HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Which Squeeze?
Date: 30 Jul 92 14:33:23 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Paul Grossman <brdgstar@wam.umd.edu> writes:
>                 J 6 4
>                 8
>                 A K Q 3
>                 A K J 9 2

>                 A K 9
>                 A K 3
>                 9 5
>                 Q 10 7 4 3

>The play so far: West leads D-7, won in dummy, (D-2 from East). On the run
>of the clubs, West pitches: spade, heart, heart, heart. East pitches: heart,
>spade, heart. On your spade ace, West drops the ten. Now what?

It seems likely that the diamonds are 4-3.  (If they were 5-2, I doubt
the opponents could have resisted the temptation to throw one.)  In
that case I can claim.

Since each opponent has at least two diamonds remaining, it is
impossible for either opponent to guard both spades and hearts.  So, I
have set the B2 double squeeze with the diamond 3 as the double threat.

All I have to do is cash the spade and heart winners.  Then, either my
long spade will be good, or my long heart will be good, or one
opponent will retain a spade and the other opponent a heart, in which
case the diamonds are good.

The only way this line can fail is if one opponent really does guard
both majors.  If West has them, then I couldn't have made it anyway:

        QTxx            xxx
        QTxxxx          xxx
        7x              JT8x2
        x               xx

If East has both majors, then I guess they got me:

        Txx             Qxxx
        Jxxx            Qxxxx
        JT87x           x2
        x               xx

In that case I should have played for the double squeeze with the
heart 3 as the double threat.

                                        David desJardins
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Yet another assign the blame
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:54:24 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul28.143618.7288@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
> I don't know how you only went down 3.

He didn't.  He was non-vulnerable and undoubled.  -300 = down 6!

                                - Tim
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Problem Solvers' Panel 15.3
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:16:29 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Avi Roy Shapira <avir@chen.bgu.ac.il> writes:
>I am sure David Desjardins can gives us the exact prior odds, but I
>will guess they will be closer to 33% than to 50%

I can't possibly give odds unless people define their terms better.  I
think most of this discussion stems from confusion about terms, which
in turn connects with differences in style.

What does "a one-loser club suit" mean?  To one person, it might mean
two of the top three clubs.  To another, it might mean a suit which
usually has only one loser opposite a singleton.  To another, it might
mean a suit which almost never has more than one loser, even opposite
a void.

                                        David desJardins
From: msl@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Mark Laventhal )
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 16:08:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Bidding problem
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge

> 
> >East did open 1D, and partner responded with 3C (strong jump overcall),
> 
> I think you mean a strong jump-shift response.  A jump
> overcall (or any other overcall) occurs when the opponents
> open.
> 
Yes, of course I mean strong jump-shift.  Obviously a disconnect between
my brain and my typing fingers.
> 
> I have trouble imagining a reasonable jump-shift in clubs
> opposite this hand.  I have even greater difficulty imagining
> one that doesn't make 6C.  I would say both of your opponents
> misbid pretty seriously.
> 
The reason that the contact went down is that the side suits split
really badly.  E.g. West had a singleton diamond, but so did I (South);
West had 5 spades, but they split 6-2.  So, even with cross-ruffing,
they ended up having to give up 1 spade and 1 diamond.

Of course, West's 3C bid, holding 5-5 in the black suits, was another
incomprehensible bid.

Mark
From: hargrove@nobelium.SLCS.SLB.COM (Jim Hargrove)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Problem Solvers' Panel 15.3
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:45:46 GMT
Organization: Schlumberger Austin Systems Center

Submitter's Comments
--------------------

I suspect that a fair number of people will call 3N.  The point is that there
is "no such thing as a RED vs WHITE preempt on the 3 level", so partner should
have great broken clubs and nothing outside so that the bid is descriptive.

My partner managed a 5C call, which almost always makes 6.  The other table
managed 3N, which goes down on all but the most brain-dead of defenses.

My 3C hand? T 6 953 KQJT8753  Maybe I should try 4C instead of 3C, but this
precludes partner bidding 3N holding AX of clubs and stoppers across.

=============
Frankly, with that hand opposite
 S-AKQ4 H-A753 D-AQJ6 C-9

I want to be in 6C. It looks to me that it takes a diamond opening lead and a bad spade break to beat it.
--
-- 

        -- jwh
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: m36150p@kaira.hut.fi (Janne Veikko Petteri Kallunki)
Subject: Re: AKQJxxxx in hearts and 18 points
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 06:05:25 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.091720.1550@nntp.hut.fi> m36150p@kaira.hut.fi (Janne Veikko Petteri Kallunki) writes:
>ALL/N IMP:

>N:
>ATx
>T
>KQJxxx
>Jxx

>S: (me)
>-
>AKQJ9xxx
>A
>ATxx

>But how to make 7NT which is always home?

I notice that it's not home with C lead but with H lead it is.
I play A of spades and A of diamonds to it. Then three big diamonds
and club and seven hearts. It makes 13 tricks.

-----
Janne 'Jake' Kallunki m36150p@kaira.hut.fi jkallunk@otax.hut.fi
p. home 4553831, work 1543562
"One-Two-Three-Four"
	-Dee-Dee Ramone 
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: hartman@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Christopher Hartman)
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:39:20 GMT

morgan@math.psu.edu (Ilene Morgan) writes:

[original thread deleted]

>Hi - I haven't really been paying attention to this thread but I noticed
>this article.  I also am against conventions whose main advantage is that
>unprepared opponents will be taken unawares.  However, I like two-way game
>tries, and since we only play them in uncontested auctions it is not that
>likely that an opponent will be damaged by failure to discuss a defense, since
>both opponents have already passed.

>I play them a little differently.

>1H-2H-2S:  prepares for long suit game try
>2NT:       relay (responder)
>3C, 3D, 3H:  long suit game try (opener)

>1H-2H-2NT:  short suit try in spades
>1H-2H-3C,3D:  short suit try


>1S-2S-2NT:  prepares for long suit game try
>3C:         relay (responder)
>3D,3H:      long suit game try (opener)
>3NT:        long suit game try in clubs (opener)
Huh??? I think this is a little bit to far to go for a game TRY!  If I
understand what you are saying, you are already at 3N.  How could
responder not go to game now?

>1S-2S-3C,3D,3H:  short suit game try

>I'm sure other methods are playable, but this has worked well for me.

>Ilene
>morgan@math.psu.edu
--
Chris Hartman   hartman@symcom.math.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge,misc.forsale,ne.forsale
From: doug@admiral.uucp (Doug Fields)
Subject: Bridge books for sale
Organization: The Admiral's Unix System & The Grid BBS
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 00:03:37 GMT

I have the following bridge books for sale, all paperbacks:
 
Sheinwold, Alfred: 5 Weeks to Winning Bridge. $3
Mollo, Victor & Gardener, Mollo: Card Play Technique. $6.50
Kearse, Amalya: Bridge Conventions Complete. $15
Stewart, Frank: The Bridge Player's Comprehensive Guide to Defense. $8
 
5 Weeks is obviously used. Bridge Conventions is slightly worn, and the
other two are in mint condition.
 
Price does not include minimal shipping via US mail ($1 or so). Terms
are prepay or pay when you get it (provide references, if any). COD would
cost too much compared to the books. If someone wants more than one, and
another person wants just one, the person who buys more than one gets the
one in contest. Otherwise, first come first serve.
 
You may reply to:
 
yale.edu
microsoft.com
yale.edu
 
Cheers,
 
Doug
 

-- 
Doug Fields -- 100 Midwood Road, Greenwich, CT 06830 -- (FAX) +1 203 661 2996
uucp: uunet!admiral!doug ------------------ fields-doug@cs.yale.edu: Internet
--------- Magpie and Waffle BBSes and FREE shell accounts available ---------
| (HST/V32) +1 203 661 2873; (MNP6) -2967; (PEP/V32) -1279; (V32/V42) -0450 |
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Yet another query about bridge software for personal computers
Summary: (In this case, specifically, the PC)
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:05:29 GMT
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, don't buy software - buy a book.

That said, a friend of mine asked me about bridge software for the PC.
She would like shareware/freeware if possible, but is willing to spend
money if necessary.  (Pretty much the standard schtick...)

She is just starting to learn bridge, so it doesn't have to be much.  I
have Bridge Pal, which isn't great, but does have the benefit of being free.

I'd like recommendations along with prices and targeted skill levels.
(My own view is that bridge software can be useful, at the right price
and when targeted at a user of the appropriate skill level.)

************************************************************************
Please don't drink the battery acid, it tastes bad and will hurt you.
Also, don't bite the tyres, especially when the bike is moving.
(Our lawyers made us put this in this manual.)

	- pynq@quads.uchicago.edu, who is still costing the net
	  hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars, every time he posts -
************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: georgeyu@leland.Stanford.EDU (George Yu)
Subject: Anyone have news from Toronto?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 20:26:24 GMT

Hi,
Anyone at Toronto have few minutes to give some news from the Nationals?
I would especially appreciate news of the Grand Nationals and the Junior
Trials (and the later national events as well).  Thanks in advance.


George
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: campbell@Aero.org (Andrew Campbell)
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
Keywords: game tries
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 19:04:16 GMT

-- 
The subject matter, basically two-way game tries afte a single
major raise, prompts me to post a method that I encountered
recently at Bridge Week, and which intrigues me a lot. I am told
that it is the creation of Ed Davis, and I hope I have it right.
Note the 3C/2H and 3D/2S bids, which may be BLUFF game tries.

Here is the basic scheme after 1H - pass - 2H (adjust 1 up for 
1S - pass - 2S). The same scheme is used by responder after
sequences such as 1m - P - 1H - p - 2H - p. Game tries might be
slam tries, and there may be special agreements I am not aware of
for competetive auctions, acceptance after unbalanced tries, etc.

Opener:

2S	forces 2NT, opener will make a long suit game try
2NT	forces 3C,  opener will make a short suit game try
                    in a MINOR as follows:
                    3D = short C
                    3H = short D (non-forcing)
3C	forces 3D,  opener is either making a general, presumably
                    balanced, try with emphasis on no particular
                    suit, or he is making a preemptive bluff game
                    try; the (only possible) responses:
                    3D = I accept (but then 3H shows a BLUFF)
                    3H = I reject (and then pass is ambiguous)
3D      = short suit game try in the other major (spades)
3H      = requests help in the trump suit (could also be a bluff
          with very good trumps and a weak hand)
 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|L. Andrew Campbell     internet: campbell@aerospace.aero.org   |
|M1-102 PO Box 92957    organization: The Aerospace Corp.       |
|Los Angeles CA 90009   telephone: (310) 336-8642               |
From: grove@triangle.Berkeley.EDU (Eddie Grove)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: after 1N - X - 2S
Date: 28 Jul 1992 18:44:22 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: triangle.berkeley.edu


I am interested in the following ordinary auctions:
1N - X - 2S - X and 1N - X - 2S - P; P - X

If the doubles are penalty, what to do with 1-4-4-4?
If takeout, what to do with a penalty holding?
In any case, what to do with 2 or 3 cards spades and
reasonable values?

Is 2N some sort of cue-bid?  If so, how does it differ from 3S?

I assume in "standard" both doubles are "penalty".  How good a
trump holding should that show?

If this is well described in some book, please post or mail
me a reference.

Eddie Grove
From: zilch@planb.Eng.Sun.COM (John Hoffman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Zip Swiss misadventure
Date: 30 Jul 1992 18:54:41 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: zilch@planb.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: planb

Assign the blame...
from yet another instant partnership at the Midnight Swiss teams
in Toronto:

All vul.
South    West   North   East
  3H      DBL    Pass    3N
  Pass    Pass   Pass

South leads the Jack of spades and East wishes he were somewhere else:

            West
            S- Q62
            H- 
            D- AKJ4
            C- AK8632
South                North
S- JT                S- AK8753
H- AKT9764           H- 832
D- 85                D- T9
C- 54                C- QT
            East
            S- 94
            H- QJ5
            D- Q7632
            C- J97

Playing safe, North ran 6 spades before returning a heart,
for down 4.  It could have been down 9 (!) but EW also could have
found a way to 5 of a minor, making on the fortuitous club break.

Evaluate the EW bidding.

John Hoffman
john.hoffman@eng.sun.com

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: skataba@pbhyf.PacBell.COM (Sam Atabaki)
Subject: Re: Bidding of Hand, is there a good way to do this?
Reply-To: skataba@PacBell.COM (Sam Atabaki)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:30:35 GMT

In article <23348@alice.att.com> jj@alice.UUCP (jj, audio curmudgeon) writes:
>I must say that we lack any good way of interrogating (re)opener
>
>N
>
>S   -   Axx
>H   -   
>D   -   xx  
>C   -   Q J 10 9 6 5 3 2 
>
>S
>
>S   -   x
>H   -   Axxxx
>D   -   KQx
>C   -   AK84
>
>bidding opens with West, who opens 1H  (using Std. American 5 Card Maj)
>
>What really happened was preposterously stupid, we got to 5C,
>doubled. (I think that E was supposed to pull the double, but
>
>How to show the preposterously long suit in second seat and the
>strength in 4th?  Like I said, suggestions are welcome.


This is how I would bid it:

W     N      E      S
1h    2c(1)  p(2)   2h(3)
p     3c(4)  4n(5)  5d(6)
6c    p      p      p

(1) Suit length and void justify this bid at any vul.
(2) You did not mention if East made a bid, but I assume not- if West's
    bid is genuine East can not have much anyway.
(3) Strong cue-bid; forcing at least to game.
(4) I only have clubs and am not strong.
(5) Blackwood. Partner probably has a singleton heart or is void, so
    combined hands can not have more than 2 losers.
(6) One ace- that is what I want to hear. If pard bids 5c I pass.

-Sam.
From: blosser_cy@lrc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: READ THIS!
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:15:41 GMT
Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC

HEY, YOU--YEAH, YOU STUPID BRIDGE-PLAYER...GET A LIFE!!!
From: sater@cs.vu.nl (Hans van Staveren)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: report 8 from the EBL juniors
Date: 22 Jul 92 09:03:11 GMT

desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:

>Hans van Staveren <sater@cs.vu.nl> writes:
>>brd 19   -
]> S/EW    Q 9 7
]>         J 9 7 6 3
]>         10 6 5 4 2
]> A Q 10 9 8 3    J 6 4
]> J 6 4 2         A K 10 5 3
]> A 10 4          K Q 5
]> -               A J
]>         K 7 5 2
]>         8
]>         8 2
]>         K Q 9 8 7 3

]> ... we saw that declarer would almost certainly make it.  The spades
]> are automatic, and after a couple of rounds the hearts should be
]> easily guessable.

>I don't see why you expect declarer to guess the hearts "easily."
>Presumably declarer draws trump, discovering that spades are 0-4, and
>eliminates the diamonds, discovering that diamonds are 5-2.  Now when
>declarer leads the second round of hearts toward the dummy, the odds
>are exactly even between the heart drop and the finesse.

>                                        David desJardins

Yes, but howmany players holding a 0256 green versus red pass
nowadays? The fact that north has not bid makes the 0355 hand a lot
more likely.

Bidding on garbage is getting more popular every day, and I can
assure you that the juniors are not among the more coward players.

Apart from that clue from the bidding you are of course right.

	Hans
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: olle@astro.uu.se (Olof Morell)
Subject: Re: Bidding problem
Organization: UDAC, Uppsala, Sweden
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 08:42:08 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.001038.1986@linus.mitre.org>, bs@faron.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
|> In article <102440013@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com> msl@hpcvlx.cv.hp.com (Mark Laventhal ) writes:
|> :The following hand came up at an informal game.
|> :Dealer (East) held:
|> :
|> :	S: 
|> :	H: Tx
|> :	D: Axxxxx
|> :	C: KQxxx
|> :
|> :In practice, East bid 4N (Blackwood), which of course is another blatant
|> :example of Blackwood being abused.  East ended up bidding 6C when West 
|> :showed 3 Aces, but the contract was down 1.
|>  
|> Huh? West makes a strong jump shift in clubs missing 2 of the 3 top
|> honors, shows all 3 Aces, and this hand stops in 6C?? And it goes
|> DOWN? It must have been a mighty strange 3C call. 

I have absolutely no idea of the actual West hand, but what about
AK, AK, QT8, AJ10987 :-)

I agree that stopping in 6C is astonishing, though...

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

Snail Mail - Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden
From: kpsmith@cookie.asd.sgi.com (Kevin P. Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Try this one out...
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:22:42 GMT
Reply-To: kpsmith@sgi.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc.

In article <1992Jul20.163431.1155@sco.com>, philipg@sco.COM (Philip Gordon) writes:
>
>Matchpoints
>Fairly weak opponents
>N/S Vulnerable
>
>South:  
>  S: QT6432
>  H: 852
>  D: 74
>  C: 932
>
> 1. North   East   South   West
>    ---------------------------
>     1S      2D     Pass    2H
>     2S     Pass    Pass    3D
>     3S     Pass    Pass   Pass
>
>Do you agree with all of south's bids?  If, not when and what would you
>bid differently?

I disagree with South's first pass.  I would have called a misdeal instead.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: philipg@sco.COM (Philip Gordon)
Subject: Try this one out...
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. (ODT 2.0 is here!)
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:34:31 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.bridge
Summary: bidding problems, Matchpoints


Matchpoints
Fairly weak opponents
N/S Vulnerable

South:  
  S: QT6432
  H: 852
  D: 74
  C: 932

 1. North   East   South   West
    ---------------------------
     1S      2D     Pass    2H
     2S     Pass    Pass    3D
     3S     Pass    Pass   Pass

Do you agree with all of south's bids?  If, not when and what would you
bid differently?
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 01:13:08 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

graeme@castle.ed.ac.uk (G J Ackland) writes:
: In article <1992Jul21.030846.5333@ramon.bgu.ac.il> avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira) writes:
: >IMHO the reaseon for this debate is simply because on some hands long suit
: >tries are more usefull, while on others SSGT are more informative.
: >
: >Why not use both?
: >
: >After 1H-2H, the bid of 2S asks partner to bid 2NT, after which
: >opener will make a SSGT in the suit above the singleton. (3c with a singleton
: >spades). 2NT is a long suit try in spades. 3C 3D are natural and long.
: >Similarly, after 1S-2S, 2NT is a relay to 3C, and again opener bids the suit
: >above the singleton.
:
: This is a nice solution, but why bid the suit above the singleton?
:
: >You don't lose anything by this approach. Bidding the suit above the
: >singleton minimizes the risk that the oppenents will be able to find a cheap
: >sacrifice by doubling.
: > [rest deleted]
:
: I am not generally in favour of banning new ideas, but it seems to me
: that the claimed advantage of this (suit above the singleton) is to exploit
: the fact that opponents have not had chance to discuss defences to it.
: A ten second discussion (X shows length in the singleton suit) would
: resolve it - but who has the time?  As an opponent waiting to double the
: SSGT, I'll have to ask about the alert, digest the information, consider
: how partner will read a double of the suit above the singleton and
: then...  but by now partner's constrained by my hesitation.
:
: Surely a straight SSGT is fairer (and after the transfer, I suppose,
: rebidding trumps to show the unbiddable S/C suit).
:

Of course it's easy to agree that double means the suit of the singleton,
but it is riskier.

The point is that if I bid two spades, showing a singleton spade,
and you double, you know for sure that if partner has no fit, you will not
have to play the hand.  We are unlikely to leave 2S* in.

On the other hand, suppose I bid 3C, to show a singleton spade. Should
you now decide to double, you may get away with it, if partner has a fit,
but if he does not, we may very well accept 3C doubled as the contract,
and now you will have the dubious pleasure of either letting us make
3C doubled or playing *Three* spades doubled against bad breaks and
underpower.  Note that if the singleton is any suit but spades, doubling
will force you to the FOUR level.

Naturally, any singleton showing bid may permit the opponents to find an
occasional cheap sac. But bidding the suit above the singleton makes it more
difficult.

There is another advatage to the suit above the singleton approach, and that
it makes the scheme consistent for both majors, but this is only a minor
aestethical point.

Avi






Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack Newsbaum)
Subject: Re: Try this one out...
Date: 24 Jul 92 14:05:20 PDT

In article <1992Jul20.163431.1155@sco.com>, on 20 Jul 1992 16:34:31 GMT,
philipg@sco.COM (Philip Gordon) writes:

>
>
>Matchpoints
>Fairly weak opponents
>N/S Vulnerable
>
>South:
>  S: QT6432
>  H: 852
>  D: 74 
>  C: 932
>
> 1. North   East   South   West
>    ---------------------------
>     1S      2D     Pass    2H
>     2S     Pass    Pass    3D
>     3S     Pass    Pass   Pass
>
>Do you agree with all of south's bids?  If, not when and what would you
>bid differently?
>
Yes.

    ====Jack====
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge