HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: baseggi1@husc8.harvard.edu (Franco Baseggio)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: What is going on?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:11:59 GMT

sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Myerson) writes:

>danil@boreal.owlnet.rice.edu (Danil Patrick Suits) writes
>in <1992Apr14.163320.9104@rice.edu>:

>* IMP teams, everybody green   Axx, KQx, xxx, Axxx.  Absolutely spotless.
>* 
>* Second chair, playing Standard American, you open
>* 1C. Partner skips the bidding up to 2H (strong)
>* you raise to 3H....
>* 
>* Partner bids 4H.
>* 
>* 1] What is going on?
>* 2] What should partner's hand look like?
>* 3] What do you call?

Some excerpts from Mike Lawrence's _2/1 Workbook_ on strong jump shifts
(Soloway style).

There are 3 types of hands you can make a SJS on:  Solid suit, opening hand;
6 card suit, 18+; or a double fit with the right 11+.

For example, AQT65/42/K3/KQT4 or 2/AKT97/42/KT865 should both JS over a 
1C opener according to Lawrence.  Playing this style, partner might have
xx/AJTxx/Ax/KQJx or x/AJTxxx/xx/KQJx or a number of similar hands.  Of course,
according to Lawrence no hands exist where he would bid 4H.  WIth the 2x fit
type hand, you either bid a singleton or raise partners first suit (if
balanced).

Note also that with 865/K64/AJ5/KQ42 (another hand BS would pass) Lawrence
advocates raising to 3H after 1C-2H.  I seem to remember a post suggesting
this showed extras.

I (as opposed to Lawrence) think the point here is that strong jump shifts
and subsequent auctions need to be defined by you and your partner.  In this
case, they obviously aren't.  Pass must be called for, though.  You *have*
bid your hand. ... On second thought, your partner has shown a SJS with
his 1st bid, even if the 2nd bid is "impossible."  Some try (such as 4S)
must be made, *especially* if partner's manners have given any indication
that he does not have a SJS.  We can't expect partner to be perfect, even
if we are :-), and it doesn't make sense to say "well, you made a mistake,
so even though the alternatives were obvious, I am completely absolved of
any subsequent mistakes made on the hand."  Some of you may remember an 
"assign the blame" hand I posted a few weeks back about a 3NT defense.  I
did not lead my partners suit in favor of a better lead (although partner's
suit would have set the contract).  After he made a bone head play and
we let 3N make, he defended himself saying that once I chose to lead a
"random" 4 card suit instead of his suit that anything he did was O.K.
(He is usually a fine partner, quite able to hold his own in FLT A)]
This sort of reasoning is annoying.  Anyway, my point is, partner has
screwed up, but I'm not going to say "well I showed my hand already."
Partner clearly didn't get the message, or doesn't have a SJS.  I rarely
will "repeat myself" (deliberately, that is :-)) in the auction and try
to trust partner as much as possible, but I think this is an exception.

Franco
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Rules about psychs?
Keywords: Psychs, artificial bids
Date: 11 Apr 92 20:36:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: overload.1992Apr11.203624.13378
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

In article <1992Apr10.204019.19104@midway.uchicago.edu> valley@gsbsun.uchicago.edu (Doug Dougherty) writes:
>asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) writes:
>Does the verb "psyche" require intent?

Yes, but intent is not enough.  You have to grossly misstate your stregth
or distribution, and

>I.e., suppose I miscount and open 1C with 15 (when our express agreement
>is 16+)?  Do I then have to go stand in a corner for a few rounds?

this is not a psych, just a slight deviation from partnership agreement.

-- 
"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
From: ECL4JN2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Jack Newsbaum)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 2 Problems (IMPS)
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:39:07 PDT

>ECL4JN2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Jack Newsbaum) writes:
>
>JN: >(2) This is a play problem. Both Vul.
>JN: >
>JN: >        Ax AK9, KJ98, J9xx,
>JN: >
>JN: >        Q10, Q10xxx, 10x, AK10x
>JN: >
>JN: >1NT 2S 3H P
>JN: >4H  all pass.
>JN: >
>JN: >8 spades led.  Plan the play. Both Vul.
>JN: >
>
>JN: Duck the spade expecting the SQ to win in your hand (LHO did overcall
>JN: vulnerable). Over to dummy to play the A and K of trump. If they split
>
>Um, the 3 heart bidder is playing the hand.
>It was Opener's LHO that made the overcall.
>
>JN: [rest of article deleted for obvious reasons]
>
Oops! Forgot to tell everybody that I get a special handicap when
declarer -- I have the choice of interchanging the opponents holdings
after the opening lead. :-)

    ====Jack====
From: bs@fatima.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: play
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:04:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: linus.1992Apr15.140442.23646
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA

In article <1992Apr14.055759.11019@ucc.su.OZ.AU> mike@archsci.arch.su.oz.au writes:
:Re playing of:
:
:Ax        Q10
:AK9       Q10xxx
:KJ98      10x
:J9xx      AK10x
:
:spade lead.
:
:There is 1S, possibly 2D losers as most certainly E has those cards for
:his overcall. If you take the club finesse and it loses - you go down.
 
With 7 spades, it is unclear as to what outside cards E holds. [West has
an obvious doubleton on the lead]

:
:The simplest way is to bank on 3-2 trump break and no worse than 4-2 clubs.
 
4-2 clubs??  They only have 5 clubs between them. And a 4-1 break doesn't
matter if E holds the stiff and both diamonds.

:Take the spade A, and give up two diamonds by club to CQ and lead D10 - 
						        ^
I assume you mean A or K.

:after next spade win return and give up another diamond.
:Draw trumps ending in N and cash. 5H, 1S, 2D, 2C.


This is close, but not quite the best line. I got some private email
and only 2 people have found the best line.

The above line runs an extra risk of a club ruff, even if clubs are 3-2.

The best line is simple. Win A spades and immediately lead a low diamond
to the 10, planning on losing 2 diamonds and a spade.

We'll assume that whoever has the Q wins. If RHO assume he leads clubs.
If LHO he can't lead clubs without giving a free finesse. 
[But it's not really relevent, since you don't need it].



Win the club, draw 2 rounds of trumps, leaving an honor in dummy, and
give up another diamond. RHO wins and leads another club. If he also
had 4 clubs and LHO has the 3rd heart they can get a club ruff, but since
RHO advertised spade length it is unlikely he has 4 clubs as well.

If RHO started with a stiff club, he will win A diamonds and now must 
lead a diamond or a major, either of which is fine.

The only danger with this line is that RHO might have total garbage.
IF LHO has both diamonds, and RHO a stiff club they can get a club ruff.
[I think this unlikely]


Win the club [or other return], lead a trump to dummy and pitch your
club losers on diamonds.

The full hand:

	Ax
	AK9
	KJ9x
	J9xx

8x		KJ9xxxx
Jxx		xx
xxxx		AQx
Qxxx		x

	Q10
	Q10xxx
	10x
	AK10x

Winning the A spades and leading a low diamond clearly works.

The line suggested above works too, but would not work if East held:

KJ9xxxx
xx
Qx
xx

You lose to Q diamonds, they cash a spade and lead a club. You win and
give up a diamond. LHO wins and gives partner a club ruff.

It would not cost anything to draw two rounds of trumps before giving
up the 2nd diamond in the line suggested by the prior post.

--
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: nair@astro.ufl.edu (Nair)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: 2 Problems (IMPS)
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:34:55 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Astronomy, Univ. of Florida
Originator: nair@quasar


 IMPS against a BAD team.

 1.) With both vul.

 7x
 AQ10xx
 AKJx
 Kx

 Auction :

 You    LHO    Pard   RHO
 1H     2C      2S     P
 3D     P       3S

 Given that you don't play negative free bids, I think the percentage
 bid is 4S.  Of course that's a bid I would make with my partners
 these days.  But I think the right bid definitely is 3NT, saying :
 I have 1 stopper with exactly the hand shown.  So if he/she doesn't
 have a stopper he/she should pull it out to 4S.  I've shown 2 suits
 & I can't practically have clubs doubled stopped & bid 3NT (If I
 don't have 2 spades 3NT may not make).

 2.)  Play problem.  Both vul.

      Ax
      AK9
      KJ98
      J9xx
      +
      Q10
      Q10xxx
      10x
      AK10x

 1NT   2S   3H   P
 4H all pass.

 Why can't the 1NT opener bid 3S to try for 3NT?  Seems routine to
 me.  As far as the play goes, E is short somewhere & for no reason
 at all, I assume it is hearts.  Go up with spade A, cash the HA, play
 the CJ to the CA (covered or not) & hook the H9.  For the DA, E is
 the favorite.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Damo Nair
Dept. of Astronomy
Univ. of Florida
nair@astro.ufl.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: hamilton@siberia.rtp.dg.com (Eric Hamilton)
Subject: Re: Problems from Pasadena
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 14:41:49 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC

In article <1992Apr6.011329.15094@pencom.com>, eric@pencom.com writes:
|> I have noticed that in the following sequence :
|> 
|> 
|> 1H  P  2D  4C
|> P   P  4S
|> 
|> That almost everyone thinks 4S is non-forcing.

Yep.

|> 
|> What does parner have to do to get you to bid when he has 6-5
|> in diamonds and spades?  Get out his cattle prod?
|> 
|> Besides, why don't people think :
|> 
|>  	QJT - AJ7xx - Kxx - Jx
|> 
|> Is a good hand?

It is.  Just no better than you've already shown.  You did open this puppy,
didn't you?

|> If partner is 6-5 in diamonds and hearts, slam is so
|> close to reality, I don't see why people keep WANTING to
|> pass.  Your holding in hearts is excellent opposite shortness.
|> Why not give partner the benefit of the doubt and take simple
|> preference?

Because this is matchpoints.
If you leave 4S for 6D, and it makes, you gain 1/2 MP against the pairs in
4S, and do not change your position relative to any other results.
If you leave 4S for 6D, and it doesn't make, you lose a full matchpoint to
all the other pairs (except the other kamikaze slammers) and half a matchpoint
to the 4S bidders.
If you leave 4S for 5D, you lose 1/2 MP against the pairs in 4S, and do not
change your position relative to any other results.

Something else to remember - your partner is aware of these considerations as
well.  There are more hands in which he will want to offer a choice of games
than to initiate a slam search.  And it seems fairly clear that his only
choice-of-games call on this sequence is 4S.  Thus, partner may have stretched
to bid 4S, in the pass-out seat.  Don't hang him for it.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Hamilton				+1 919 248 6172
Data General Corporation		hamilton@dg-rtp.rtp.dg.com
62 Alexander Drive			...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!hamilton
Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA
From: reiher@crim.ca (Eric Reiher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Rules about psychs?
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:55:56 GMT
Organization: Centre de recherche informatique de Montreal


Playing five cards majors, if you open with only four, it's not considered
a psych.
How about if you play 4 cards major and open with 3?

-- 
Eric Reiher
reiher@bond.crim.ca
Montreal, Canada
From: doug@cm.deakin.OZ.AU (Douglas Newlands)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 1S, 2S, or 2NT?
Date: 9 Apr 92 11:26:58 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computing & Mathematics, Deakin University, Australia

In article <rlqpdINNn4p@cs.utexas.edu: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
:I was recently rereading Kit Woolsey's _Matchpoints_ and found
:AJ93 A3 A42 KQJ9.  You open 1C, partner responds 1H.  Your bid?
:
:Every time a 4-[2,3]-[3,2]-4 hand with 18-19 HCP comes up,
:somebody asks "Why not bid 2NT?  Partner can check back with
:3C."  The answer is in two parts.  First, this is *far* from
:standard.  Second, there are good reasons why many of us
:consider it inferior to both alternatives.
:
:-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
And of course there are the 4 card major+weak NT players who
just open 1S and wonder what all the discussion is about on a 
hand which is trivial to bid using simple methods.
You open 1S partner responds
      1NT : you bid 3NT
      2C  : you bid 4C forcing tho with 3A this is going to stutter.
      2D  : you bid 2NT, flat and game forcing
		can't be flat and weak or you'd have opened 1NT
		can't be weak with 5 cards since you'd rebid 2S
      2H  : as for 2D
      2S  : you bid 3NT showing game values but only 4 spades
      2N  : this is normally a conventional fit showing raise
	     so cue or whatever you do.
If partner has 5 of a red suit and 4C he'll bid 3C over 2N so
you can't miss the club fit.
The corollary to all this is that if the auction goes 1C-1H-1S
partner is definitely 5+C and 4+S.
Something is definitely wrong with a bidding system where a common
handshape like this leaves it with no obviously correct bid.

   __
  |  \     __             __   _     __     __
  |   \   /   \   |   |  /  \   |    __\   (
  |   /   |   |   |   |  \__/   |   /   |   \
  |__/    \__ /   \__/|   __|  _|_  \__/|  __) o
From: "michael benveniste" <michael.benveniste@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: not another jihad
Date: 10 Apr 92 22:32:06 EST
Reply-To: "michael benveniste" <michael.benveniste@channel1.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

This is not a reply to any specific postings on unlimited conventions, but rather some observations from an ex-duplicate and money player.

First, I think the ACBL is overly conservative.  When a convention
achieves the popularity of the Multi-2D, it's well past time to
permit it at the sectional and regional levels.  There is plenty of
source information on how to defend.  Of course, look at the
organization you're dealing with.  Does the ACBL have a PC-based
program for club use yet?  They didn't in 1990.  Bidding Boxes?
Too complicated.  Some sort of way to find a club game, possibly
through a phone response system?  Forget it.

OTOH, the barriers of entry for a beginner are high enough as is.
Even chess is easier, since you can show up alone at a chess club and
not be treated like a leper.  While I'm not a good enough chess player
to make a valid comparison, it seems easier to defend against an offbeat
chess opening than, say, a forcing pass system.

There are two other reasons I oppose unlimited conventions.  First, the
game takes too damn long as is.  An evening weekday duplicate puts me in
bed at midnight.  If I come to a table were a pair is playing a new
approach, I think it's only fair for me and my partner to get a few
minutes to figure out how to defend against it.  But is it fair to
delay the game each time someone shows up at that table?

Second, I hate to broach the subject, but I walked away from a regular
money game because the artificial system the opponents were using lent
itself to cheating.  If the hands that came around fit the system, the
auction went quickly and predictably.  However, when the hands didn't
quite fit, it was fairly easy to interpret the hesitations.  And sorry,
no matter how ethical a player is, you can't unring the bell.  Improper
inferences were taken, and I fully believe they became a part of the
system.  There is no way I could reach as accurate conclusions as the
people using the system, even though I was legally entitled to take
inferences and they weren't.  This problem is at its worst when a
comparitively inexperienced partnership is trying out their latest
gimmick.

In short, the communication system you and your partner use should
convey just as much information, if not more, to your opponents.
If, because of time restraints or partnership agreements, that is
not the case, then the system should not be allowed.
---
  DeLuxe 1.21 #10918  Sleep is the opiate of the proletariat
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Myerson)
Subject: Re: hesitating with a singleton
Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth, RI
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 12:31:43 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.183647.29084@leland.Stanford.EDU> daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao) writes:

DS: Suppose partner has made an opening lead in a suit in which you have
DS: a singleton, and your usual practice is to spend a few moments
DS: studying the dummy.  Declarer plays a card almost immediately after
DS: seeing the dummy.  Do you have to play the singleton at the 
DS: fastest pace at which you play a card, or can you take your usual
DS: time after the opening lead?

You may take your time. If prodded by an impatient declarer, just say
"I need just a few seconds to study the dummy and plan the defense."
You may want to get in the habit of taking the same amount of
time when defending.

DS: It seems to me that if you must play as fast as possible, you
DS: automatically tell both partner and declarer what you holding is
DS: if they are familiar with your habits.
DS: 
DS: It also seems to me that later in the play there can be situations
DS: where allowing pauses would minimize the inferences that a defender
DS: could draw about his partner's holdings.  For instance, if declarer
DS: plays two rounds of trump, partner capturing the second round, and
DS: you started with two trumps, then a pause by partner would always
DS: imply he has at least one more.  And why would he want to pause with
DS: only one card left?  Perhaps he wants to think about his discards
DS: should declarer run the rest of the trumps.  But my understanding
DS: about the rules is that one can never pause later in the play when
DS: you have no choice about which card to play.

Cards should always be played in the same tempo.
If you have one card remaining in a suit, and declared leads that suit,
but you want to think for a minute, place your card face down on
the table (in tempo), do your thinking, and then turn your card over.
This way, it will be obvious that you are not thinking about which card
to play, but rather about something else (such as, Should I return partner's
suit when I get in? Why did I double? Where should we go for dinner? etc).

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
From: davidm@rutabaga.Rational.COM (David Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Can you beat 3 NT ?
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:06:34 GMT

Ach, wrong again. On two grounds. Firstly, partner playing the spade Q on round
2 does not help: you are still squeezed. Secondly, either declarer has misplayed
the hand or else he has only 1 spade. It looks like partner's club 8 was
real and declarer really does have 5 clubs. My original hypothesis of 
declarer being 4432 was wrong.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Reverse Redux
From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 23:56:10 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

ttw@beta.lanl.gov (Tony Warnock) writes:
: What should one bid in the following situation:
:
:                South     S: KQJx
:                          H: xx
:                          D: xxx
:                          C: xxxx
:
: The bidding has gone:   North          South
:
:                         1 club         1 spade
:                         2 hearts         ???
:
:
: This is a follow-up to the case where North bid 2 diamonds.

3C WTP?

Avi














Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Myerson)
Subject: Re: *My* Thoughts on the Jihad and ACBL
Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth, RI
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 12:27:52 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.011847.20272@linus.mitre.org> bs@fatima.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:

BS: [...many other article numbers and authors deleted]
BS:
BS: This isn't even half of it. Perhaps the most frequent form of
BS: cheating is the "wire".  You are in a room with 200+ tables,
BS: all playing the same pairs event. If you listen carefully you
BS: can hear the conversations at the other table, e.g.
BS: 
BS: "Making 4. Yes, I know a diamond lead beats it."
BS: 
BS: You come upon that board [you know the boards from the table no.]
BS: and lo and behold you [or partner] leads a diamond!!
BS:  
BS: In other words, in close quarters it is easy to pick up conversations
BS: [and hence results] at other tables.
BS:  
BS: How many times have you seen opponents make miraculous [and
BS: non-logical] leads or plays? Or miraculous and peculiar auctions
BS: that lead to an optimal contract not reached elsewhere.
BS: 
BS: [...rest of Bob's article deleted]

I agree with Bob on this one. It happens at club games frequently.
One of the worst ones I can remember is when my partner and I found
and made a 28 pt spade slam. When we opened the traveller, we found
the first four pairs were all in 4S making 6. Well, North said,
"Ok, 6 spades, making 6, 980, your pair number?".
Needless to say, every pair that played the board after us
also reached 6S.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
From: vlucht@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (vlucht)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: leading
Date: 16 Apr 92 07:34:33 GMT
Organization: Academic Computer Centre Utrecht

In <1992Apr16.014602.27831@ucc.su.OZ.AU> mike@archsci.arch.su.oz.au writes:

>If your card states that you overlead and you lead Q from KQx is this
>cheating or (since you have fooled partner too) its ok. This situation
>came up at the club last week;

Of course this is perfectly legal.

>I was in 6H. the QS was led and dummy had AJ10xx in spades and I had xx.
>Entries in to dummy were short and I needed a discard on the spades.
>I ducked the first spade and a small spade was then led. What now?

This duck does not sound too hot to me. Why not win and return a spade?
Even when dummys entries are scarce this is not too bad, as you will
only need one. (I am presuming you don't have the spade 9, but will
only need one discard).
Which card DID you play on the second round of spades anyway?

>actually the leader had KQx. If the K is led it can be ducked and a
>finnesse taken against the Q and a discard on the A.

>Is the lead illegal? or are you allowed to lead anything. In this case I
>don't think it was cheating. The opposition was pretty feeble but it worked.

>In general can you attempt to mislead declarer in this way if you mislead
>partner as well? If your card says leads 4th highest can you lead 5th or 3rd.

As long as you don't do it regularly with partner taking the possibility into
account while planning his/her defense, nothing illegal. The point is that you
cannot have agreements, either explicit or implicit, that the opposition does
not know about.

---
Maurits van der Vlugt			Voice: +31 30534559
Faculty of geographical sciences	Fax:   +31 30540604
University of Utrecht			Email: vlucht@cc.ruu.nl
P.O. Box 80115
3508 TC  Utrecht
The Netherlands

***************************************************************************