HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rainbow@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Rob Buchner)
Subject: Re: splinter with A/K
Organization: St Barts
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:23:10 GMT
Keywords: also 1H-P-2D-2S-?

> What is the r.g.b.consensus (is there) on splintering with
>
> a) Stiff Ace
> b) Stiff King
> c) Void

As many people have found out through real life experiences,
the problem with splintering with an A or K is partner will 
expect your values to be elsewhere and evaluate their fit 
accordingly. Worse, they will discount their own values in
the suit splintered when they may actually be working cards.
As a consequence you will often reach unmakeable slams and
also miss slams which are cold. Hence I usually don't do it.
If absolutely stuck for a bid, I may do it if I have sufficient
values outside of the splinter suit to still justify the bid
so if partner does get excited they won't be too disappointed.
But then I am also understating the full value of my hand.

However, if I have sufficient strength and plan to follow up 
the splinter bid with another cue-bid to show slam interest 
and pinpoint specific concerns, then it can be very useful.
And if partner's holding in the splinter suit is immaterial
to our slam prospects (ie I have my own source of tricks),
then I will go right ahead with the honor card splinter bid.

So, with minimum values I will not make an honor card splinter.
But with slam interest I will not preclude myself from making one.
It depends on my hand and how I evaluate the auction/bidding.

I will splinter with a void, and if my values are good enough,
I will proceed by cue-bidding the splinter suit to show my void.
Splintering with stiffs/void are very good descriptive bids.
It also has the side effect of showing good trump support which
is probably one of the most underrated concepts in bridge today.
I cannot stress how important it is to show good trump support.

As for holding Kx,AJT87x,QJxx,A (IMPs) with auction 1H-P-2D-2S-?,
I assume Standard American bidding. If a direct free bid of
3D is not forward going in your agreements, you could make
a forcing pass to see what else partner might have to say.
This allows partner room to show their values/distribution.
This makes sense if you plan on taking control of the hand.
3S is also a possibility intending to next show diamond
support and slam interest. But all of these choices could
leave you awkwardly placed. And I would never jump to 4D.

Interestingly, 4C is appealing because you can follow up
4D or 4H with a 4S cue-bid and leave partner in control,
clearly pinpointing the importance of his/her red suit 
holdings. Partner may then be in a position to keycard.
On this hand, partner's club cards are not relevant.
Partner, looking at the AK of diamonds and either a 
stiff heart or honor doubleton, will go on to slam.
Anything else and partner will not get too excited
(unless of course they have hidden heart support).
And that is what you really want to accomplish...
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: The Butler Scoring Method (was Re: Toronto Nationals selection #1)
Reply-To: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:17:23 GMT

grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.000818.9287@ramon.bgu.ac.il>, Avi Roy Shapira writes:

>> Unless you use a computer either a triangular or a gaussian curve is too
>> time consuming, and why should a gausian filter work any better is beyond
>> me. I guess that the object is to find some sort of a par score, but
>> your suggestion implies that scores would be normally distributed around
>> the par. I doubt that this is the case.  It is just as logical to take the
>> mode or median score. In fact, I susspect that the median score is probably
>> as close to par as it gets.

>The median will not make a good par because many boards have two or
>three principal results.  For example, if everyone in the room is in 4S,
>but only four of thirteen pairs make it, neither +620 nor -100 is a good
>par.

I dunno Dave -- if the intent is to simulate an IMP game, the ONLY two
acceptable pars are -100 and +620...

>David Grabiner, grabiner@zariski.harvard.edu

I think the median is an excellent par, especially if scores are
distrubuted the way you outlined.

Bharat


Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Life Master ?= expert
Date: 31 Aug 92 15:11:09 GMT
Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA



We all know the answer, of course, but here's a possibly amusing
illustration with a real question at the end.

The setting is the North America Open Pairs unit game.  Since my
regular partner was out of town, I had to face the partnership desk.
They suggested a 60-ish gentleman, who told me he was a life master
and questioned at length whether I had enough experience to play with
him.  As game time approached, though, he didn't have another choice,
so we bought an entry for Flight B (0-1500 MP).

Now put yourself in my partner's place.  Both vulnerable, you pick up
QJ9872 A73 J843 -- and hear me open 3C as dealer.  We have agreed to
play light preempts but "Be careful about going down too much when
vulnerable."  RHO passes.

1) What is the best call?
2) Is it different if you are a life master playing with an
unfamiliar partner?

I cannot imagine any call other than pass, but the life master bid
3S!  Furthermore, he informed me that "all over the world" the 3S bid
"had to be" a signoff.  Maybe he was right about my lack of
experience, but in more years than I care to admit to, I've never
heard of playing 3S as anything but forcing.  So my serious question
is this: does anyone advocate or play a new suit response to a
3-level preempt as a signoff?  Answers by email, please, and I'll
post a summary protecting anonymity of respondents.

For the truly depraved, the full auction was 3C-3S-4C-4D-(x)-4S-(x).
This went off 1100 for a zero, my hand being K5 96 T2 KQJT976.
-- 
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: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: bidding problem
Keywords: precision
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Distribution: rec
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:08:48 GMT

In article <BtK2Dy.2ut@me.utoronto.ca> zhang@me.utoronto.ca (Xiaodong Zhang) writes:
;South hand: S:X H:AQJxxx D:T9XXX C:x
;The bidding is:
;North	East	South	West
;                         1S
; X      Pass      ???
;
;What should south bid? 3h 4h or 2s? I bid 4h, and the bidding is:
 
4H is absolutely correct.

;
; N	E	S	W
;			1S
; X	P	4h	P
; P	X	P	P

You should REDOUBLE, not pass.

; 5C	X	5D	X
; P	P	P
;
;The hand are:
;		North S:KJx
;		      H:x
;		      D:Axx
;		      C:AKQxxx
 
rest deleted. Your partner lost his mind. 

(1) With length in the opponents suit and a stiff heart and a 5 loser
hand, South is not good enough to double and bid clubs later, but it is
a close decision. It is only slightly wrong, if at all. I personally
would only overcall 2C because KJx spades are defensive, rather than offensive
cards.

(2) Pulling 4H to 5C is crazy, however. Partner's jump to 4H shows a good
6 card suit. There is no reason to expect partner to have ANY clubs and
hence no reason to believe 5C is better. This hand, having made the decision
to double originally should sit. However, if partner had redoubled 4H
originally, this hand would not have to think about what to do.

--
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: olle@astro.uu.se (Olof Morell)
Subject: Re: bidding problem
Organization: UDAC, Uppsala, Sweden
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:11:42 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.110238.28541@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug26.092214.8796@corax.udac.uu.se> olle@astro.uu.se (Olof Morell) writes:
|> :In article <1580@idacrd.UUCP>, desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
|> :|> Robert D. Silverman <bs@gauss.mitre.org> writes:
|> :|> >(2) Pulling 4H to 5C is crazy, however. Partner's jump to 4H shows a good
|> :|> >6 card suit.
|> :|> 
|> :|> I don't understand this at all.  What would you bid over 1S-X-P with
|> :|> xxx/KTxxx/Ax/AQx ?  I can't imagine bidding anything but 4H.
|> :
|> :I don't se the reason to blast 4H on this hand, why not bid 2S and follow-up
|> :with 3H, giving partner a chance to describe his hand, 3NT may well be
|>  
|> Cuebidding 2S then bidding hearts shows much more in HCP and less shape.
|> Jumping to game shows a good suit with shape and fewer HCP.
|> 
|> One would bid 2S then hearts with the hand David asked about. With a

Sorry for perhaps having been unclear, this is what I meant! I was
referring to Davids hand, and I completely agree with you on this one,
Bob.


*** Olle ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail - Olle.Morell@astro.uu.se

Snail Mail - Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 1+1
Date: 27 Aug 1992 19:21:44 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

In article <1992Aug27.184535.29112@Princeton.EDU> spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:
>In article <17hi91INNcck@overload.lbl.gov>, asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) writes:
>>it.  Well, that's not really true.  You can start another whining string
>>of postings about it, but there is nothing you can do to change it.

>>people's time then, deliberately, and I can see how that would
>>push some people's buttons.

>Care to clarify, Asya?  First you say that you can't control what other
>people post and you should just give up trying to change them.  Then you
>bitch about how people are wasting your time with posts you consider
>inappropriate, with a strong implication (IMO) that such articles should
>be eliminated.  If there are no rules, then how can something be
>inappropriate?  Which is it?  If I were in your position, I would want
>to make my statements more precise.

Is English not your native language?  What's not clear?

First I say that the only thing you can do about posts you don't like is
bitch and moan about them.  Then I bitch and moan about posts *I* don't
like.  

WTP?

>Besides, the only responses I've seen to non-expert-type questions are
>flames.  Haven't seen anyone offer any book titles (although Bob gave me
>one or two in e-mail which I'll look for)

Well, then you haven't been reading very long.  There have been LOOOONNNGGG
articles posted in the past citing various sources that people can use.

Maybe it should be reposted every week.
-- 
"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: h75@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Henk Uijterwaal)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Thursday's results from Salsomaggiore
Date: 28 Aug 92 08:28:46 GMT
Reply-To: h75@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Henk Uijterwaal)
Followup-To: rec.games.bridge
Organization: Nikhef-H, Amsterdam (the Netherlands).

Men (After 14 of 29 rounds).
===

    Group A                              Group B
    =======                              =======
 1. Denmark            14-262 VP's    1. THE NETHERLANDS  14-273.5 VP's *
 2. Belgium               255         2. USA                 267
 3. Austria               252         3. Iceland             254.5
 4. Hong Kong             251         4. Pakistan            250
 5. Israel                248         5. Norway              249.6 
 6. Brazil                241         6. France              248
 7. Greece                239         7. Sweden              247
    Egypt                 239         8. Turkey              245
                                    
* The Dutch lost the appeal against Indonesia, so the result of that match
  remains 13-17. Yesterday they scored 20-10 against the CIS, 22-8 against
  Chinese Taipei and 12-18 against the USA. Today they will play Pakistan, 
  France and Sweden. 

Women (after 19 of 34 rounds).
=====

   Group A                               Group B
   =======                               =======
1. Austria             19-337 VP's    1. Great Britain    19-360 VP's
2. China                  336         2. Sweden              358
3. Germany                334.5       3. France              347  
4. Japan                  329         4. Canada              340 
5. Israel                 308         5. Denmark             329
6. THE NETHERLANDS        300         6. Australia           326
7. USA                    299.5       7. South Africa        302
8. Bulgaria               283         8. Argentine           297
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bid this, or something
Date: 29 Aug 92 20:53:01 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

I write:
>>>> S - 7 4
>>>> H - Q 7
>>>> D - A K 10 9 8 5
>>>> C - 8 5 2

>>>> S - A K 3 2
>>>> H - K J 10 9 6
>>>> D - <nil>
>>>> C - K Q 9 6

>Of course, 4H is virtually cold.

Clearly this is a bit optimistic.  If the opponents start with two
rounds of trump, then you need a favorable club position (3-3 or jack or
ten doubleton), and you also need to be able to retain control (3-3
hearts, or the second club winner in the hand with short diamonds).
Not so good, but better than 3NT.

How likely you are to get a trump lead depends on the auction, of
course.  Since my auction would be 2D-P, this question wouldn't come up.

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bjpt@mulga.cs.mu.oz.au (Ben Thompson)
Subject: World Championship Problem
Organization: University Of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:27:22 GMT

Actually, the subject is a little bit of false advertising.  This IS
a world championship problem, but it's from the final of last year's
Bermuda Bowl final between Iceland and Poland.

With E/W vul and South dealer
		AJ92
		KQ7
		864
		A75

		K3
		J43
		A2
		K96432

At one of the BB tables:
West	North	East	South
			2C
P	2D	P	2NT
P	3NT	All Pass

2C showed clubs, 2D was an enquiry and 2NT showed no singleton with
at least 6 clubs.

West leads D5.  East wins D10 and returns DQ, West following with the 7.
Your play.

Ben
From: ted@sage0.gsfc.nasa.gov (Ted Ying)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: what went wrong?
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:36:56 GMT
Organization: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center

sperbr@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Ron E Sperber) writes:

Poster: 	KQxxx / KQTx / x / xxx
Partner:	AJ / Axxxx / KQJ / Axx

>Partner in first seat opens 1H and with the opponents silent the auction
>proceeds:

>1H   1S(1)
>2N   3H
>3S   4H
>P

>(1) promises 5 spades
>this proved to not be the optimal contract as we were +480 missing a 
>nearly cold slam...

>Where did the auction go wrong? I think its possible (not great) for
>my hand to splinter,but if anything,that makes my partners hand worse
>since KQJ is not the greatest holding to have opposite a splinter.

	Hmmm...when I first read this, my first reaction was that I
	would have splintered immediately with the poster's hand
	(1H-4D), but after reading some of the followups, I can
	understand the interest in showing a decent hand with a good
	side suit so I don't really have a problem with the 1S bid.

	2NT was a good bid to show the values of the hand and 3H is
	a forward-going bid (at least a mild slam try).  Most people
	play that 2NT is game-forcing there and as such, 4H should
	be weaker than 3H and hence 3H a mild slam try.  3S showing
	a key feature was good.  The problem I saw was that the
	responding hand then signed off in 4H.  I probably would have
	made another attempt with a 4S call.  This will probably drive
	partner on to 6H.  The hand is just too good to sign off in
	4H.  However, despite this, the opener might also want to
	make one more try by bidding 5H over 4H (asking for quality of
	trump support) which will get a 6H call.

	However, I think the majority of the blame on this one should
	go to the responders hand for signing off in 4H with such a
	great hand.

	Ted Ying			ted@rosserv.gsfc.nasa.gov
	Hughes/STX			Goddard Space Flight Center
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding
Date: 28 Aug 92 13:40:04 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

In article <1577@idacrd.UUCP> desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>Ted Ying <ted@sage0.gsfc.nasa.gov> writes:
>>>I believe Lawrence's 2/1 system (which I've only heard of vaguely)
>>>advocates rebidding your opening with a minimum (even on a 5 bagger) instead
>>>of going to the three level.
>
>>	If you play this way, then you are essentially playing "Standard"
>>	and not 2/1 (but calling it 2/1 to be in vogue).  If you play 2/1
>>	then you should bid 3C any times your hand pattern warrants it
>>	without need for showing or denying extra values.
>
>It's hard for me to accept that you know so much more about bidding than
>Mike Lawrence that you can tell him how to bid.  Maybe, just maybe,
>other people have other ideas than you do about how to bid, and they are
>at least equally good.

One point that should be mentioned. In Lawrence's system a 2 level response
forces the auction up to (but no further than) 2NT. It is not "almost" game
forcing. Therefore, it seems to me that you are both right. Lawrence
certainly knows how to bid but the system that he describes as 2/1 is
arguably closer to standard than to what many of us think as 2/1.
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bid these hands
Date: 28 Aug 1992 14:06:10 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Aug28.140001.19525@midway.uchicago.edu> pynq@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

>Matchpoints, none vul.

>North: AJTx,Qxx,AQTx,xx
>South: Qx,Kxxxx,9xx,Axx

>1D-1H
>1S-?

Several points here.  1. If you're playing a weak or kamakazi NT or
Carrot Club North doesn't open 1D.  2. If you're raising on 3-card
support North will bid 2H rather than 1S.  3. Some will rebid 1NT
rather than 1S (although I wouldn't).

While I think 1NT is now clear for South and North should probably
pass, there were several places the auction could have taken a
different turn.

Besides, maybe the opponents will balance in clubs and North can
give belated support with 2H.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: andrewd@tamsun.tamu.edu (Andrew T Duchowski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Need some help
Date: 2 Sep 92 17:24:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: tamsun.1992Sep2.172429.20242
Distribution: usa
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station

Hi, 

I'm new to rec.games.bridge, and I just started playing
okbridge.  I'm an ok player, I've won a few hands, got
whipped on others.  I can play with people I've played
with before, because we know what we're doing, but I don't
know how to call certain actions so that I can communicate
my intentions more effectively to my partner and to 
opponents.

I'd like to be more familiar with some of the many bidding
conventions that I see on okbridge, as well as some of the
coined terms, including:
  Stayman, 
  Blackwood,
  reverse bid
  Jacobian transfers
  etc....

Is there a book someone could suggest that would explain these
terms?

Please email and optionally post.
Thanks in advance,
Andrew
andrewd@cs.tamu.edu
From: dberman@cs.washington.edu (Deborah Berman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Michaels without a c(l)ue--assign the blame
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:55:40 GMT
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <BtKn5r.2vp@ais.org> hampton@ais.org (Kevin Podsiadlik) writes:
>Love all, West deals:
>
>West                East
>T 7                 A K Q J 8
>9 2                 K Q 8 7 5
>7 5 3               K
>A K 9 7 4 2         6 5
>
>Pass      (1D)      2D(1)
>3C                  Pass
>
>(1) Michaels--weak or strong.
>
>3C overcame a 4-1 trump break, but the zero was still quite frigid.
>The partnership is relatively new, if that is relevent.  Assess the blame.
>
>-- 
>Kevin J. Podsiadlik         | "A recent survey has revealed that, if the
>Vaporware Engineer          | election were to be held tomorrow, a whopping
>2nd class                   | 98% of those polled would be glad it came
>E-mail: hampton@ais.org     | early this year." -- Thomas Sowell (paraphrased)

West is to blame.  Michaels indicates at least 5-5 in the
majors.  West should bid 2H or 2S (I suppose spades are a tiny bit
better).  3c is a very odd bid.  West was lucky to find East with
2 clubs.  East could easily have 1 or 0 with his bid.  

Well, I could see East being confused with the 3c bid, so I blame him
less for passing (I think the only time West can give a 3c bid is with
a self-sufficient club suit and a real misfit, like 0-1 in the majors
or something).  In a normal sequence, East needs to bid again to
indicate he is one of those strong hands, not weak.  

Debbie
-- 
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend...
   Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.  (Groucho Marx)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Bid these hands
Summary: This is probably a baby question, but...
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:00:01 GMT

... when it happened, I realized I had no answer for it.

Matchpoints, none vul.

North: AJTx,Qxx,AQTx,xx
South: Qx,Kxxxx,9xx,Axx

North opens 1D and opps are silent.  It goes:

1D-1H
1S-?

Now, at ?, what do you do?  It seems to me that bidding 1N gives up the
chance of playing in hearts when he has 3 of them.

************************************************************************
A note to new readers:  the weasely :-) symbol is frowned upon in this
group.  Any questions, see Phil Gustafson who will gladly rearrange your
diodes for you.
			- From the AFU FAQ -

	- pynq@quads.uchicago.edu, who is still costing the net
	  hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, every time he posts -
************************************************************************
From: poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu (David Poore)
Newsgroups: rec.games.moria
Subject: Re: A few questions from a newbie
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:31:07 GMT
Reply-To: poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu (David Poore)
Organization: Florida State University

In article <RIPLEY.92Sep3183851@forint.cs.tu-berlin.de> ripley@cs.tu-berlin.de (Hans-Ch. Eckert) writes:
>In article <10560@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu (David Poore) writes:
>   3) "It makes a horrible wail" "You feel clumsy" etc... What is it? A
>   Banshee? Haven't found a way to see invisible yet...
>You're possibly right about the Banshee.  Concerning your inability
>to see invisible creatures, you really ought to do something against that.
>How deep have you gone so far ?

Well, I've had a couple guys up around 18-20 level, and have been
wandering around the 1000 foot range. Some of these have been
encountering banshees, but I think before getting that deep. In any
case, not having had the good fortune to get an ego weapon or other such
goodies, and having read that these things start appearing 'round 1500',
I dove for it. One case in particular, the character got whacked up to
about 12th level by the banshee, and it was all over with. 

David Poore
poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.moria