HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: an1739@anon.penet.fi ("Professor Who?")
Subject: Some moderately interesting hands
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: rec.games.bridge
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:12:35 GMT

Played over the New Year vacation what passes for the prelim rounds of
the local Junior Trials.....  Some hands for you guys to ponder. I will
tell you what happened at the table if there is interest, I am not sure
I know any of the answers myself!

	S:AQ8x
	H:KJTxx
	D:x
	C:Txx

Lead: DA (ace from AK), shift to CQ

	S:JTxx
	H:Ax
	C:Qxxx
	C:AJ9


Auction: (love all) North opens 1NT (10-14 both majors), South 2C(relay),
	West 2D, North 2H (longer H than S, shortness in D), South 4S.

East, whose card is marked "High=even, Low=Odd after partner leads at
trump contract" played the trey of diamonds on trick one.

	S:AKQ9xx	S:
	H:AQ		H:KT9xx
	D:Q9x		D:AJ8x
	C:QJ		C:xxxx (_NO_ spots!)

Auction:	West		East
		1C(15+)		1D(8-)
		1H(~19+)	1N(hearts, 6-8)
		2C(relay)	2S(3-suiter short in spades or 5332)
		2N(relay)	3N(0544)
		P

the lead is the Jack of spades (standard).  What is the best practical line?


Holding the following:
S:x H:xx D:AKxx C:KQJxxx, you open 1D (no major, 10+ to 15) at game all
and hear 2D(majors)-2H(diamonds, invite plus)-2S, what do you do?

If you bid 4D or 5D, LHO will bid spades over it passed to you, now what?
[partner promised only five pieces in D with 2H, pass over 4S would be
forcing but over 5S non-forcing.]

Someone else's problem:

S:xxx H:x D:Kxxx C:AQxxx, you pass in first seat (love all) and
partner opened 1H in Precision (11-15, more or less), you respond 1N,
the (very sound and conservative) opponents passed throughout as your
partner jumped to 3D (two good suits, good hand, not forcing) and you bid
4C to hear 4D, what now?

My problem again, at game all, you pick up:
S:J H:AKQxxxx D:AJxxx C: and hear partner open 3NT (a good preempt to 4H or
4S, but not a strong hand HCPwise), what do you do after a pass?
[4CD are cue-bids, 4HS are correctible, 4N is ye olde black.]

At many other tables this hand heard 4S (Standard Amer. style more or less)
what is the recommended move?

happy New year!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Bidding Opinions Sought
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:36:08 GMT

In article <1ihmfgINNhg2@transfer.stratus.com> kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner) writes:
>IMPs, White/White, Dealer: West
>You sit South holding:
>	s x
>	h JTxx
>	d KJxxxxx
>	c x
>
>The auction start out:
>	W	N	E	S
>	p	1NT	p	?
>
>What's the best reponse?  
 
Firstly, you do not say what kind of 1NT you are playing.
The response to a K-S or ACOL 1NT would not be the same as to a 16-18
or other 1NT.

Secondly, I hate to say this again, but it depends on your methods. I have a 
way of dealing with such hands [a variation of Walsh relays],  but it is
unlikely that you play Walsh.

Do you play 4 suit transfers? If so, do you have pre-acceptance bids
for your transfers? etc. etc.

The question also does not admit a unique answer. 'Best' is highly
subjective.

I will assume a 15-17 NT.

I would handle this by transferring into diamonds by bidding 2NT.
What happens next depends on partner's response. If partner bids 3C
[a pre-acceptance bid], then I would bid 3H. The pre-acceptance
bid over a transfer into a minor says: "partner; if your transfer
bid is based upon an invitational hand with a diamond suit, I would
accept because I have good diamond support".  If partner has poor
diamond support (say xx) he will simply accept the transfer and I
will PASS.

Note that this sequence:

1N	2N
3C	3H

is only a search for game. Some people might think it is a slam try
cuebid in support of diamonds, but it is not because of the principle:
GAME BEFORE SLAM.  It is also not a slam try, because I have a
separate way of making a broken suited slam try in diamonds [or solid
suited] with a secondary suit.
 
If partner raises 3H to 4H, I sit. If he bids 5D, I sit. Over anything
else I bid a simple 4D.


Transfer into diamonds. If partner pre-accepts, try 3H. If partner does
not, then pass.
--
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: doug@cm.deakin.OZ.AU (Douglas Newlands)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: compiling okbridge
Date: 4 Jan 1993 11:18:05 GMT
Organization: Deakin University, Geelong, Australia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: aragorn.cm.deakin.oz.au

This is mainly for Matt Clegg but there may be some other poor soul
who compiles it for a sparc station using gcc and setting the load flags.
You need to comment out line 50 in commands.c - trivial to spot if
you do computing in some form but probably worrying otherwise.

doug.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: "gordon restivo" <gordon.restivo@canrem.com>
Subject: bridge conference
Reply-To: "gordon restivo" <gordon.restivo@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 8 Jan 93 12:47:05 EST

Anyone out there who is living in the Toronto, Canada area know of
another bulletin board (other than CRS) that carries this bridge
conference?

Thanks in advance, Gord Restivo

Entered Scarborough, Ontario, CANADA, 12:44, 8 JAn 1993.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Sunday, 10 Jan 1993 10:58:07 MST
From: <ATG2G@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Reading List for new duplicate players
 <1993Jan5.222941.7655@ariel.ec.usf.edu> <1993Jan9.223739.28844@galois.mit.edu>

I absolutely agree with the Professor's objection to Granovetter's
inequitable treatment of the weak NT in "Murder . . ."  I admire his
table play, but his very careful construction of layouts in which
the treatment works poorly is shameful.  This is not the only
treatment given a shoddy evaluation in "Murder".

My apologies to anyone who has already mentioned this book if I missed
the citation, but one of the earliest and best on duplicate
technique, primarily pairs, is Marshall Miles' "How to Win at
Duplicate Bridge".  Its copyright date is 1957 and much of the
bidding appears quaint 35 years later (when did you last sit
down opposite a pair playing Bulldog?) but the discussion of the
issues is very strong and comprehensive.
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Computer Bridge and the Law
Date: 11 Jan 1993 20:14:48 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbootay.sw.stratus.com

In article <7784@tivoli.UUCP>, taylor@foraker.tivoli.com (Eric Taylor) writes:
> Should a computer bridge game allow a player to make
> an insufficient bid?
> 
> Are insufficient bids part of the game or are all of the
> rules regarding them merely an attempt to control the
> damage caused by them?

In article <C0pDGA.J4K@deshaw.com>, baseggio@deshaw.com (Franco Baseggio) writes:
> What about leading from the wrong hand?  Is it always unethical for
> declarer to do this deliberately?  

Are you guys serious?  Will the next posting in this thread argue the inalienable
right to pull an Alcatraz coup??  Are you trying to bring Asya back???

Okay, I'll give you a straight answer, quoting (as usual) chapter and verse.
"The Laws are designed to define correct procedure, and to provide an adequate
remedy when there is a departure from correct procedure.  ...  The Laws are
primarily designed not as punishment for irregularities, but rather as redress
for damage."  ["The Scope of the Laws"]  "To infringe a law intentionally is
a serious breach of propriety, even if there is a prescribed penalty that one
is willing to pay."  [Law 72B1]

If the playing conditions (e.g., computer moderation) make some irregularities
impossible, should we invent a way to make them possible again?

No.
-- 
Tim Hill
Stratus Computer, Inc.                  tnh@vos.stratus.com
55 Fairbanks Boulevard                  508-460-2232
Marlborough, MA  01752                  fax 508-624-7488
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: baseggio@deshaw.com (Franco Baseggio)
Subject: Re: What's your call?
Organization: D. E. Shaw & Co.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 00:24:18 GMT

In article <C0E41o.GpD@cs.uiuc.edu> bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao) writes:
>In article <C0CsMI.DI4@deshaw.com>, baseggio@deshaw.com (Franco Baseggio) writes:
>|> In article <C0Cp8D.CnG@deshaw.com> I write:
>|> >Flt B swiss, early round, white on white.  You, south, hold
>|> >KT965
>|> >AQ5
>|> >A
>|> >KT93 [ACTUALLY AT93!!!]
>|> >
>|> >South  North
>|> >1S     1N
>|> >2C     4S
>|> >?
>|> >
>|> >1N was forcing, but limited to 12 HCP.  4S means that North was going
>|> >to make a balanced 3 piece limit raise, but liked your 2C bid.

[stuff deleted]

>Essentially I need help in both black suits.  I will raise to
>5S and that should convey this message pretty clearly (I cannot be
>open in BOTH red suits to make a slam try, and if I needed help in
>one red suit, I would cue the other -- ergo, my red suits must be
>good shape).  Partner
>will pretty much discount his red suit values (OK, the HK could be
>very useful, shrug).  Looking at SAQ and CQJ or even at SQJ and CKQ
>he will bid 6S...
>
Well, he has essentially already shown lots of black suit values.  

There seems to be general agreement that this hand should at least try
for slam (despite a previous non-forcing bid!) but no one seems to be
interested in 6C.  That would be the preferred slam, would it not?

Franco
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: jmh@athena.mit.edu (J Michael Hammond)
Subject: Bidding and Play Problem
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:08:26 GMT

Knockout teams, low B bracket, second round, very early board in the
set, non-vul against vul, West deals.  You're playing 2/1 Almost Game
Forcing with natural overcalls, e.g. a 1NT overcall is 15-18+ with
stopper.

North
S ATxx         West   North  East  South   || 
H Txx          1S     pass   pass  2C      || opponents play 5CM and West's
D Axxx         dbl    redbl  all pass      || double was for takeout.
C A8

Here's the hand (from South's point of view):

        ATxx             
        Txx              | opening lead KS.  I think declarer's best line
        Axxx             | is to win the AS, take AC and a club finesse,
KQJ9x   A8      x        | go to the AD, lead a heart to the jack, and
AQxx            xxx      | then sit back and either wait for East to ruff
KQxx            JTxx     | and then you win four more trump tricks,
---     xxx     J96xx    | or if East refuses to ruff you can eventually
        KJx              | set up a heart trick or the TS and either
        x                | win it and three trump tricks or get East
        KQT7xx           | to ruff it and then you win four trump tricks.
                         | I can't find any way to beat this plan.  

contract: 2Cxx
Opening lead: KS

The two questions are: (1) How defensible is my bidding, and (2) is
the contract as cold as I think?  I'm afraid I don't remember the
actual play except that East scored two trump tricks led by South and
the contract went down one.

------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Michael Hammond           The MathWorks, Inc.  | Testers do it  
Manager of Software Quality  (voice) 508 653-1415 | over and over! 
jmike@mathworks.com          (FAX) 508 653-2997   |                
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Yet another place the blame.
Date: 5 Jan 93 15:01:45 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

In article <1993Jan4.190727.9259@midway.uchicago.edu> pynq@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <7405@tivoli.UUCP> taylor@foraker.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Eric Taylor) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan3.202515.27062@midway.uchicago.edu>, pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers) writes:
>>I can certainly understand West wanting to open the auction.
>>	Not!   :-)
>It is a piece of cheese, but not (totally) unreasonable.
>Precision is light opener.

You asked us to assign the blame. Either this hand is systemically an
opening bid and systemically allowed to rebid 3C in which case the blame
goes 75% responder for forcing to slam and 25% to opener for agreeing to
play this absurd system or it is not and the blame goes 100% to opener.

How can we place the blame if we aren't told the system ("precision" is NOT
adequate)?
From: bpwing@phoenix.princeton.edu (Ben Wing)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Date: 8 Jan 93 08:37:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Arggggh!
Organization: Princeton University
X-Subliminal-Message: You can quit reading news anytime you want.

In article <1ielb9INNq9c@s-crim1.dl.ac.uk> mbrgw@s-crim1.dl.ac.uk (R.G. Walters) writes:
|In article <1id4uqINNrkm@rifraf.atl.ge.com> nstraguz@atl.ge.com (Nick Straguzzi) writes:
|>
|>           Why Bridge Is Better Than Chess, reason #2874:
|>         Hilarious stories like this never happen in chess.
|
|Or at least not very often :-)
|
|On a similar vein (but without the humour).
|What is the net's opinion of the best way to cope with interference of
|this sort - e.g. after the auctions
|
|2C (or 2D or whatever, strong)    (4S)     ?
|
|or
|
|2C         (4S)          Pass       Pass
|?
|
|What do Dbl, 4NT, 5 level bids etc. mean?
|What if the 2C opener was is 3rd position (i.e. after 2 passes)?
|What effect does vulnerability have?
|
|This came up last night:
|
|Vul. vs not, you deal.
|
|S  -                    You open 1NT (20+, any shape), and LHO leaps in
|H  K Q T                with 4S, passed round to you.
|D  K Q J 9 8
|C  A K Q 2              Pick a bid.
|
|Robin Walters.
|

Well, there has been tons of flamage here.  Bob continues to complain
about how Robin isn't specifying his methods for coping with interference
of 1NT.  However, I think he's missing the point:  if you read what
Robin says at the top, 

|What is the net's opinion of the best way to cope with interference of
|this sort - e.g. after the auctions

He's asking, exactly what these methods should be, so obviously he can't
specify them.

So, how 'bout we make the question as clear as possible:

Given: You are playing a system where all hands with 20+ HCP are opened
1NT.  Other openings systemically deny 20+ HCP.

And: dealer opens 1NT and LHO interferes with a 4-level or 5-level pre-
emptive bid.

And: pick the relative vulnerabilities and the scoring method.  (clearly
you want agreements that work under all combinations of such.)

Then: what should responder's bids mean?

Now whatever agreements may exist for responding to a 1NT opening with
no interference, or even for lower levels of interference, are clearly
irrelevant.  Equally irrelevant are the meanings of other opening bids
besides 1NT except that they deny 20+ HCP.  

The question is simply, what agreements will lead to the best results?
This question covers agreements about opener's rebids as well.

ben
--

"Can't we all just get along?"
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: spencer@der.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: Arggggh!
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: Society for Promotion of Entropy in the Universe (SPEU)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:45:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.124012.9222@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.101014.23075@Princeton.EDU> spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan7.000906.19081@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>>
>>As I have said before, my opinion is that if people aren't listening,
>>it's because of the way you say things.  However ignorant a person may
> 
>But what I posted wasn't a flame. It was very pointed criticism of
>bidding *ideas*. Too many people seem to ask others to criticize their
>bridge then complain that the forthcoming criticism is a "flame".

If this happens consistently (and it seems that it does) to you, and it
doesn't seem to consistely happen to other people (this part I don't
know), then apparently enough people DO think yu're flaming when YOU
think you aren't.  Draw whatever conclusions you like from that, if this
is in fact the case.

>It was only after the poster called the criticism "nonsense" that I
>replied with a flame.

My prior assertion stands, namely, that however correct you may be, no
one will listen to you if you're an asshole about it.  They may not
listen anyway even if you're not an asshole about it, but you could at
least make the effort.

-----
sss/PU'94 Dept of CS (spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu)/JvNCnet (spencer@jvnc.net)
"Mahwage.  Mahwage, is what bwings us, too-gethah, too-dahy."
From: kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bidding Opinions Sought - Part Two
Date: 7 Jan 1993 22:12:43 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: questor.sw.stratus.com

>In article <1ihmfgINNhg2@transfer.stratus.com> kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner) writes:
>IMPs, White/White, Dealer: West
>You sit South holding:
>	s x
>	h JTxx
>	d KJxxxxx
>	c x
> 
	
	W	N	E	S
	p	1NT-*	2D-**	?

*- 15:17HCP with 4333,4432,5332; 
   Agreed conventional reponses to 1NT are NFStaymen, JXF (2N->3C), TXF.
   All conventional responses off over interference except Q is
   Staymen and X is penalty.
	
**- Artificial, shows both majors

Same hand, this time E overcalls 1NT.  How does South proceed?


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Maybe he's just a little insane, like painters or composers."
							-Miracle on 34th Street
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: Bob S
Keywords: FAQ
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:29:38 GMT

In article <1ikmglINNcnv@transfer.stratus.com>, tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan8.155235.24897@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>, reha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (reha.gur) writes:
|> > playing 2/1 GF (no inverted minors, limit raises in minors,
|> > invitational NT over minors (2N = 11-12, 3N = 13-15))
|> > 
|> > MATCHPOINTS, vul vs not vul.
|> > partner opens 1d - pass to you:
|> > 
|> > your hand: A x x / A K / K J x x / x x x x
|> > 
|> > what is your bid? 
|> 
|> Is this a commercial for inverted minors?  I wish I could bid a forcing 2D
|> followed by 3N.  How else can I show a balanced 13-15 with stoppers AND good
|> diamond support, without going past 3N?
 
|> Bharat Rao suggests criss-cross forcing minor raises.  That sounds reasonable
|> if 1D-2C is not game forcing.  If 1D-2C is game forcing and 1D-3C is a diamond
|> raise, then how do you respond to 1D with Qxx,x,Jxx,AQTxxx?

You can;t bid 2C -- but playing 2/1 GF you know that you have to make the 
underbid of 1N on this hand anyway...  Anyway, this may not be so bad;
from my days of playing SA without 2/1GF, I remember the most common
result after resonding 2C with this hand was limping to 3NT down
1 or 2:-).  Also people who play 2/1 Almost Game Force (I don;t but
many do) can bail out in 3C on this hand (if they play it after
1D-2C -- many do only after 1M-2m) on an auction similar to
the SA auction.  (Funny thing, is most people playing the AGF still
get to 3NT:-).

Bharat
|> -- 
|> Tim Hill


-- 
R. Bharat Rao                         E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801   (217)-333-5978 (O), 337-6498(H)
Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Arggggh! (back to bridge)
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:32:41 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

In article <1993Jan8.190105.11715@head-cfa.harvard.edu> willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes:
>
>There is an interesting bridge question beneath all the flamage.
>
>>  K4
>>  A62
>>  A
>>  AKQJ743
>
>Suppose, as before, you open 2C, LHO says 4S, and partner and RHO
>pass.  The 2C opening was artificial and nearly game forcing; this
>hand is borderline for it.  Partner's pass shows in theory 2 controls
>outside spades (A=2, K=1), but at this level partner might "cheat" a
>little with other good values (e.g. spade void or ace or some very
>strong suit intending to pull a double).

I hate it when partner can "cheat". Without this factor, 6NT is a pretty clear
cut bid (I can count 11 tricks, any Q or a spade opening lead gives me 12
cast iron tricks, a JT gives me a finesse, or there may be squeeze
possibilties).

Would partner "cheat" on a hand with long strong diamonds and no other cards?
This is about the only hand which doesn't have play for 6NT and even with
this the club T will be sufficient.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steven G. Myerson)
Subject: Re: What's your call?
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:02:22 GMT

In article <C0Ep4I.20p@deshaw.com> Franco Baseggio writes:

* In article <C0E41o.GpD@cs.uiuc.edu> R. Bharat Rao writes:
* >In article <C0CsMI.DI4@deshaw.com>, Franco Baseggio writes:
* >|> In article <C0Cp8D.CnG@deshaw.com> I write:
* >|> >Flt B swiss, early round, white on white.  You, south, hold
* >|> >KT965
* >|> >AQ5
* >|> >A
* >|> >KT93 [ACTUALLY AT93!!!]
* >|> >
* >|> >South  North
* >|> >1S     1N
* >|> >2C     4S
* >|> >?
* >|> >
* >|> >1N was forcing, but limited to 12 HCP.  4S means that North was going
* >|> >to make a balanced 3 piece limit raise, but liked your 2C bid.
* 
* [stuff deleted]
* 
* >Essentially I need help in both black suits.  I will raise to
* >5S and that should convey this message pretty clearly (I cannot be
* >open in BOTH red suits to make a slam try, and if I needed help in
* >one red suit, I would cue the other -- ergo, my red suits must be
* >good shape).  Partner
* >will pretty much discount his red suit values (OK, the HK could be
* >very useful, shrug).  Looking at SAQ and CQJ or even at SQJ and CKQ
* >he will bid 6S...
* >
* Well, he has essentially already shown lots of black suit values.  
* 
* There seems to be general agreement that this hand should at least try
* for slam (despite a previous non-forcing bid!) but no one seems to be
* interested in 6C.  That would be the preferred slam, would it not?

If North has 4 clubs, I agree that the preferred slam is 6C.
Does the raise to 4S promise 4 clubs, though?
And it still doesn't address the problem of wasted diamond points
in the North hand, but now you're already at the 6 level.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge