pattern Recognition Group,  Faculty of Applied Physics,
Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack Newsbaum)
Subject: Re: bidding
Date: 20 Aug 92 10:55:54 PDT

In article <1992Aug20.015157.19549@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, on 20 Aug 1992 01:51:57 GMT,
mike@fowler.arch.su.oz.au () writes:

>
>Sorry, mistake with East's diamonds. Q should be J.
>
That correction makes a lot of difference. With the Q, I would have jump
shifted to 3D, rebid NT at the minimum level after partner's rebid (4NT
would be natural if partner's second bid was 4C), and ended up in 6NT.

>This hand came up at friendly game last night. A discussion ensued on
>how to bid it. What contract should one get to (as against what might be the
>actual best? At what stage of the bidding does either E or W become aware
>of each other's strength?
>
>      W (Dealer)            E
>
>          Kxx                   AJ
>          K10xxx                Ax
>          A                     KJ10xxx
>          AKxx                  Jxx
>
My auction would be pretty straightforward:

  1H - 2D - 3C - 3D - 3NT.

It's true that each hand is somewhat better than a minimum for its
bids. However, without any fit, I think a further bid by West is a
losing proposition in the long run.

>
>Dr Mike Rosenman                         Ph:   +61-2-692 3549
>Key Centre of Design Quality G04         Fax:  +61-2-692 3031
>University of Sydney                     Email: mike@archsci.arch.su.oz.au
>NSW 2006 Australia
>
    ====Jack====
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: NT with a partial stopper
Date: 16 Aug 92 19:23:52 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Richard Harter <rh@smds.com> writes:
>Lets take the simplest first; how likely is it that they are going
>to run hearts against a NT contract?  If we assume that partner 
>won't raise NT on a singleton, then partner holds 2 or more hearts.
>A simple calculation says that the odds are 8 to 7 that partner holds
>an honor if he has two hearts.

This is a terrible abuse of statistics!  You have 19 (actually 20) HCP,
and your opponent opened the bidding!  The chance that a randomly
selected heart honor is in your opponents' hand is *much* higher than
that it is in partner's hand, by 3 or 4 to 1.

>In addition partner may hold 3 (or even 4!) hearts; furthermore LHO
>with KQxxx has a problem on the lead.

RHO opened 1H.

>I don't have the exact hand but, as I recall, it was something like
>AK Jxx AQ9x KQ9x, i.e. 19 points and frozen spade honors.  If my
>recollection is correct the sequence is 1H p p ?.

Your recollection is not correct.  The hand is AK/Jxx/AKxx/KQT9 and the
auction is 1H-?.  Everyone (even Bob, I think?) would agree on double
after 1H-P-P-?.

If you had been following the discussion, the postings on playing NT
from the wrong side might have tipped you off to who has the hearts, and
at least one reason you might not want to bid NT with this hand.

                                        David desJardins
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding
Date: 20 Aug 92 18:41:04 GMT
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA

In article <19920820105455ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU> ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack Newsbaum) writes:
:In article <1992Aug20.015157.19549@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, on 20 Aug 1992 01:51:57 GMT,
:mike@fowler.arch.su.oz.au () writes:
:
:>
:>Sorry, mistake with East's diamonds. Q should be J.
:>
:That correction makes a lot of difference. With the Q, I would have jump
:shifted to 3D, rebid NT at the minimum level after partner's rebid (4NT
:would be natural if partner's second bid was 4C), and ended up in 6NT.
 
But 6D would be significantly better.

:>      W (Dealer)            E
:>          Kxx                   AJ
:>          K10xxx                Ax
:>          A                     KJ10xxx
:>          AKxx                  Jxx
:>
:My auction would be pretty straightforward:
:
:  1H - 2D - 3C - 3D - 3NT.
 
I would bid 3S over 3D. 
With partner rebidding diamonds, Stiff A is pretty good support.

6D is odds-on on this hand. It is virtually cold on a spade lead,
will make with 3-3 hearts, or Q diamonds comming down, or Q clubs
coming down.

With (say) a trump lead, you win, play a heart to the A, cash K trumps.
Assume both follow and the Q does not come down. Play a heart to K
and another heart. What happens next depends on whether RHO follows.
If RHO follows ruff and hope LHO did not have a doubleton heart
with a diamond spot big enough to beat yours. If RHO shows out,
you can ruff low, drive trumps and then play to drop Q clubs or a
black suit squeeze.

I would like to be in 6D.

--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Toronto Nationals selection #1
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:07:33 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Dr. Weird <boyiny@math.mit.edu> writes:
>RED, you hold S:KT95 H:7 D:QJT9 C:J653.  LHO opened 1NT (11-14) in third
>seat.  Do you think you should balance?  With what (please specify your
>methods in followups)?

From time to time I have played the perfect method for this hand: 2C
shows a three-suiter with clubs.  I've been trying to decide for several
days now whether I would dare to bid with this hand even under those
ideal conditions.  (Of course, at the table my opponents would have
called for the director somewhat earlier :-).)  The spots are a very
significant plus.  (As borne out by the actual hand: the reason it plays
well for our side is that the spade and diamond spots produce tricks.)
But you just don't have any high cards, and down one doubled is a
matchpoint disaster.

At the table I would probably bid, because I find it difficult to resist
the temptation to act when I have a highly descriptive bid available.
But I'm still not at all sure that it is right.

                                        David desJardins
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: How to bid this one?
Date: 12 Aug 1992 13:15:11 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.cs.utexas.edu

In article <karel.713612854@galaxy> karel@ph.tn.tudelft.nl (Karel Strasters) writes:
>Last night (pairs event) i got the following west hand, N dealer , All:

>AT9
>AKJ92
>-
>AKQ75

>How to open this one (we're playing dutch acol, but i'm 
>interested in any natural system) ?

In a system that has them, I think an ACOL 2-bid is right.  Reese
claimed one of the major advantages was to be able to make a forcing
bid with a big two-suiter.  In a system without ACOL 2-bids, I will
risk the wrath of the "Never open 2C on a 2- or 3-suited hand" crowd
and admit that I would open it 2C.  Exchange the red or pointed suits
and I'll open it in a suit.

>And how to respond with the following east hand:

>QJ3
>Q
>QJ95
>T8643

>It is a clear 7C, but how to get there? (keep in mind that this hand
>came up during a pairs event!)

Interesting.  You also have to avoid the greedy 6NT.

Starting with 2C, and assuming the opponents keep quiet with their
9-card diamond fit:
   2C  2D    (Neutral)
   2H  2NT   (Some values, balanced or clubs)
   3C  3NT   (Matchpoints.  Blech!  Opinions on 4C solicited.)
   4C  5C
   5D  5H
   ??

Opener has already bid the daylights out of this hand.  Responder,
with a fist full of random junk other than the club fit, is unlikely
to do more than the heart cuebid, which wouldn't even be allowed in
some methods.  I expect opener to be vaguely uneasy but stop at 6C.  
The key card is the HQ.  It's hard to locate.

Starting with an ACOL 2H probably doesn't change things much except
that diamond competition is easier to handle.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: doug@cm.deakin.OZ.AU (Douglas Newlands)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: cue-bidding question
Date: 14 Aug 92 03:39:51 GMT
Organization: Deakin University, Geelong, Australia

In article <1992Aug13.135627.24202@Princeton.EDU: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:
:When cue-bidding, if one has multiple potential cue-bids, is there any
:particular rule you can use as to which one to bid first, or do you sort
:of just play it by ear... 

Classically one cues the lowest first. That would have been
sufficient on the hand in question tho I suspect (not being
overly familiar with what Jacoby excludes or promises) that we
have the classic situation of cuing towards slam without any real
idea of where 12 tricks are coming from.
:
:          AT954
:          Q92
:          KQ94
:          A
:
:          KQ876
:          J6
:          A7
:          KJ93 
:
:The bidding was, I think, fairly straightforward.  Duplicate scoring,
:both vul, dealer north (my partner).  Opponents were silent throughout
:the auction.  It went...
:
:   1S - 2N (Jacoby)
:   3C - 3D
:   3S - 4C
:   4N - 5S (RKC)
:   6S - all pass

3S presumably denied the AH and if it continued
   3S   4C
   4D   4S   no AH
   5D   5S   no KH, it is now easy and obvious to stop in 5S

I bid 5D rather than 5C because I don't like cuing shortage in a
suit held by partner but if you want to go that way it could
continue
     5C     5D
     5S          and now N has denied AH and KH.

:	
:opponents did not lead a heart for unknown reasons (it's the only unbid
:suit) and the contract makes (my partner was aware he was bidding a slam
:that goes down with the correct lead, but bid it anyway, dunno why)

Leading aces against a slam often marks you as an LOL - seems a
good reason to avoid it :-) 
Against opponents whom you are confident know what they are
doing, you might lead an ace at matchpoints but at teams it would
be rare because the whole idea is to try and set up your second
trick BEFORE getting your entry knocked out.

Back to the question of cuing; Flint described another ordering
in Tiger Bridge in the mid sixties. With touching aces bid the
higher then the lower. With non-touching, bid the lower first. It
tends to facilitate cuing without using up space too quickly.

The third natural method is the Italian indiscriminate first and
second round cues. It keeps the auction flowing smoothly and is
magic for staying out of slams with 2 losers off the top in a
suit. In the above hand it would go 1S-2N;3C-3D;3S-4S and if you
had 3 heart losers you would still be safe where the natural
cuers would be 1 off in 5!

Sorry if this repeats other posting but down here in Oz we (I at
least) see the mail in roughly reverse order for no particularly
obvious reason.

doug.
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bidding problems..
Date: 14 Aug 92 02:37:21 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Varis Carey <varis@zoyd.ae.utexas.edu> writes:
> [ discussing AK Jxx AKxx KQT9 ]

>Here is what happened at the table, with Ron Rubin, member of
>the Spingold winning team, holding the disputed hand.
>
>1H-DBL-P-1S-2C!
>
>A great bid by a champion.  This avoided the distortion of the 1Nt
>rebid, and allowed his partener to make a descriptive call, (like show
>a diamond side suit, or bid NT with a 5-7 count, or hell, even raise clubs)

Well, assuming that the great champion did not in fact bid out of turn,
this is a bid which could work out well and could also work out badly,
and I'm sure that Ron Rubin would admit that.  How many IMPs would you
score in 2C passed out, down two, when partner holds Jxxx/xxxx/Jxx/xx?
Unlike you, however, I would not say that it is a bad call, just because
it's not my choice.

>Pass puts too much pressure on partner.  With Qxxx xxx Qxxx xxx he
>would pass, the opponents would make 7-8 tricks in hearts, and you
>would be smiling with -80 on your face when you are near ice for
>+110-lose 5 or 6 imps.

But you can't score +110 if this is the hand.  First of all, it is a
misdeal.  Secondly, assuming partner has only 13 cards, say
Qxxx/xxx/Qxx/xxx, partner will rebid 3C over double followed by 2C, and
you will be too high and in the wrong strain.

>with Qxxxx xx Qxx xxx he would pass too, not balance, with you again
>making 1-2 spades, while 1H probably rolls in.

Making 1S when you are in 2S is worth less than defending 1H making.
And 1H is unlikely to make.  Where is the seventh trick if hearts are
5-2 and we lead trumps at every opportunity?

>with xxxx Qxx xxx Axxx he would not balance with 1Nt unfavorable, and
>on the lay of the cards you are odds on for 3Nt(4C,1H,2S,2D) and have
>chances even on a mega-passive defence. That is a vulnerable game
>swing versus the probable +50/+100 you will collect in 1H!!

Another misdeal.  If the only hands you can come up with to demonstrate
the value of this bid are fouled boards, I don't have too much to worry
about.

But, again assuming that partner has only 13 cards, it's true that this
sort of hand is a possibility.  When 3NT is right and you pass, you have
a big loss.  Those of us who chose pass knew that.  But it's not all
that likely.  And you will also get to some bad 3NT contracts.  Partner
will bid exactly the same way with Qxx/Qxx/Qxx/Jxxx, and 3NT will have
no play.

>the only hands where pass is right is when partner holds nothing,
>except for heart length and the opponents have no 7 card fit.

What if partner holds nothing except for four spades?  Or nothing except
for four diamonds, but you play clubs because you make a bid which shows
a club suit?  If you could always get to the right contract by bidding,
of course it would be clear to bid.  But you simply can't guarantee that.

                                        David desJardins