HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mbrgw@s-crim1.dl.ac.uk (R.G. Walters)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Dousing the Flames
Date: 7 Jan 1993 18:34:30 -0000
Organization: Daresbury Lab., Warrington, U.K.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: seqnet.dl.ac.uk

Some of you may have been "enjoying" the war of words between myself
and Bob Silverman.  I can only say that both of us seem to have had
difficulty in following the other's position.

To Bob, I apologise for the various insults I have thrown at you - I felt
them to be appropriate descriptions for your postings, but we have
clearly been at cross purposes, each getting more exasperated with the
other. May I just say that I failed to follow your argument because you
never stated (until the last posting) that what you meant was agreements
about the _opening_ bid. That may have been a little dense of me, but I hope
you can now understand how the flames arose. Of course you are right about
the sensitivity of methods to the precise meaning of the opening bid, and
I'm sorry I failed to grasp that point without it being spelt out.

To the rest of you: Apologies for wasting bandwidth.

Robin Walters.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Arggggh!
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:40:12 GMT

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:
>>In article <1ifn8mINNc5t@transfer.stratus.com> tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
>>:Dear Bob,
>>:
>>:     I'm sorry if you're having a bad day, but would you please stop wasting
>>:network bandwidth with your flame thrower and offer us some of your wisdom
>> 
>>Why? Most of you don't listen anyway. See below.
>
>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".

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

I spelled out EXACTLY what was wrong with asking a specific type of
bidding question. There was no personal criticism involved. Yet
followups to my post then accuse me of "having a bad day" or 
"flaming" when no flames were involved.

I pointed out that asking a system dependent question without posting
agreements was meaningless. I also pointed out exactly what agreements
were relevent. This criticism was called "nonsensical" and "irrelevent".

I have not posted much recently, but instead have been simply watching.
I have come to the comclusion that 80 to 90% of the posters here are
totally clueless, and post merely to get others to back up their own
silly ideas. When someone more knowledgeable criticizes their ideas,
they treat it as a flame and don't listen: i.e. Don't confuse me with 
the facts, my mind is made up.
--
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: jonhaug@ifi.uio.no (Jon Haugsand)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Reading List?
Date: 8 Jan 93 11:09:04 GMT
        <9301042032.AA01223@MFDD2.CIMS.NYU.EDU>
Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway
        93 10:32:46 GMT
To: braams@cims.nyu.edu (Bas Braams)
Originator: jonhaug@rot.ifi.uio.no

In article <9301042032.AA01223@MFDD2.CIMS.NYU.EDU> braams@MFDD2.CIMS.NYU.EDU (Bastiaan Braams) writes:

..
> The most enjoyable reading about bridge play is, for me, Victor Mollo's
> "Bridge in the Menagerie" (and sequels) and Reese and Bird's "Miracles
> of Card Play" (and its sequels--this is Bridge in the Monastery, but
> they avoided that title).  Both these series present an outrageous cast
> of characters totally devoted to bridge, and there are scores of
> entertaining hands in each book.

I completely agree. Does anyone know how many books exist in each
series?

> On the serious side, one more book that I've often seen praised in this
> sort of context is S J Simon's "Why You Lose at Bridge".  I don't know
> it, but would be prepared to buy it blindly.

I once read it, and it was wonderful. I heard it changed name to
"How to win in Bridge", to sell better. People supposedly thought they
were not the ones addressed in the first title.

>  -- Bas Braams (braams@cims.nyu.edu)

---
Jon Haugsand
  Dept. of Informatics, Univ. of Oslo, Norway
  jonhaug@ifi.uio.no
  Fax: 852401, Addr: Bredo Stabells v.15, N-0853 OSLO, NORWAY
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Reading List?
Date: 4 Jan 1993 12:24:23 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: tornadic.sw.stratus.com
Keywords: books

In article <1993Jan3.193903.1604@netcom.com>, ditt@netcom.com (Debora Dittmar) writes:
> What books would rgbers recommend for a bridge novice to read? I want to stick
> to Standard American bidding for the present.

Good idea.  It's essential to have a good grasp of standard bidding
before tackling other systems.

> I've already got Root's Commonsense Bidding,

Excellent book.  I think you'll find that _The Biggest Little Bridge
Book in the World_ (Jim Becker et al., New York: The Beverly Card
School, 1992) complements it nicely.  TBLBBITW is a wonderfully concise
(57 5x7" pages) summary of standard bidding and play.

> Root and Pavlicek's Modern Bridge Conventions and Kantar's Bridge
> Conventions.

Leave those two on your shelf for a while.

> Something on actually playing the hand comes to mind, but what's good? Also, 

I haven't seen it, but, based on Audrey Grant's other work, _Bridge
Maxims_, by Grant and Eric Rodwell, should be a good starting point.
Follow that with Dorothy Hayden Truscott's _Winning Declarer Play_ (North
Hollywood, California: Wilshire, 1969) and Bill Root's _How to Play a
Bridge Hand_ (New York: Crown, 1990).

Don't forget defense.  I'd start with Eddie Kantar's _Introduction to
Defender's Play_ (North Hollywood, California: Wilshire, 1968).

> what books would be useful on the strategies that duplicate requires?

Start with Edith McMullin's _Adventures in Duplicate Bridge_ (Memphis:
American Contract Bridge League, 1989).  The ACBL will probably give you
a copy, along with a list of duplicate games in your area, on request.
Later you might want to look at the new edition (now being printed) of
Kay, Silodor, and Karpin's _The Complete Book of Duplicate Bridge_.

A good U.S. source for bridge books: Baron/Barclay Bridge Supplies,
800-274-2221.
-- 
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: ai428@yfn.ysu.edu (Daniel Schiffer)
Subject: Big Club-Not Precision
Reply-To: ai428@yfn.ysu.edu (Daniel Schiffer)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 05:18:27 GMT


My partner and I play a pretty vanilla standard American card. We are considering switching to a Big Club, but not precision card.  Comments, suggestions, etc. would be appreciated.
-- 
Dan Schiffer
ai428@yfn.ysu.edu  
Detroit MI
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers)
Subject: Re: Bidding Opinions Sought
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:28:39 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?
>What's the best way to proceed for each of the probable rebids by
>opener?

What's your NT range?  Should we assume that you open 1N with any 20+ HCP?

In my system, I would bid 3D (pre-emptive).  1N is 13-15, balanced.

************************************************************************
La plus belle fille du monde ne peut
donner que tout ce qu'elle a.

	- 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: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers)
Subject: Re: Arggggh! (back to bridge)
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 13:57:03 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.213241.14276@sco.COM> paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson) writes:
...
>>>  K4
>>>  A62
>>>  A
>>>  AKQJ743
...
>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).

Um, I only see 9 tricks - 10 with a spade lead.

************************************************************************
If there is a possibility of several things going wrong, the one that
will cause the most damage will be the one to go wrong.

	- 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: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Bidding and Play Problem
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:01:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.140826.20728@athena.mit.edu> jmh@athena.mit.edu (J Michael Hammond) writes:
: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.  
 
The best line of play is to win the A spades, A diamonds, ruff a diamond.
Club to the Ace, ruff a diamond. Exit with a spade. They need to defend
carefully to avoid giving up an overtrick.

:
:contract: 2Cxx
:Opening lead: KS
:
:The two questions are: (1) How defensible is my bidding, and (2) is
 
You do not say which hand you held.

J 5th of clubs and out is nowhere close to being good enough for
a penalty pass.

Does East's pass in fact say he wants to defend?  What are their agreements?
I think East should clearly bid 2D over the redouble.
 
If East's pass was for penalty, then West clearly has a fine hand to sit.
 
:the contract as cold as I think?  I'm afraid I don't remember the
 
It is FRIGID against ANY defense.

--
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: adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan)
Subject: Re: Bidding Opinions Sought - Part Two
Organization: Irvine Compiler Corp., Irvine, California, USA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:28:55 GMT

In article <1ii9srINNqrd@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?

I don't really have an answer to this, except to say you should
discuss this auction with your partner.  Where I live (Los Angeles
area), a large number of players use 2D to show both majors (part of
Hamilton/Cappelletti), so this auction will come up more than once.
Specifically, what would a double or 3D mean here?  What would 2H or
2S be (cuebids in RHO's suits)?  If you play Lebensohl, is 2NT
Lebensohl in this auction, and what do the follow-up bids mean?

In one of my partnerships, we do have agreements about this auction.
3D would be natural and invitational, and 2NT would be natural, not
Lebensohl, so I would be forced to pass.  Then, when it comes back to
me, I will bid diamonds at the lowest level possible.  (If LHO bids
4S, for example, and partner doesn't double, I'll bid 5D, expecting
that 4S will probably make and 5D will be a good sacrifice.)  I'm even
less interested in game than I would be without the 2D overcall.

                                -- Adam
From: taylor@foraker.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Eric Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Yet another place the blame.
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:38:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.190727.9259@midway.uchicago.edu>, pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers) 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:
|> >|> Vulnerability: Unknown.  Imps, West dealer.
|> >|> 
|> >|> The hands:
|> >|> 
|> >|> W) Qx,Qxx,KJx,Kxxxx
|> >|> N) AJxx,xxx,Qxxxx,J
|> >|> E) x,AKJx,Axxx,Axxx
|> >|> S) Kxxxxx,xxx,x,Qxx
|> >|> 
|> >|> The auction:
|> >|> 
|> >|>      1D (1) - 1S (!) - X - 2S
|> >|>      3C     - P      - 3S - P
|> >|>      4C     - P      - 6C (all pass)
|> >|> 
|> ...
|> Precision is light opener.

I realize that, but some 11 point hands are better than
others, and this one is pretty bad with points
scattered thoughout the spectrum.

Are there any "standard" guidelines in Precision
about the quality of points when opening or
is it "any 11 points"?
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: oldera@twg.com (Ed Alcoff -  Prod Mtg)
Subject: Re: Reading List?
Keywords: books 
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:20:53 GMT

"Play of the Hand" by Watson seems to be a standard
and Scheinwold (sp?)'s "Learn to Play Bridge in 5
Weeks" is also something of a standard.

Eddie Kantar's Defense book(s) are also very good.

Mike Lawrence has several good books on bidding
conventions incl 2/1.

Enjoy,

Ed Alcoff
From: kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Bidding Opinions Sought
Date: 7 Jan 1993 16:41:20 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: questor.sw.stratus.com

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?  
What's the best way to proceed for each of the probable rebids by
opener?


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Maybe he's just a little insane, like painters or composers."
							-Miracle on 34th Street
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: tjehl@sedona.intel.com (Timothy Jehl)
Subject: Re: Yet another place the blame.
Originator: tjehl@sedona
Reply-To: tjehl@sedona.intel.com
Organization: Intel Corporation.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 22:55:21 GMT


In article <1993Jan4.190727.9259@midway.uchicago.edu>, pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers) 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:
> >|> Vulnerability: Unknown.  Imps, West dealer.
> >|> 
> >|> The hands:
> >|> 
> >|> W) Qx,Qxx,KJx,Kxxxx
> >|> N) AJxx,xxx,Qxxxx,J
> >|> E) x,AKJx,Axxx,Axxx
> >|> S) Kxxxxx,xxx,x,Qxx
> >|> 
> >|> The auction:
> >|> 
> >|>      1D (1) - 1S (!) - X - 2S
> >|>      3C     - P      - 3S - P
> >|>      4C     - P      - 6C (all pass)
> >|> 
> ...
> >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.
>

   Yes, but...   the point to precision is that the range of bids for
minimum hands is extremely well defined.  Generally, a minimum opener
is 11 HCP for an opening of 1D, with the assumption of a four card
diamond suit.  This piece of cheese is not 11 HCP for anyone except a
novice.  East flat out lied to his partner, and, as a result,
the bidding got a hair too high.
From: braams@MFDD2.CIMS.NYU.EDU (Bastiaan Braams)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Reading List?
Keywords: books
Date: 4 Jan 93 10:32:46 GMT
Reply-To: braams@cims.nyu.edu (Bas Braams)
Organization: Courant Institute, New York University

In article <1993Jan3.193903.1604@netcom.com> ditt@netcom.com (Debora Dittmar) writes:
>What books would rgbers recommend for a bridge novice to read?
Once you've learned the basics of Standard American bidding, study
Mike Lawrence's "Judgement at Bridge" (subtitled, if I recall correctly,
"how to avoid the common mistakes", and that is precisely what it will
help you to do).  Lawrence discusses all the common situations in
constructive and competitive bidding and helps you make the right
decision.
The classics (Goren; Sheinwold's "Five Weeks to Winning Bridge") are
fine for the basics on play and defence.  You don't want to get your
view of what is "Standard American" bidding from these sources, because
they are dated and you will not be speaking the same language as your
clubmates.  But beginner's guides to play and defence don't go out of
date, and Sheinwold is excellent.
Eddie Kantar's "Complete Defensive Bridge Play" was mentioned already,
but you may find his "Introduction to Declarer's Play" and "Introduction
to Defender's Play" more accessible.
If you're ready to put in some hard work, get Hugh Kelsey's "Winning
Card Play"; comprehensive on play and defence for intermediate players.
The most enjoyable reading about bridge play is, for me, Victor Mollo's
"Bridge in the Menagerie" (and sequels) and Reese and Bird's "Miracles
of Card Play" (and its sequels--this is Bridge in the Monastery, but
they avoided that title).  Both these series present an outrageous cast
of characters totally devoted to bridge, and there are scores of
entertaining hands in each book.
On the serious side, one more book that I've often seen praised in this
sort of context is S J Simon's "Why You Lose at Bridge".  I don't know
it, but would be prepared to buy it blindly.
 -- Bas Braams (braams@cims.nyu.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: an1739@anon.penet.fi ("Professor Who?")
Subject: Pet Peeve....
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: rec.games.bridge
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 15:15:51 GMT

I see a few interesting tidbits mentioned, of various systemic treatments
that I have played over the years on minor-suit raises....

Bergen-Cohen, before they switched to more fashionable stuff (I was
amused very much by the thought of Marty deciding to play Meckwell
Precision and _then_ modifying it) did end up with a structure under
which they have no bid with a 3-1-3-6 11-count responding to 1D!

Inverted minors has always been a peeve-point of mine.  First, not too 
many people realise how important it is o have detailed agreements over
said forcing raise--- do you know what exactly everything means, when
has partner shown unbalanced hands, balanced hands, singletons,
small doubletons looking for stoppers, real suits?

[For those interested, I play that 1C-2C-2D, 1D-2D-2H are artificial
negatives showing minimum range hands, and the steps above are 
convoluted shape-showing bids designed to keep me out of 3N when

necessary, they may not be to your taste but you get the idea.]

Secondly, this is a system/structure designed for _WEAK_NO_TRUMPS_
by Kaplan-Sheinwold, where it is fine to respond 1NT with the 
semi-balanced hands (to get back to par).  The thought of having to
respond 1NT with a 5m-3-3-2 9-count to partner's 1m makes me rather sick.
however, in a strong NT system you can'
respond 2m or 3m!!  [Remember the story about "one or six diamonds.]

Of course, my philosophy drives me to the Polish style (diamonds are
for real, ALWAYS, usually FIVE) or the 4-card major biddable suits
style (again diamonds are for real) when I am using "natural" systems,
so 1D-2D is very preemptive for me ... it does _NOT_ deny a major
(Bergen and Cohen has been known to skip the major in tournament
reports) with the effect that no longer can the next hand to speak
take-out easily (when you have one of the majors, s/he will likely
be offshape) and 4-4 major suit fits are _likely_ to be lost.

For comparison, think of the 2D natural preempt.  It is IMNSHO a better
preempt than 2H, just as I think of a natural 1D-2D as a better preempt
than 1H-2H; so long as I can have majors myself (Franco if you are 
listening, you will remember that we caught someone for 500 the first time
out on this auction) I like its effect.  For "real" diamond suits
a forcng jump raise also perform reasonably well-- it is the may-b-short-
but-then-maybe-not 1D openings which is usually a balanced minimum
that causes all the trouble.

End of cheap advertisement for weak no-trumps, polish clubs,
and other perversities favoured only by Professor Who?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: taylor@foraker.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Eric Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: What's your call?
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:54:35 GMT

In article <C0Cp8D.CnG@deshaw.com>, baseggio@deshaw.com (Franco Baseggio) writes:
|> Flt B swiss, early round, white on white.  You, south, hold
|> KT965
|> AQ5
|> A
|> KT93
|> 
|> 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.
|> 
|> What if you were in a long KO match?

Partner has around 12 points with a fit in clubs.
You have 5 losers.  Partner needs 4 cover cards
for a slam.  This is a tall order for someone
who could not make a 2/1 call.  It partner held
4 cover cards and a 5+ club suit with a fit
in spades, I would expect him to have made a 2/1
call. (I assume you are playing sound openers).
Switch the diamond ace for the club 3 and I will
make a slam try.

I will pass here.