HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Playing in an individual
Date: 10 Nov 1992 01:14:49 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

I played in the Atlantic City Omar Sharif individual a number of years ago,
and here's my advice:

1. Don't waste time discussing what 4 level bids over Jacoby 2NT are.
2. Don't waste time telling partner what s/he did or didn't do right/wrong.
3. If you have another hand to play with partner, say "Nicely played/bid"
4. Tell them one thing only:
     "Lead 4th best and please always give count"

The theory here is that a bad player won't always decide correctly whether
they want the suit continued, but even a total idiot knows whether he has
an even or odd number of cards.

5. (optional, if necessary) Third hand high please.

Hey, trust me, these work.  I got a check for three grand to prove it too.
-- 
"In nature there are no rewards or punishments, only consequences"

Asya Kamsky	      e-mail: asya@ux5.lbl.gov                   Go Red Sox
"In order to command you must first learn to submit" - chinese fortune cookie
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From:  (martino@courier6.aero.org(Nick Martino))
Subject: Re: Simple question about how to play takeout doubles
Followup-To: rec.games.bridge
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:50:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.222945.14874@midway.uchicago.edu>,
pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson) wrote:
> 
> My partner and I currently play that a takeout double guarantees 3+
> cards of each unbid suit.  This was his idea, not mine, but I think it
> is essentially sound.  It means that you can compete in any suit after
> partner's double.
> 
> However, the downside of this is that you have to play essentially
> unlimited overcalls (the ubiquitous "6+ HCP" on the card...).
> 
> My question is this, "Is this style playable, or is it necessary to have
> an upper bound on overcalls?"
>

Your agreement sounds unplayable to me.  I hate offshape doubles as much as
the next guy, but surely you must be able to double with a strong balanced
hand which is too strong for a simple notrump overcall. (For example, RHO
opens 1C and you hold  Ax QJxx AQxx AKx.)  With very strong balanced hands,
you generally don't have to worry about partner competing at a high level. 
Neither he nor the opponents will have enough to get you in trouble. 
Assuming you make exceptions for these hands, I still have a problem with
6+++ overcalls.  Are they forcing one round?  Are jump overcalls forcing or
strong and descriptive?  I think a reasonable upper limit on overcalls is
around 17 or 18 HCPs, although some 16 point hands are good enough to
double first (e.g., AKQxxx x AQJx xx).  
   

*******************************************************          
                                                                           
                                                                           
                         
    martino@courier6.Aero.org (Nick Martino)                            
   
    The Aerospace Corporation                                            
                                                                        
*******************************************************
From: willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Simple question about how to play takeout doubles
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:25:10 GMT
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA


In article <1992Nov9.222945.14874@midway.uchicago.edu>,
pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson) writes: 
> My partner and I currently play that a takeout double guarantees 3+
> cards of each unbid suit. 
> However, the downside of this is that you have to play essentially
> unlimited overcalls (the ubiquitous "6+ HCP" on the card...).
> 
> My question is this, "Is this style playable, or is it necessary to have
> an upper bound on overcalls?"

Having a double guarantee 3-card support (at least over one-bids) is
entirely playable and indeed recommended by many authorities.  See
Kaplan's (now mistitled) Competitive Bidding in Modern Bridge, for
example.  You will probably find, though, that you need to raise the
lower limit of the overcall.

In essence, you can consider weak, medium, and strong overcalls,
where medium is about an opening bid.  Most people overcall on weak
and medium and bundle strong in with the takeout double.  The
alternative is to let the overcall show medium and strong, keeping
the takeout doubles pure.  Some of the weak hands can jump overcall,
but others have to be passed.

A good alternative is to use 1NT to show a suit overcall.  It can
either show the weak overcall bundled in with strong balanced hand
("Comic Notrump"), or the strong overcall.  If using the latter,
balanced hands up to 17 points or so are _passed_, which at first
glance seems to be a disadvantage but isn't really.  (In fact, it may
be the biggest advantage of this method.)  In either case takeout
doubles are pure except for balanced hands with 18 points or more.
Unfortunately, both of these agreements are apparently illegal in
ACBL play.

> Overall, I am happy playing this way, but it does give you a problem on:
> 	AKTxx,x,KQxx,Axx
> when RHO opens 1C, you bid 1S, and partner bids 1N (opps silent).

Why is this a problem?  You bid as if you had opened the bidding (but
1NT is not forcing).  In most styles it would be correct to bid 2D on
the hand above, ambiguous as to strength except for being less than a
game force.  Partner will strain to keep the bidding open if holding
good values for his 1NT.

This will not be effective, of course, if your sequence could show
Qxxxx x Qxxxx xx.
-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: ed@scorpiocmc.ca (Ed Antosz)
Subject: Re: Committee Ruling - Opinions?
Reply-To: antosz@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca
Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation
Distribution: can
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:16:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.181241.835@rayssd.ssd.ray.com>, sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson) writes:

|> 
|>
|> * 2C*  p 2S** 3C
|> 
|> * 2nd hand.
|> * 
|> * This time I don't remember the exact hand, but the problem came at this
|> * position:
|> * 
|> *              AJ, - , xx, xxx
|> * Kx                           xx
|> * KQxx                           j
|> * Kx                           JTxx
|> * -                            -
|> *              QTxx,  AQx -
|> * 
|> * or something like that. NS were playing 4S, and need all the tricks.
|> * Clubs are good. W overruffed once. Now, the lead is in dummy
|> * S played a diamond, intending to  win the A and finesse in Spades, hoping
|> * for a 2-2 break. However, on the play of a low diamond, E went into a trance.
|> * pulling one card, then the other, finally played the J. There was no
|> * dispute on the facts of the matter.  Now S thought the E had the K of D,
|> * and decided to finesse, planning to ruff one in dummy, and hope that the
|> * K of spades in now single.
|> * 
|> * In the auction. S opened 1S, E overcalled 2H and N doubled (-ve) and W
|> * remained silent.  South claimed that he thought that the high cards were
|> * marked, and that without the hesitation, he would have certainly not finessed.
|> * South is a good player. E is an LOL.
|> 
A recent change in the Laws covers this situation.
The moment a player coffee-houses you may play them for the card in 
question at no risk.  In other worlds E is deemed to have the KD.  S can safely
play the QD and if it loses the trick is restored to S.


Ed
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: taylor@tivoli.com (Eric Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: A few problems
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:50:00 GMT

South on all hands:

First the simple one.  Playing standard 2/1 you hold :

QJ10xxx
Kx
Kxxx
x

The bidding has gone :
N         E          W         S
1H        P          1S        P
2N        P          3D        P
3S        P          ??

Do you make any slam peeps?





Second one.
K10x
xx
Qxxxx
AKx

The bidding has gone :
N        E           W          S
1C       1H          2D         2H
2S       P           3C         P
3S(1)    P           ??

Partner's style is to bid Spades with 55 in the blacks.
Therefore he is 56 in the blacks.
How would you go about investigating slam (if at all.)?






Describe partner's hand on the bidding :
N         E         S        W
1D        1H        X        P
2H        P         3D       P
3H        P         3S       P
4C        P         4D       P
6D

Suppose you hold :
98xx
xx
KJx
Kxxx

I did not like partner's 3S call since he
already showed a 4 card spade suit and has now distorted
the holding.   But besides that, what can the opener be looking for?


Result merchanting to follow ....
From: sneedham@aggie.ucdavis.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Striped Tailed Ape Swings Low
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:22:45 GMT
Reply-To: sneedham@aggie.ucdavis.edu ()
Organization: University of California, Davis

Many of you are probably familiar with the 'striped-tail-ape double',
which is a way of getting a great pairs score in high-level competitive
auctions. You have to believe that opponents can make six of their suit,
and that sacrificing against six of their suit is too expensive.

What you do is double FIVE of their suit. If they tamely sit and play
five, making an overtrick, you've done better than pairs who have six
bid and made against them. But ... if they redouble ... the overtrick
would beat the small slam, and you have to run to your suit, a level lower
than your sacrifice against the slam.

I'm sorry to say I've never even tried this. What I have done is double 
people in five, watch them make, and beat the pairs who defended six, and
then CLAIM that I knew all along they were cold for slam. 

If my partner on the following hand were to make that claim I don't think
anybody would believe him - especially since I am in possesion of the true
reason for his call.

I picked up KJ9xx, x, KJxxx, xx and passed (vulnerable against not) to hear:

	Me	LHO	Partner	RHO
	 /	1H	/	2C (playing 2-over-1 game force)

This is a pretty inauspicious moment, but I doubled ...
	X	/	/(!!!!!)

RHO thought and thought and redoubled ...
				XX
	/	/	2S	3NT
	(end)

Making six. Opponents were cold for 6C and many pairs got there. RHO was
right to redouble, as his best shot at a top - 2C doubled, making six, is
not as much as 6C bid and made.

Partner's penalty pass was made on 10xxx, xxxx, xxx, KJ - a brilliant
and probably unprecedented STA double at the two-level!

Nothing to do with giving up caffeine and sugar earlier that week...

							Sam
From: burt@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca (Burt Voorhees)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Freak hand. YBTJ
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:57:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: aupair.burt.721673829

hargrove@nobelium.asc.slb.com (Jim Hargrove) writes:


>Both Vul.
>Dealer North.

>                        S Q 7 4
>                        H 10
>                        D J
>                        C A K Q J 9 7 5 3




>                        S A K 6 5 3 2
>                        H A 2
>                        D K 10 8 6
>                        C 10

>The pairs at both tables were playing the "yellow card."

That's the first mistake

How about

     N              S
     1C             2S
     3S             4H
     6C             6S

After all, once north knows there is a spade fit it's okay to suppress
those clubs for a while.
Souths 4H is just a half-assed slam try, in case North has the right
cards.  North bids 6C showing pretty much what they've got.
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Comments Please (without tabs)
Date: 6 Nov 92 18:12:17 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Karel Strasters <karel@ph.tn.tudelft.nl> writes:
>>   A8xxx      QJx
>>   JTxx       Axx
>>   AKxx       Qxx
>>   -          xxxx

>>   1s         1NT
>>   2h         3s
>>   4s         all pass

> Matter of style. After the 3S bid south knows the north hand.

I have to strongly disagree with this analysis.  Bidding 1NT followed by
3S with the North hand is not a question of style, it is a question of
evaluation (or misevaluation, in this case).  This 3334 nine-count is
simply not a limit raise, and you would have a very hard time finding
any strong player to say that it is.

North was dealt a single raise and North should have made a single raise.

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson)
Subject: Re: Comments Please
Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth, RI
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:32:55 GMT

In article <thijs.720875456@ei0> Thijs Veugen writes:

* We play Dutch ACOL, i.e. 5card spades, 4card hearts, strong NT, 2/1 not
* GF.
* I would like some comments on the following hands (IMP's):
* 
* 1. South			North
* 	A8xxx			QJx
* 	JTxx			Axx
* 	AKxx			Qxx
* 	-				xxxx
* 
* 	White vs. red:
* 	1s				1NT
* 	2h				3s
* 	4s				all pass
* 
* 	Result: -2
* 
* 	What about the 1NT bid and the final contract?

I can sympathize with North's 1N bid. Even though North has good
3-card support, the hand is still a 4-3-3-3 with half the points
in quacks. That said, I still think a immediate raise to 2S is best.
After the 2H rebid, it seems that North tried to make up some lost
ground by jumping to 3S, trying to give the impression of a hand
better than just a simple preference.
Both players slightly overbid their hands, but I think the 1N bid
was the one that started the ball rolling.

BTW, please don't use tabs when posting hands.

* 2. South			North
* 	T				AKQJxx
* 	-				xxx
* 	AJTxxxx		KQx
* 	Axxxx			x
* 
* 	All white:
* 	W		N		E		S
* 	1c		2s		3h		4d
* 	4h		4s		all pass
* 
* 	Result: +3
* 
* 	2s shows openingstrength and a good 6card. 
* 	7d and 7s allways makes. 

2s shows opening strength and a good 6 card? Well, that is exactly
what North has. What is the purpose of the 4S bid?
South has introduced a suit at the 4 level, and North has KQx.
How much more does North need to raise?

* 3. South			North
* 	Kxx			Qxx
* 	KQ9xx			x
* 	Qxxx			Ax
* 	x				AKxxxxx
* 	
* 	Red vs. white:
* 	-				1c
* 	1h				2c
* 	2d				3c
* 	pass
* 
* 	Result: +1
* 
* 	2d is roundforcing.
* 	3NT is the better contract provided they don't lead dK.

Does 3N still make on a spade lead. I don't see very many good spade spots.
And you also need clubs 3-2, right? It doesn't seem like a very good game.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: ted@sage0.gsfc.nasa.gov (Ted Ying)
Subject: Re: Playing in an individual
Organization: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:07:42 GMT

varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:


>Received from Danil Suits:
>-------------------------
>Also a legality/ethics question.  Is it appropriate to have
>2 cards? That is one to use when partner will be first to 
>speak, and a second when you will be?  If there are 
>differences, what should they be?

>How about a third card, to be used when you recognize your 
>partner? For example, if I draw Charlie Coon, should I
>ask him to play 2/1, or simply accept the A+'s his card
>play will generate anyway....

	No...not only is it inappropriate, it is a violation of law.
	Law 40.E (Right to Prescribe) states, "...may establish
	regulations for its use, including a requirement that both
	members of a partnership employ the same system (such a
	regulation must not restrict style and judgement, only method)."

	ACBL uses the above rule for all sanctioned events.  Both
	players in a partnership must use the same convention card and
	methods.

	As for the last question, yes, you can play the card that you
	regularly play with him as long as he agrees to play it as well
	and that you have a fully filled out convention card with the
	details of that system available for your opponents.

	Ted Ying			ted@rosserv.gsfc.nasa.gov
	Hughes/STX			Goddard Space Flight Center
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge,comp.sys.acorn
From: rjh21@cl.cam.ac.uk (Richard Hayton)
Subject: Computer Bridge (Acol)
Keywords: Bridge,Computers,Archimedes
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:10:41 GMT

Hi,
   I'm interested in getting a decent computer bridge program. I would 
   prefer it to be for the Acorn Archimedes but I'm also interested in
   Mac / PC or Unix versions. 
 
   In particular I'm looking for:
  
     * ACOL bidding system. 
     * Multiple human players
     * Bidding which sticks to the system so that beginners and near 
       beginners can understand it.
     * Conventions and systems such as Blackwood, Transfer Bids, Trial Bid and
       Cue bids. However it must be possible to choose _not_ to use any of 
       these.

   What I'm not looking for is a program that is plays very well (ie wins a
   lot) but uses lots of bizarre conventions that can't be turned off.
   
   I run a small bridge club (mainly beginners) and the program is wanted to
   allow players to practice what they have learned. 

   Omar Sharif's Bridge has recently been released for the Acorn Archimedes and
   I believe it is avaiable on other machines. Has anyone tried this?

   Please mail replies, I will summarise.

Rich.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: c85perwe@IDA.LiU.SE (Per Westling)
Subject: Re: Striped-tail doubles
Reply-To: c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
Organization: CIS Dept, University of Linkoping, Sweden
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 13:41:25 GMT

In article <9211111532.aa27705@Paris.ics.uci.edu> kibler@turing.ICS.UCI.EDU (Dennis Kibler) writes:
> As dealer you pick up  Axx,AQ10x,xx,Qxxx and open 1 club.
> The bidding goes:


>   1c   1nt  2s   3d*    Alert transfer to hearts
>   p    3h   p    3nt
>   X**  p    p    4d
>   p    p    p

> ** I believed 3nt as asking for a choice between 3nt and 4hearts
> and felt I could beat either contract.
>     Not - 3nt makes with an overtrick as 1nt bidder held KJXX of hearts.
When why did the 1NT bidder don't prefer Hearts?  Partner sound like
having a weak hand (as he run from 3NTX with 5 hearts and 4-5
diamonds, so with KJxx support in hearts 4H is called for.

> Does the double call for any particular suit to be lead?
I would take it as wanting the 2S bidder to lead hir suit, as normaly
s/he would lead clubs (my suit).  And judging by your holding in
spades (Axx) it is a good lead.  




--
Per Westling              |
Mardtoprsgatan 15         |  c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
S-582 48 LINKOPING        |  In praise of Idleness -- Bertrand Russel
SWEDEN                    |
Stuff regarding DPP may be sent to x90perwe@ida.liu.se instead.
From: brl@kopasker.is (Bjorgvin Runar Leifsson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: About Flannery
Date: 7 Nov 92 14:30:03 GMT
Organization: Primary School of Kopasker, Iceland

Hi, fellow bridge fans.

There was some discussion recently on the Flannery convention, where the
subject was (if I remember correctly) if it is better to use the 2 diamond
or the 2 hearts opening for Flannery.  In my system I use the 2D opening as
multi; it shows one of three types:
a) A weak two bid in hearts
b) Any 4441 distribution and 16-24 hcp
c) A very strong hand with an even distribution

So I use the 2 hearts opening for Flannery, but is also a multi type:
a) 4-5-x-x
b) 4-4-1-4, 4-4-0-5, 4-4-5-0
In each case 12-15 hcp.

Partner bids 2NT if he wants a clarification of the hand.  

Any comments on this version (it is from the Sontag/Weichsel system)?

Bjorgvin R. Leifsson
brl@kopasker.is
From: wallaced@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (David Wallace)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Simple question about how to play takeout doubles
Date: 10 Nov 92 08:07:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: kauri.WALLACED.92Nov10200716
Organization: Computing Services Centre, Victoria Uni. of Wellington, NZ.

George> My partner and I currently play that a takeout double
George> guarantees 3+ cards of each unbid suit.  This was his idea,
George> not mine, but I think it is essentially sound.  It means that
George> you can compete in any suit after partner's double.

George> However, the downside of this is that you have to play
George> essentially unlimited overcalls (the ubiquitous "6+ HCP" on
George> the card...).

I've never liked the idea of an unlimited overcall: an overcall
shouldn't be forcing because then you can't make them on a shapely 7
count. But if they're unlimited but not forcing, how can partner
decide when to respond, and when he/she won't be missing game to do so.

What my partner and I do is the following. Our standard overcalls are
limited, although the exact numbers aren't set in concrete, they're
generally about 8-13 at the one level and 10-15 at the two level (plus
or minus a tad for the vul). Anything stronger than this is indicated
by doubling, then bidding the suit later. This means that a double can
show EITHER 3+ cards in all the unbid suits (I don't like to do it
without at least Qxx or xxxx, but my partner is less inhibited) and
whatever strength one feels one needs (depending on vulnerabilty,
who's opened, whether you're in the direct seat or the balancing seat
and so forth) OR a strong hand with another bid on the way.

George> 	AKTxx,x,KQxx,Axx

Double first time round. If partner bids diamonds or spades, a raise
is in order. If he/she bids hearts or notrumps, show your spades
(indicating 14+ HCP or thereabouts, and at least 5 spades) and await
developments.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
|           |                                |                                |
| Cheers,   | Disclaimer:  I generally don't | "In order to reach the truth,  |
|   Dave.   |      go along with anything my | it is necessary, once in one's |
|___________|      employer tells me. Much   | life, to put everything in     |
| less would I dream of quoting it above. My | doubt - so far as possible."   |
| opinions belong to me and only me.         |             - Descartes        |
|____________________________________________|________________________________|
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge