HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ttllarsa@eua.ericsson.se (Lars Andersson)
Subject: 6N Play Problem
Reply-To: ttllarsa@eua.ericsson.se
Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 11:49:31 GMT


An interesting (?) declarer play problem.

AQT752
7
AT
KJ85

N


S

KJ84
KQJ3
Q9
A62

As South you are declaring 6N. West (LHO) has doubled a diamond bid. North
has shown a good hand with 6Spades, 4Clubs, ace of diamonds, 2 aces and the queen
of spades. Actually the bidding was (EW vul) 2S-2N; 3S-4D*-(D); RD-4N; 5S-6N.
(matchpoints)

West leads the ten of clubs. Plan the play (with variations).

--lars
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Elo ratings
Date: 7 Oct 1992 12:58:12 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bovina.cs.utexas.edu

In article <dej.01qb@qpoint.ocunix.on.ca> dej@qpoint.ocunix.on.ca (David Jones) writes:

>I would also be interested in seeing Elo ratings for bridge because, in
>the ACBL at least, you are effectively purchasing masterpoints (in Ottawa,
>a club game, a sectional, and a regional tournament will attract the same
>players with the same skills, but the entry fee increases with the
>masterpoint awards).

>However, there is one problem: I don't have a regular partner.  Sometimes
>I play with very good players and sometimes I play with "fish".  Given that
>the performance of a partnership depends on the performance of BOTH players,
>how can one assign a meaningful rating to an individual?

>If you can figure out a way of doing it, a lot of players would be
>grateful.

A&B, playing together, average 55%.  A&C average 52%.  B&C average 45%.
Elo(A) > Elo(B) > Elo(C), and in fact Elo(A) is quite a lot higher than
either of the others.  This is assuming approximately constant opposition.
The point is that there is an expected performance for a pair each player
of which has a known strength.  Ratings can be adjusted up or down
according to how they compare with the expected performance.  When you
play with the fish and achieve a 50% score your rating might improve
more than when you play with the very good player and win.

I'm not an expert on ratings.  I realize there is a very significant
random factor in bridge, and that it is possible for two good players
to play very badly together.  Still, most bridge players play enough
that these things will average out.

To "figure out a way of doing it" is no big deal.  The methods have been
known for a couple of decades.  As for a lot of players being grateful,
that might or might not be the case if Elo ratings were adopted.  Since
they won't be, it is quite false.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: Ed Rotberg <gonzo@ntb.apple.com>
Subject: Re: play or defend?
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:36:22 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer

play or defend?

In article <4965@tivoli.UUCP> Eric Taylor, taylor@foraker.tivoli.com
writes:
>IMPS, South, White vs. Red, you hold :
>
>Kxxx
>AK1098x
>xx
>x
>
>Bidding has proceeded :
>East      South        West         North
>1C        1H           X            P
>1N        ??

What's the problem?  Pass evenly and in tempo as if you have no problem,
which you don't!  You've already had your opportunity to sacrifice and
chose (correctly) to make an overcall instead.  You have a hand with some
defensive values and a defender loaded in hearts.  To make matters worse,
partner probably has from 6-9 points with little or no support in hearts.
 The auction is not over yet and your partner still has a chance to bid
if he deems it appropriate (Bridge is a partnership game!!).  Remember,
he knows a heck of a lot more about your hand than you do about his, and
I can't think of a call that would clarify your hand any more without
undo risk. If the defenders bid on, they are likely to wind up in a minor
or NT.  Game in a minor would be very risky for them and with the right
values in partner's hand, you have an excellent chance to beat game in NT.

What am I missing here?


Ed Rotberg                 "Just remember...
Professor of Gonzo          a waist is a terrible
Apple Computer, Inc.        thing to mind"
From: "will sahlein" <will.sahlein@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: boston game/partner?
Date: 15 Oct 92 23:39:10 EST
Reply-To: "will sahlein" <will.sahlein@channel1.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

I'm seeking a good competitive rubber bridge game or a duplicate partner
in the Boston area.
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA
From: adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Do you go on?
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:55:18 GMT
Organization: Irvine Compiler Corp., Irvine, California, USA

In article <GRABINER.92Oct9124107@germain.harvard.edu> 
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:

> N-S vul      AKxx            N   E   S   W    
> Matchpoints  AQTxx           P   1D  1H  1S   
>              xxx             P   2C  P   P    
>              K               2H  P   P   3C   
>                              P   P   ?        

This is a tough problem, but I think 3H is best because I think partner is 
likely to have at least 4 hearts.  West bid 1S, showing a five-card suit the 
way most people play, and he has at least four clubs, otherwise he wouldn't
have competed in his partner's second suit.  East could be 4-4 in the minors,
but it's more likely he's 5-4 or 4-5.  (Many players open 1C with 4-4 in the
minors and flat distribution.)  This means both opponents are short in hearts,
making it likely that partner has four.  In addition, partner likely has 3 or
4 clubs and 3 or 4 diamonds, so with only 3 hearts and a weak hand (he didn't
raise you at his first opportunity) and flat distribution, he *might* not have
bothered to compete.  If partner has four heart, then 3H could well be a make.
Although I'm putting specific cards in everyone's hands here, I expect the
layout to be something similar to this:
                    x x
                    K x x x
                    x x x x
                    x x x
     Q J x x x                      x x
     x x x                          x
     K                              A Q J x x
     J x x x                        A Q x x x
                    A K x x
                    A Q 10 x x
                    x x x
                    K
3C will make even if East misguesses clubs.  3H could be tricky, especially
if West leads the king of diamonds and East overtakes, cashes two more
diamonds and the club ace and then leads a fourth round of diamonds.  But it
still has chances, depending on who has the intermediate spot cards in
hearts.  Even down one is fine if you don't get doubled.
From: Brynjulv.Hauksson@nr.no (Brynjulv Hauksson)
Subject: Play 6NT
Organization: Norsk Regnesentral, Oslo, Norway
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 09:44:06 GMT

All vulnerable, South dealer.

	J953
	K64
	A5
	K863

	AK
	Q72
	KQ7
	AQ972

You are South, and end up in 6NT after the following bidding sequence:
South				North
2 NT (20-21)			3 C (intended as stayman)
3 NT (replied to Baron)		6 NT (believed 2 NT showed 22-24)

West leads the jack of clubs, and East follows. How do you play?
--
Brynjulv Hauksson       |  snail: Boks 114 Blindern, N-0314 Oslo, Norway
Norsk Regnesentral      |  X.400: G=Brynjulv;S=Hauksson;O=nr;P=uninett;C=no
voice: +47-2-453608     |  inet:  Brynjulv.Hauksson@nr.no

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: lsimonse@vipunen.hut.fi (Leif Simonsen)
Subject: Re: 6N Play Problem
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 16 Oct 92 09:34:23 GMT

My point is that you can construct a hand where a special play is cool. I
admit that your repeated three-suit squeeze was good. Anyway a simple finesse
might sometimes be better than a squeeze.

Contrary what is more probable? East holding the ace of hearts, the queen
and nine of clubs and the jack of diamonds or simply either nine or queen
of clubs by west? Yoy have to rely on the previous distribution after nobody 
taking the ace of hearts after two rounds. (Or maybe play on that the ace is
single now and play a small heart.)

(West might have something like xx Axxx KJxx T9x. Or no spade at all!)

Mathematically  75%>epsilon.

I am aware of that I would have went one down as declearer when you had got
a top-score.

Kenneth Simonsen
lsimonse@vipunen.hut.fi

PS Before i wrote my previous article I had allready wrote a bunch of possible
   plays and squeezes. I then realised that if east-west would not tak their
   ace of hearts I would be in a very hard gessing position where it might be
   right to play a little heart or play on a pseudo-elimination or whatever.
   I decided that the finesse is my way. 

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: jdcarter@healthy.uwaterloo.ca (Judi Carter)
Subject: convention card
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 14:06:17 GMT


Does anyone have an easy method to produce a
personalized convention card on a laser printer?
Reply via e-mail. Thanks!
From: turin@diku.dk (S|ren Turin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Play problem
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:16:19 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, U of Copenhagen

A friend of mine gave me this play problem a couple of days ago.

	Axx AQx AKT T9xx

	JT KJTxxx Jxx AK

How do you play 6S after the lead of 2 of spades (4th highest). 


I'll be back in a few days.



- Soren 

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
turin@freja.diku.dk aka Soren Turin 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: davidm@voltaire.Rational.COM (David Moore)
Subject: Re: A Question!
Organization: Rational
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:24:02 GMT

While Gerber is being discussed, perhaps someone can enlighten me.

When I learnt to play Bridge back in the triassic, (early 70's)
the king ask over Gerber was the next suit up. A lot of people here 
in the US play 5C as asking for kings and I believe the Yellow card also 
uses this version.

Which form is the original form of Gerber and if, as I think, it is
the next suit up version, how come a non-standard version became so
ensconced here in the US? For that matter, is the 5C version being
used anywhere else? Perhaps I was taught a variation without knowing it.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From:  pmbel@gst.kiev.ua (Beletsky Platon)
Subject: Bidding program is at comp.sys.ibm.pc.games ART 13921
Reply-To: pmbel@gst.kiev.ua
Organization: Applied Informatics Institution, Kiev, Ukraine
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 13:13:27 +0400 

Recently I submitted an announcement about bidding program for IBM PC.
I've sent it to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games, ARTICLE 13921 (54K encoded)
-- 
Platon Beletsky, Applied Informatics Institution, Kiev, Ukraine:
pmbel%gst.kiev.ua@relay.ussr.eu.net,  +7 (044)2212794


Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: c85perwe@IDA.LiU.SE (Per Westling)
Subject: Wanted: Bridge program
Reply-To: c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
Organization: CIS Dept, University of Linkoping, Sweden
Distribution: rec
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 09:42:58 GMT

One thing I have used a lot is a program that can deal hands for
practice bidding, given some restrictions on HCP, suit length etc.

But have anyone written such a program that inserts overcalls when
apropriate?  And which is public domain?

--
Per Westling              |
c/o Lindh, Drabantg 11    |  c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
S-583 46 LINKOPING        |  In praise of Idleness -- Bertrand Russel
SWEDEN                    |
Fax: 105235, Home: 273054, Work: 104890  --  Add 013 or +4613 before.
Stuff regarding DPP may be sent to x90perwe@ida.liu.se instead.
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 6N Play Problem
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:37:51 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

ttllarsa@eua.ericsson.se writes:
> AQT752
> 7
> AT
> KJ85

> KJ84
> KQJ3
> Q9
> A62

> West leads the ten of clubs. Plan the play (with variations).

Leading the ten of clubs from Tx seems a remarkably unattractive lead
against 6NT, especially with a relatively safe spade lead available.
But if I could rule out such a lead, I suppose that this hand wouldn't
be posted as a problem.

If West has led from shortness, then the squeeze which comes to mind is
a heart-club squeeze against East.  (Perhaps West is 2-3-6-2.)  But
there is no way to maintain the communication for such a squeeze except
to put up the king of clubs at trick one.  This seems like too high a
price to pay.

I really don't see much more to do than to put in the jack of clubs,
cross in spades, clear the hearts, and eventually take a club finesse.

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson)
Subject: Re: Do you go on?
Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth, RI
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:56:32 GMT

In article <GRABINER.92Oct9124107@germain.harvard.edu> David Grabiner writes:

* North dealer, N-S vulnerable, matchpoints.  Sitting South, you hold:
* 
* AKxx, AQTxx, xxx, K
* 
* N   E   S   W
* P   1D  1H  1S
* P   2C  P   P
* 2H  P   P   3C
* P   P   ?
* 
* We play sound, unlimited overcalls (Kaplan-style).  Double here would be
* action, not necessarily penalty.
* 
* Do you bid 3H, double, or pass?

3Hx down 1 is a matchpoint disaster. Partner BALANCED with 2H.
Note that North didn't bid directly over 1S, so I would expect that
the raise to 2H is less than robust.
Your king of clubs is probably useless, and the three small diamonds
are a bad sign in that West is short in diamonds. I would not be
surprised to see partner with 3 diamonds also.
That's four tricks off the top (3 diamonds and a club)
and do you think you can take the rest? I don't.

The choice is between double and pass.
You have 2 spades and a heart.
Can partner contribute 2 defensive tricks? Doubtful.
What if declarer has only 1 spade loser?
You don't have a prayer of beating 3C.

I pass.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
From: kibler@turing.ICS.UCI.EDU (Dennis Kibler)
Subject: Re: Sheinwold on bridge flub...
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:13:52 GMT


In rec.games.bridge you write:

>Today's Sheinwold column has a travesty of a bidding suggestion.
>Here is the problem. You hold:

>        AQ983 KQ7 T AJ97

>You open 1S, partner bids 2H.  Your call.

>Alfy's answer is to bid 4H(!)

>Well, I don't know how partner is supposed to know the slam potential
>of this hand.  I would bid 3C after 2H, planning to bid 4H.


 I would bid 4 diamonds, splinter. We play that 2/1 in hearts
guarantees 5 and HHX is equivalent to four card support.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From:  (martino@courier6.aero.org(Nick Martino))
Subject: Re: Do you go on?
Followup-To: rec.games.bridge
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:02:24 GMT

In article <GRABINER.92Oct9124107@germain.harvard.edu>,
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) wrote:
> 
> 
> North dealer, N-S vulnerable, matchpoints.  Sitting South, you hold:
> 
> AKxx
> AQTxx
> xxx
> K
> 
> N   E   S   W
> P   1D  1H  1S
> P   2C  P   P
> 2H  P   P   3C
> P   P   ?
> 
> We play sound, unlimited overcalls (Kaplan-style).  Double here would be
> action, not necessarily penalty.
> 
> Do you bid 3H, double, or pass?

There has been much discussion in response to this post as to the liklihood
of North having 4 Hearts on the above auction.  At red vs white, I think it
is possible that he might fail to make an immediate raise on a flat, weak
hand with 4 trumps.  Despite that possibility, bidding 3H on the South hand
is the poorest choice.  In fact, North's Heart length is practically
irrelevant to your choice between passing and doubling.  If you think he
may have 4 Hearts, it surely makes more sense to double than to bid 3H. 
This allows partner to retreat to 3H on 
                     xx Kxxx xxxx xxx 
or to sit 3Cx with 
                     xxx Jx xxxx Qxxx.

I think the chance of finding partner with the right cards to beat 3C are
much better than finding him with the magic hand to make 3H.  It is quite
possible you could even set them 2 tricks.  The problem with doubling is
the risk/reward ratio at unfavorable vulnerability.  You don't get much for
your trouble if you only beat it a trick.  Worse yet, partner may pull the
double when you have it set, only to score a bottom in 3H.   



*************************************************************************  
       
                                                                           
                                                                           
                         
    martino@courier6.Aero.org (Nick Martino)                            
   
    The Aerospace Corporation                                            
                                                                        
*************************************************************************

 
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: A Question!
Date: 15 Oct 1992 02:34:06 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: bovina.cs.utexas.edu

In article <35831@cbmvax.commodore.com> macon@cbmvax.commodore.com (Glen Macon) writes:

>In article <1992Oct13.002558.8968@odin.corp.sgi.com>,
>sajid@jam.wpd.sgi.com (Sajid Zia) writes:
 
>|> So Far I had known that Black Wood Convention means, you have
>|> to bid 4NT to ask for aces. But recently I saw in the bridge section
>|> of newspaper, bidding 4 Clubs may also means asking for aces. Could
>|> somebody clarify when it happens, and what are the other possibilities
>|> for asking for aces?
 
>|> thanks, sajid
 
>|> P.S. BTW, Why it is classed Black Wood?

>BTW... it's called blackwood (one word, after the the guy or gal
>who started the convention).

The late Easley Blackwood, Sr.  His son Easley Blackwood, Jr. is
a well-known composer.

>you ask for aces with the 4 clubs call if (and only if) you have
>settled on a NT contract.  then when you settle on a slam
>(6 or 7 NT) or just to get out at 5 NT where it might sound 
>like you're asking for kings...

No.  No.  No.  Limit it much more than this.  Best only over
opening 2NT or 3NT.

>  example:

>open    : 2NT 
>partner : 3NT
>you     : 4C  < asking for aces

AAARRRRRRRRGH!!!!

1. 4C over 3NT should never be Gerber.
2. 4C here is an impossible bid.  Opener has made a limit bid (2NT)
   and partner has bid what he thinks he can make (3NT).  For opener
   to bid again is a serious breach of trust.

I had one partner who felt she absolutely couldn't get along without
an ace-asking bid at every conceivable moment.  We agreed that 5C
over 3NT was Gerber.  And we never used it.  4C over a wandered-into
3NT should be forcing but natural.

There are two simple agreements about 4NT or 4C.  One is it always
asks for aces.  The other is it never does.  I far prefer the latter.
Middle grounds close to the latter are also acceptable.

If you feel you can't do without Blackwood and Gerber, you probably
aren't much good at bidding slams in any case.

I would say "IMHO" except these are far from humble opinions.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: vaughanm@cs.man.ac.uk (Vaughan Marks)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bridge program
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:31:07 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester
In-reply-to: carney@rocky.rational.com's message of 15 Oct 92 00:49:40 GMT

In article <CARNEY.92Oct14164940@rocky.rational.com> carney@rocky.rational.com (Mike Carney) writes:

   Does anyone out there know of a public domain graphical bridge program
   that runs under X (I know it's a lot to ask for :-). I'd like one
   that can somehow customize for different bidding systems (That's even
   more to ask for!! :-).

I have written an application similar to that you describe. However it is not
yet finished, and certainly in no state to release to the net at large.
My system was called XBridge, a rough summary follows:

Game for 1-4 Players. The Xb server is invoked with command line arguments
specifying the displays of each player. These may be any valid DISPLAY on the
internet. The remainder of the players become computer processes running on
the local machine. Currently the computer player bids COBRA [1]
(or at least tries to), and the play is extremely rudimentry.

It's graphical, though only monochrome. You have a bidding box, and select
cards by clicking on them etc.

Different bidding systems will eventually be incorporated. The reason I am
posting this article is that I would like to hear "wish lists" from people
who would be interested in using such a system, and any ideas for features
that should be incorporated. If anyone else has attempted such a venture, I
would also love to hear from you...

[1] COBRA - A Computer Designed Bidding System, Lindelof, E.T.,
            Victor Gollancz 1985

Regards,
--
       _    _     _  __   ____    ________________________________________
   \ \\_\\ \\ _\_\\_\\ \ \\ \ \   \  Vaughan Marks: vaughanm@cs.man.ac.uk \
    \_\\ \\_\\_\\ \\ \\ \_\\ \ \   \_______________________________________\
From: olle@astro.uu.se (Olof Morell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Position varying of opening bids
Date: 15 Oct 1992 13:04:03 GMT
Organization: Uppsala University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: solaris.astro.uu.se

A while ago Giuseppe  (Sorry if I misspell your name :-)) asked
about the rules for e.g. different NT ranges in 1/2 - 3/4 seat.

I asked Hans-Olof Hallen, the Swedish guru on The Laws, and one of the
best directors of Europe, and he claimed that this was not a
problem. You may vary your system according to position and zones
as much as you like.

If this is not so in Italy it's a pure Italian rule, and he did not
know anything about it.

Hans-Olof also pointed out, as many of you surely know, that the 
different players in a pair must play the same system, while
of course your judgement may differ... One of the players may not
dare preempt as wildly as his partner or so. You are NOT allowed to play
that your 1NT shows 12-14, while that of your partner shows 15-17.

I was afraid for a while, but bridge is still alive in the EBL! :-)

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

Snail Mail - Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: davidm@voltaire.Rational.COM (David Moore)
Subject: Re: Do you go on?
Organization: Rational
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 23:11:48 GMT

grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:


>North dealer, N-S vulnerable, matchpoints.  Sitting South, you hold:

>AKxx
>AQTxx
>xxx
>K

>N   E   S   W
>P   1D  1H  1S
>P   2C  P   P
>2H  P   P   3C
>P   P   ?

Even though your double is "Action", if you double it is highly unlikely
partner will pull. He quite probably has 4 clubs and is content that he 
has drawn an adequately gloomy portrait of his hand. You certainly don't
want to defend 3C's doubled; as far as you can tell, it is making 4.

3H is unlikely to be a happy contract; You can see at least 3 hearts in
wests hand. You could easily be down 3 or 4. 

So, I think its a clear-cut pass.
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Over Strong NT
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:17:57 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Paul Jackson <paul@sco.COM> writes:
>Oh, I understand your reasoning I just feel that it is completely wrong.
>Playing your way you cannot double on balanced hands, you can only double
>on hands with huge trick taking potential. A balanced 18 count is NOT
>sufficient.

This is simply not right.  It is perfectly playable to double with
strong balanced hands and sit with busts.  It just means that they make
1NT* sometimes.  That's obviously not good, but it's not a disaster.  (I
assume that this whole discussion doesn't apply if the opponents are
playing pass forces redouble, because in that case advancer has more
options.)  It might well be worthwhile if (1) doubler often has some
source of tricks and (2) the fact that advancer shows values can be used
to make subsequent bidding more constructive.

                                        David desJardins