HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Assess the blame
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:08:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.215151.23230@leland.Stanford.EDU> altus@leland.Stanford.EDU (Steve Altus) writes:
:In article <65965@apadravya.princeton.edu> bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing) writes:
 
stuff deleted....
:that's fine ben, but if you ARE going to play off-shape takeout doubles
:you need some methods over them;  i'm sure bo-yin has them but i doubt
:most people who just randomly say, "oh, i'll double on any old hand" do;
:you really need a way to bid on the east hand here, and if you play either
:some kind of leb. or transfer responses or something, that's fine.  saying
:that Bob is wrong, scared of bad results, or lost in the past b/c of the
:methods HE uses is wrong and totally uncalled for.
 
Indeed. On some occasions I use a system called ADOS [for active defensive
overcalls]. All overcalls [including NT] and direct cuebids are limited
to 6-13 HCP. You double on any hand of 14+ HCP and any shape. But it
uses EXCLUSION non-jump responses by partner and transfer jump responses.
[among other things]

The method was invented by Kris Bhavnani, a New England area expert and
known as a bidding theorist.

The advantage of using disciplined takeout doubles is that responder is
always able to bid KNOWING that there is a fit. This gives responder
much more freedom to respond competitively. Playing power doubles
can lead to disasters when responder bids in the doubler's short suit.
The law of total tricks is VERY relevent here.
--
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"
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steven G. Myerson)
Subject: Re: Offshape doubles
Keywords: double, free bid.
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:17:42 GMT

Kevin Podsiadlik writes:

*[Matchpts. South dlr., E-W game]
*          West               East
*          AQ94               3
*          AQT9               62
*          K                  QT9865
*          A642               9853
* 
*                   (P)       P
* (1H)     X        (2H)      3D
*
*  [rest of bidding to 5C doubled deleted]

There has been much discusion about this hand and
certainly quite a wide range of opinions, to say the least.

Changing the topic slightly,
does anyone use a Lebensohl-type bid in this sequence?

By this I mean, after (1M) - X - (2M) - 2N,
where 2N is a transfer to 3C, the start of a Lebensohl sequence.
What you lose is the ability to bid a natural 2N,
but how often will this come up?

On this hand it would have been useful,
but is it practical to play it this way?

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: What's the best bid?
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:35:22 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

In article <1993Jan24.145929.11614@ramon.bgu.ac.il> nimrod@black.bgu.ac.il (nimrod gal-oz) writes:
>paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson) writes:
>: In article <1j7csaINNocu@im4u.cs.utexas.edu> varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
>: >   S: --   H: Q x x   D: A x x   C: A 9 6 5 4 3 2
>: >Partner opens the bidding:
>: >   Pard   RHO    Me     LHO
>: >   1C(1)  Pass   2C(2)  2D
>: >   2H(3)  Pass   3D     Pass
>: >   3NT    Pass   ??
>: >
>: >(1) Will never be 12-14 balanced.
>: >(2) Inverted.  In principle 9+ HCP, but frequently shaded because
>: >    of exciting distribution.  Kaplan's rule is, would you rather
>: >    be in game or not opposite a strong notrump?
>: >(3) Heart stopper, 15+ HCP, 4+ clubs.
>: ... Under the circumstances described
>: where the partnership is already a little uncertain as to exactly what
>: various bids mean I'll just bid what I think I can make, 6C. This will range
>: from having no play (very rare) to having a decent play for 7 (also rare).
>: I figure that it will make at least 12 tricks far more than 50% of the time
>: (the lead is running up to partners hand which should be to the good).
>:
>
>On what grounds do you base your assumption that the you have at least 12 tricks
>on far more then 50% of the time?
>what about this hand ( and many more )?

While I haven't run it through a hand generator it just seems intuitively
likely that partner has a decent fitting hand. Since I can easily construct
hands consistent with the bidding where we're virtually cold for the grand (eg

QTx
AKxx
Kx
KQxx

my intuition (based on less experience and ability than Bob!) says that a
small slam is a good bet. No guarantee, obviously. I can easily construct
hands where it is wrong just as you did.

>
>KQJ
>AKx
>QJx
>Jxxx
>
>pard had strongly indicated some values in spades with his 3NT bid. I don't think
>You would like to play a slam in this case.

Clearly not, but note that with this hand with 6 wasted points in spades and
no club values (despite the fact that partner has both points and at least
4/6 of the outstanding clubs) all that I need to make 6C is the spade hook
and a 1/1 club split (admittedly probably not there in this auction). Change
the QJ of diamonds to the king and 6C is a fine contract needing only the
clubs to split.
From: doug@cm.deakin.OZ.AU (Douglas Newlands)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 2/1 question
Date: 27 Jan 1993 06:57:33 GMT
Organization: Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: aragorn.cm.deakin.oz.au

In article <C1H4qI.FED@news.cso.uiuc.edu: nateward@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (ward nathaniel) writes:
:jose@duke.edu (Greg Lawler) writes:
:
:>    K x x x   A x   x x  A K Q x x
:
:>Excuse me for suggesting a reactionary idea, but how about a jump shift
:>in clubs (strong) followed by a raise in spades.
: 
: I also agree that 3C is by far the BEST bid with this hand, the only
: problem is that many tournament players are unable to do this.  Either they
: play Bergen raises, WJS, or assign some other conventional meaning to 3C.

This discussion is getting too tied up with this one particular hand. You must
also examine how your system handles hands which are similar to this one. The
above hand is a poor test since partner can only rarely tell you he has
anything useful in clubs but change it to

Kxxx Ax xx AQTxx

and now you are nowhere near strong enough to bid 3C, and to fail to bid the
club suit is to fail to understand why you are bidding - you have got to find
out what your club fit is like if you are to sensibly approach a slam.
For those not playing 2/1 there is a third option between weak and strong jump
shifts. The FIT SHOWING JUMP which shows primary trump support, at least 1
honor to 5 in the jump suit and at least invitational values. 
Partner responds as he does to long suit trials:-
1 return to 3 of major - no fit in FSJ suit, minimum.
2 4 of major - no fit in FSJ suit, better than minimum.
3 raise of FSJ suit - minimum but has fitting honor in FSJ suit - this is now
gf due to double fit.
4 step bid - relay - good hand, invent your own sequence!
5 new suit - cue, not minimum, fit in FSJ suit.
6 3NT - fit in FSJ suit, not minimum but no cue available.

It's great when it comes up but I'm bound to say its not super-frequent, only
3 in 280 hands last time I played.
In a non 2/1 gf and 4 card major system like I often play it means that
failure to raise the first time denies 4 card support (I used 2N as a raise as
well).

doug.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding after a t/o double
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:02:20 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1993Jan25.071235.14923@smds.com> rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:
>In article <1993Jan24.222142.1584@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan24.191124.5033@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
>>>You hold:   AQ  AKTx  x  AQJT7x
>>>Matchpoints
>>>RHO  You  LHO  Pard
>>>1S    X    P    2H
>>>P     ?

>>In any event, I now bid 4H. What's the problem? You certainly can't
>>be thinking of more with 4 losers. If partner has 2 or 3 cover cards
>>he will move over 4H.

>Evidently this is a matter of assessment.  Now me, I would expect the
>slam to be an odds on favorite if partner has Qxxxx in hearts and
>nothing else.  With 20 pts in this hand, 2 in partners, 12+ in openers,
>and 6- in in LHO, who is more likely to have the KC?  I would view
>the real question as being -- does partner have adequate hearts?  I
>would bid 2S with the view to giving partner a chance to rebid hearts.
>[Assuming that 2S is a cue bid.]  On the sequence 2H-2S-3H you have a
>fair presumption that partner has 5H,

You have a fair presumption of nothing of the sort.  Try xxxxx xxx xxx xx.
Responder's proper response is 2H.  Over the cuebid, many people (including
Bob, if I remember correctly) play the rebid of the first suit (hearts) as
showing inability to do anything else, and play 3D as showing something
like 4-4 or 4-5 in hearts and diamonds.  In any case, without discussion
I wouldn't take 3H as confirming even four hearts, not to mention five.

There's a principle here.  When one partner forces in a situation where
the other may not have prepared a rebid, either *all* of responder's bids
carry reduced meaning or some subset (usually one) must.  Worldwide, the
almost universal choice for a "bailout" bid is the return to the first
suit bid by the partnership.  Thus, for instance, with xxxx x AKQx KQxx
you deal and the bidding goes 1D (1S) 2H (P); 3C (P) 3S.  3NT shows a
stopper in spades, a heart raise shows hearts, 4C shows 5-5 or 6-5 and
4D shows at least 5 diamonds.  Bid 4D.  While you really should have five,
there is no other bid.  Partner shouldn't count on *this bid* for much.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Subject: Re: Assess the blame
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:57:39 GMT

In article <C16n12.LE8@ais.org> hampton@ais.org (Kevin Podsiadlik) writes:
>Pairs
>E-W vul (naturally)

I presume that North is the dealer or the E/W hands were switched

>South dealer	
>          West               East
>          AQ94               3
>          AQT9               62
>          K                  QT9865
>          A642               9853
> 
>                   (P)       P
> (1H)     X        (2H)      3D
>          3NT                4D
>          4S                 5C
>          P        (X)*
>Assess the blame.

110% west (for the original double, the 3NT bid, and the 4S bid), 100% east
(for the 4D bid and the 5C bid, I LIKE the 3D bid). (both were atrocious,
west was worse).
From: grove@triangle.Berkeley.EDU (Eddie Grove)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: two simple sequences
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:34:43 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: triangle.berkeley.edu


Consider the defensive bidding sequence

(1D) - 1S -  P - 2D*
       2H        2N

* in the modern style, new suits are not forcing, so 2D is used
for most decent hands

How does this differ from an immediate 2N?  Is it a difference
of hcp?  Are the points the same, but direct 2N shows better
diamonds?  Does either sequence promise or deny 2 spades or
3 spades?


Consider this offensive sequence

1N - 2C
2S - 3S

Responder, when bidding 2C, needed to have enough strength
to play in 2N if s/he did not find a fit.  When you add a
4-4 fit to the strength to play 2N, it seems to me that
you have the strength to play game in the major.

For example, when playing 2/1 forcing to 2N, the auction
1S - 2C; 2H - 3H is generally played as forcing.

Doesn't it make sense to define the raise by Staymaner as forcing?
It only gains you that 3H is not needed as an artificial raise,
but why give a sequence a meaning that makes it almost never used?

Eddie Grove
From: rh@smds.com (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding after a t/o double
Date: 26 Jan 93 06:10:41 GMT
Reply-To: rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Organization: Software Maintenance & Development Systems, Inc.

In article <lm8apcINN16p@cypress.cs.utexas.edu> varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.071235.14923@smds.com> rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes:

>>[Assuming that 2S is a cue bid.]  On the sequence 2H-2S-3H you have a
>>fair presumption that partner has 5H,

>You have a fair presumption of nothing of the sort.  Try xxxxx xxx xxx xx.
>Responder's proper response is 2H.  Over the cuebid, many people (including
>Bob, if I remember correctly) play the rebid of the first suit (hearts) as
>showing inability to do anything else, and play 3D as showing something
>like 4-4 or 4-5 in hearts and diamonds.  In any case, without discussion
>I wouldn't take 3H as confirming even four hearts, not to mention five.

Good point.  If those are your methods then there is no inference.  It
may be antique but I much prefer NT as the bailout.  E.g. 1S x p 1NT
and 1S x p 2H, p 2S p 2NT; I would rather give up NT than lie about my
distribution in a competitive auction.  Be that as it may, it is 
certainly true that one can't make inferences without prior discussion.


-- 
Richard Harter: SMDS Inc.  Net address: rh@smds.com Phone: 508-369-7398 
US Mail: SMDS Inc., PO Box 555, Concord MA 01742.    Fax: 508-369-8272
In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: geppo@spot.wustl.edu (Giuseppe Bianchi)
Subject: thanks
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:28:58 GMT

I'm sorry to use the net for a semi-private message, but I would like to
thank Eamonn for the detailed informations on the Carrot club system 
(I couldn't contact you via e-mail). Thanks also to Ben for the public
response (in particular for the interference stuff) and Soren for the 
addresses.

Giuseppe.

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: matthew@base.cs.ucla.edu (Matthew Merzbacher)
Subject: Re: bridge for the blind
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:40:09 GMT

henri@zircon.PHYSICS.ORST.EDU (henri jansen) writes:

> Any suggestions out there how to implement this in a regular game 
> in such a way that it does not interfere with the normal speed of the game?

I'll post my response, as well as mailing it to henri.

There are two approaches that I've seen for letting the blind play in
clubs.  Both involve the use of Braille cards, which are normal playing
cards that also have the suit and rank punched into them in Braille.
You can order Braille cards from various catalogs, or make your own using
a Braille typewriter (though this doesn't work as well, because:
   a. the cards are thicker
   b. the wax coating gets punctured, and the cards wear out faster

Anyhow, the two approaches are:
  1. Have a sighted friend sit with a sorted Braille deck at hand.
     When the deal occurs (or the hand is removed from the board),
     the sighted person selects the corresponding cards from the 
     Braille deck.  The sighted person does the same for dummy (or
     can call out what's in dummy, if you prefer).  If you have
     three or four Braille decks on hand, this doesn't even take
     much time.  You have to resort the decks after each round.
  
  2. Buy a bunch of Braille decks (27, or whatever) and just use them
     instead of normal cards.  This works, but is expensive.  You may
     also have to get special big boards that can accommodate the thicker
     cards.
--

Matthew Merzbacher	ARPA:	matthew@CS.UCLA.EDU
Moo - Moo Moo  		UUCP:	...!{uunet|rutgers|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!matthew
               		This time, *with* the oys
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: oldera@twg.com (Ed Alcoff)
Subject: Re: bridge for the blind
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:09:17 GMT

Here in the Bay Area, we have an elderly gent who
is blind and plays duplicate regularly.  He brings
is own braille (sp?) cards and the club uses them
(minor complaints because the braille cards aren't
as nice as the club's cards and they don't fit well
into the boards).

All played cards are called out for Fred by his
partner  (if Fred is the declarer) and/or by the
person playing the card.  Sometimes/usually, Fred will
need a review of what cards remain in dummy.  Fred is
usually cognizent that he may be delaying the game and
he tends not to spend a lot of times on decisions.

I do admire him for his intellect and memory- I don't
think I could do that and I hope I never have to; keeping
tracl of cards is hard enough with my eyes fully functional.
From: rh@smds.com (Richard Harter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding after a t/o double
Date: 25 Jan 93 07:12:35 GMT
Reply-To: rh@ishmael.UUCP (Richard Harter)
Organization: Software Maintenance & Development Systems, Inc.

In article <1993Jan24.222142.1584@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>In article <1993Jan24.191124.5033@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
>>You hold:   AQ  AKTx  x  AQJT7x
>>Matchpoints
>>RHO  You  LHO  Pard
>>1S    X    P    2H
>>P     ?
>>
>>Your plan?  I don't want to hear if you didn't double the first time,
>>because then you are playing in 2C and it's not even a play problem.

>Now this hand and club suit IS good enough to double, then bid clubs
>over a diamond response from partner. I absolutely agree with a double
>here. Contrast it with the previous hand.

>In any event, I now bid 4H. What's the problem? You certainly can't
>be thinking of more with 4 losers. If partner has 2 or 3 cover cards
>he will move over 4H.

Evidently this is a matter of assessment.  Now me, I would expect the
slam to be an odds on favorite if partner has Qxxxx in hearts and
nothing else.  With 20 pts in this hand, 2 in partners, 12+ in openers,
and 6- in in LHO, who is more likely to have the KC?  I would view
the real question as being -- does partner have adequate hearts?  I
would bid 2S with the view to giving partner a chance to rebid hearts.
[Assuming that 2S is a cue bid.]  On the sequence 2H-2S-3H you have a
fair presumption that partner has 5H, and the only question is whether
to bid 5H, begging partner to go to 6, or go 6H directly on the view
that the hand is a 4H/6H hand.  On a 2H-2S-2NT sequence I would go
4H -- now there are too many holes and partner needs to take the next
move.  Do you disagree that Qxxxx or better in partner's hand is an
odds on slam?  If you do agree, do you expect partner to bid over
2H-4H?  If not, do you feel that this is a slam "well worth missing"?

By the by, it makes all the difference in the world (IMHO) what
partner's hearts are.  If partner has Jxxxx and nothing outside
you only 4H on a 3-1 heart split (no entries off the board).  The
other issue is partners clubs -- x is bad, xx or xxx is good.  On
the sequence, 2H-2S-3H-4C-4H-5H you're telling partner that you're
close to slam in support of hearts and that you're interested in
clubs.  On that sequence how will partner read xx,QJxxx,xxx,xxx?
-- 
Richard Harter: SMDS Inc.  Net address: rh@smds.com Phone: 508-369-7398 
US Mail: SMDS Inc., PO Box 555, Concord MA 01742.    Fax: 508-369-8272
In the fields of Hell where the grass grows high
Are the graves of dreams allowed to die.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 2S X play question
From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 03:37:09 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
: Here's a hand that was sent to me by a former rgb regular.
:
:      QT7    984   A743   842
:
:      A9853  J62   KQ6    K8
:
: You reach 2SX on the following auction:
:
: 1S  P  1N*  X      of the forcing variety
: P   P  2H   X
: P   P  2S   P
: P   X  all pass
:
This is an intersting problem. It seems that W has
KJxx, xx(x), xx(x), QJxx.  If you cross with the K of diamonds to lead
spades, E will win, play on hearts and discard the last diamond on the
4th round of hearts (is makes no difference if he has 2 hearts and 3 diamonds
or vice versa) when you ruff with the 5.  Now you can cash the Q of Spades,
but have no way back to hand without giving up another spade trick.
It does not help to lead hearts from dummy, since E will win, and play
club, forcing you to ruff, and when you play spades, W will win, play hearts,
again forcing you to ruff in hand on the 4th round.

The only hope then, which is also consitent with the bidding, is to hope
diamonds are 3-3. Ruff a club, play 3 rounds of diamonds, and lead
hearts.  No matter what the defences does you will get 2 more tricks.

Avi
--
Aviel Roy-Shapira, M.D.         Ben-Gurion University Medical School
Dept. of Surgery A.             POB 151, Beer Sheva, Israel
avir@chen.bgu.ac.il             AVIR@BGUVM.BITNET
From: kgreen@tuvor.ee.rochester.edu (Kenton A. Green)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Mistake is sa-yc?
Date: 26 Jan 93 01:19:27 GMT
Reply-To: kgreen@tuvor.ee.rochester.edu (Kenton A. Green)
Organization: University of Rochester Department of Electrical Engineering

REgarding the recent post of the sa yellow card, under GENERAL APPROACH, it says
Normally open 10 with 4-4 in the minors.
            ^^^^
I have never seen the yellow card system, (I am a beginner) but what does 10 (ten) mean?
Should this say 1D maybe?

Thanks,

Kenton
-------------------------------------------
These opinions are held by everyone, and are NOT just my own.
-------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: jworley@gold.KPC.Com (John Worley - Consultant)
Subject: Proposal: reg.games.bridge Bidding Summaries & References
Keywords: bidding, conventions
Reply-To: jworley@gold.KPC.Com (John Worley - Consultant)
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:42:27 GMT


    Would anyone be interested in putting together a rec.games.bridge
collection of bidding systems, conventions and treaments? What I have
in mind is a formatted summary of bidding sequences plus suggested
references - no boasting or flames, just the facts. I am volunteering to coordinate the effort if other readers will help. If you are interested,
respond by e-mail with the system/convention/treatment you would like to contribute; constructive, competitive and defensive sequences are all
open to consideration.

				Regards,
				John Worley
				jworley@kpc.com
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bridge for the blind
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:32:12 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tornadic.sw.stratus.com

In article <1993Jan21.210917.21311@twg.com>, oldera@twg.com (Ed Alcoff) writes:
> Here in the Bay Area, we have an elderly gent who
> is blind and plays duplicate regularly.  He brings
> is own braille (sp?) cards and the club uses them
> (minor complaints because the braille cards aren't
> as nice as the club's cards and they don't fit well
> into the boards).

An alternative to using the Braille cards at all tables is to use
ordinary cards at all but the blind player's table.  Before calling
the move for the second round, the director distributes boards with
Braille cards and asks the players to duplicate the boards that they
just played.

This procedure is used for a player with very poor eyesight who
frequents club games and tournaments around Newton, but she uses giant
index cards rather than Braille cards.  She also asks players to
announce their cards and place the dummy as close as possible to her.

The whole procedure works quite smoothly.  With clear instructions
from the director, getting all the boards duplicated after the first
round takes only about five minutes.

-- 
Tim Hill
Stratus Computer, Inc.                  tnh@vos.stratus.com
55 Fairbanks Boulevard                  508-460-2232
Marlborough, MA  01752                  fax 508-624-7488