HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: satadd00@nx29.mik.uky.edu (scott andrew taddiken)
Subject: Request for partner.
Keywords: aggressive 4cm, natural style
Summary: Rixi reader seeks partner for okbridge.
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:54:03 GMT

It says it all up there.  I've played now for two and a half years,
and am now able to score consistently in the top half of our local
duplicate club, but I am no expert.

Professor WHO's most recent posting and Rixi's sad departure made
me think about how nice it would be to bid as she advises in her
books and columns.

Write, and we'll try to arrange a time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Scott A. Taddiken, University of Kentucky



Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: morgan@math.psu.edu (Ilene Morgan)
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
Organization: Penn State Department of Mathematics
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:14:35 GMT

In article <Bs4n9L.9AD@news.cso.uiuc.edu> hartman@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Christopher Hartman) writes:
>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

Oops -- the gremlins crept in.  Obviously 3NT would be a stupid game try.
The proper long suit game try in clubs is 1S-2S-2NT-3C-3S.  Make more sense?

Nice to know that someone is reading my posts. :-)

Ilene
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: jss@lucid.com (Jerry Schwarz)
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
Reply-To: jss@lucid.com (Jerry Schwarz)
Organization: Lucid, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 23:42:20 GMT

In article <l78kobINNc9u@cypress.cs.utexas.edu>, varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
|> 
|> By the way, do people generally relay for short-suit tries?  The published
|> versions of this that I have seen bid the short-suit try directly and
|> relay for the long- (or help-) suit try.
|> 

I've usually played that responder may accept or refuse the relay
game try without "inquiring" about the suit (i.e. instead of accepting the
relay).  When this happens the opponents aren't going to find out
which suit the try was in.  Generally it seems more
useful for the defenders to know where declarers singleton is
than where his secondary suit is, so I have used the relay for
the short-suit.

  -- Jerry Schwarz

+
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Short vs Long suit game tries
Date: 27 Jul 1992 14:48:27 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.cs.utexas.edu

In article <24158@castle.ed.ac.uk> 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?

Because --

>>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.

>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?

It is relatively *safe* to double a short-suit game try, for any of
a variety of artificial or natural messages, BECAUSE THE OPPONENTS
WILL SELDOM IF EVER WANT TO PLAY THAT CONTRACT.

That is, 1S-2S; 3C (SSGT in clubs) is safe to double.  You would fall
off your chair if the opponents were to redouble and play the contract.
On the other hand, 1S-2S; 3D (SSGT in clubs) is very dangerous to
double.  You can easily find yourself playing 3D redoubled, with nowhere
to run.  If you are very lucky, 4C loses less.  That is also the reason
for using the suit *above* the singleton instead of the suit *below*,
as is often done by relayers.  It preempts the opponents' most likely
interference!

From a technical standpoint suit above the singleton will sometimes gain
and will hardly ever lose.  This is *not* an example of an idea that is
useful only because it is unfamiliar.  (I'm generally against those too.)
It is an idea that contains a trap just subtle enough to catch the unwary.

By the way, do people generally relay for short-suit tries?  The published
versions of this that I have seen bid the short-suit try directly and
relay for the long- (or help-) suit try.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
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: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 06:37:50 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.130803.855@e2big.mko.dec.com> barth@bcse.enet.dec.com (Karl Barth) writes:
>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
>|>

>What was their auction?  I'm not sure I'd be very comfortable passing 6NT with

N       S
2D(1)   2NT(2)
3H(3)   4NT(4)
5D(5)   6H 
6NT(?)  PASS(?????)

1 = 6 diamonds max 11 points
2 = ask
3 = max 1 heart 10-11 p.
4 = 4-ace Blackwood
5 = one ace

------
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: satadd00@nx27.mik.uky.edu (scott andrew taddiken)
Subject: Re: AKQJxxxx in hearts and 18 points
Keywords: Imagination, Bidding
Summary: Ely Culbertson Lives!
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:17:13 GMT

> ALL/N IMP:
> 
> N:
> ATx
> T
> KQJxxx
> Jxx
> 
> S: (me)
> -
> AKQJ9xxx
> A
> ATxx
> 
> N     S
> 1D    1H
> 2D    7H

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

Dee Dee, I'm not sure what system could get you to 7NT.  I greatly admire
your chutzpah in leaping to 7H.  You deserved success.  Clearly, however,
neither you nor your opponents were playing the Culbertson system of bidding.

;)

When partner opens 1 diamond, we picture him with 3 honor tricks.  "But,"
you complain, "he has only 2."  Well, Ely lets us get away with (roughly)
half an honor trick less for improved length and high honor strength in
the long suits, and a full honor trick less if we have a very shapely hand.
Two is as little as he could possibly have, and if he had that, he'd have to
have good diamonds and maybe another good suit.

Picture it.  Perhaps he has no honor tricks in spades.  Then he must have at
least king-queen in each minor suit, and long diamonds. Then 7 hearts is
clearly right. You may continue the analysis for one half, one, 1 and 1 half,
and 2 honor tricks in spades, but that is unnecessary.  The worst situation
is if partner has 2 honor tricks in spades, and half an honor trick with his
long diamonds (barely possible).  The auction makes the situation clear.

  N     S
----- -----
 1D    2H
 3D    3H
 3S*   4C
 4H    6D
 Pass#

* A safe bid to make, and the most descriptive one we can find.
# Of course, 7D is on, but that's a hard bid to find.  Partner is
  giving us a choice.  Could it be that he is worried about the quality of
  his hearts?  Not too likely.  Perhaps, given this misfit auction, he is
  worried about entries.  He might think that 6D might play better. That seems
  more likely.  If you ask yourself why partner didn't bid the Culbertson 4NT,
  and you're feeling lucky today, you just might shoot for 7D, hoping to set
  up partner's hearts if they are not absolutely solid.

Of course, I'm raving.  Anyone playing a reasonable system and counting points
instead of honor tricks should be able to reach 6D, and possibly 7D.  The
important thing is to try to form a picture of your partner's hand in your
mind.

Dotting i's and crossing t's: The Culbertson 4 NT is bid when you have 3 Aces
or 2 Aces and the king of a bid suit.  With more or less, you should make an
asking bid, make a direct slam try, or just bid the slam.  Does it seem
possible, on this auction, that South has less than a Culbertson 4 NT bid?
Decidedly not.  Thus, he has two aces and two bid kings at least, or three
aces and a bid king at least.  Maybe he has Aces and Kings in hearts and clubs,
but no Ace of diamonds.  This seems possible, so we pass.



Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Re: Zip Swiss misadventure
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 15:52:44 GMT

In article <1529@idacrd.UUCP> desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>zilch@planb.Eng.Sun.COM writes:

>>  West             East     
>>  S- Q62           S- 94    
>>  H-               H- QJ5   
>>  D- AKJ4          D- Q7632 
>>  C- AK8632        C- J97   
>
>100% of the blame to South.  Preempts work.  What else is new?
>

Agreed.

(I have kept silent until now, as I knew I would see people come up with
all kinds of sequences to get you to the game that makes [and makes only
because of lucky breaks])

I agree with East's bid.  In the heat of battle, it is likely to be right.

South gets 50% of the blame for bidding 3H and 50% more for finding an
inspired lead.  Note that if he leads fourth best (like he's supposed to)
you'll wrap this up.

I will agree, thoough, that the form of scoring (IMPs) makes some
difference.  At matchpoints, I think 3NT is clear.   However, minor
suit games are always hard to bid and hard to make, even at IMPs.
(Especially, on this hand, where partner is showing interest in spades)

BTW, did the original poster say what happened at the other table?

************************************************************************
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 -
************************************************************************
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Do you convert for penalties?
Date: 25 Jul 92 01:42:20 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Nick Martino writes:
>IMP's, NS VUL. South holds:

>       9 A6532 K7 87643

>  East    South    North   West
>   2H       P        P*      X
>    P       ?

>*Long hesitation

Presumably West made the slow pass and North doubled.

I think that this is nothing like a penalty pass.  They could easily
make 2H*, particularly with the slow pass.  On the other hand, you
could have a slam if partner has a halfway decent hand like
QTxx/x/AQx/AKxxx.

If you play Lebensohl where you can bid 3C showing a decent hand, that
seems best.  The alternative is to jump to 4C.  That could be too
much, though: partner is known to have short hearts and so would be
under some pressure to reopen even with an off-shape hand.

                                        David desJardins
From: sater@cs.vu.nl (Hans van Staveren)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: report 14 from the EBL juniors
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:17:12 GMT

Just came back from Paris, where I discovered that my normal means of
discovering foreign cities and my current temporary employment do not
mix: I have blisters on my feet. I actually went into the Louvre, which
is hard to explain since I never went into the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam
yet. All the tourists do, and I was a tourist today so...

I will report the scores from today, without comment on the matches for
the simple reason I was not there, maybe the daily bulletin will provide
some info tomorrow. I have the first session off, so I might be able to
type in a good deal.

Round 17:
Netherlands - Norway		16 - 14
Turkey - C.I.S.			 7 - 23
France - Germany		12 - 18
Italy - Finland			13 - 17
Romania - Sweden		14 - 16
Iceland - Hungary		10 - 20
Portugal - Denmark		21 -  9
Greece - Poland			10 - 20
Lithuania - Austria		 2 - 25
Ireland - Estonia		 5 - 25 (An eery silence falls)
Belgium - bye			18 -  0
Great Britain - Israel		19 - 11

It looks like the Irish have definitely switched to drinking instead of
bridging.

Round 18:
Finland - Iceland		19 - 11
Germany - Ireland		21 -  9
C.I.S. - Romania		25 -  5
Belgium - Netherlands		 0 - 25
Hungary - Italy			 6 - 24
Sweden - Turkey			25 -  3
Estonia - France		 3 - 25
Austria - Great Britain		16 - 14
Denmark - Greece		21 -  9
Poland - Portugal		18 - 12
Lithuania - Israel		 5 - 25
Norway - bye			18 -  0

If my countrymen would only spread their successes more evenly...

The top 5:
1. Germany	332
2. Italy	328
3. Norway	320
4. Poland	320
5. Austria	312

It is still the same old five, but with five more rounds to go the
tension rises. I will make a voluntary fool out of myself and predict
Italy will win. Tomorrow there are three sessions and on Sunday two.

The appeal from the Germany - Iceland match was handled. I just met the
Iceland captain and he told me that German lost the appeal and their
money. It was strange, when I made the ruling I was without doubt, but
the longer I started thinking the more the German reasoning began to
make sense. The appeal committee probably did not think long about it :-)

Just kidding: the German reasoning was that South knew East had misbid,
and that he did not want to warn them. This however only makes sense if
you decide from the start that you cannot make game, and that your
partner has a chance to diagnose the situation.

That's it for today. One more administrative thing. Last Sunday I
couldn't get on the net because the terminal room here was closed. I
will try to change that next Sunday, but just in case I don't succeed I
would appreciate Email from someone in France who can see the results on
Minitel and can post them if I cannot. Just send me your telephone
number, and I will call you if I run into trouble. Tia,

	Hans van Staveren
From: matthew@pram.cs.ucla.edu (Matthew Merzbacher)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Yet another assign the blame
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:41:21 GMT
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department

pi@wam.umd.edu (Raymond L. Gilbert) writes:


>Matchpoints, E/W vul, N dealer

>    North             South
>S: A Q J T 9 x    S:
>H: x              H: T x x x
>D: J              D: A K x x x x
>C: A K J x x      C: x x x

>The bidding (E/W passing throughout, not even a double!):
>    North             South
>     1S                1N
>     3C                3D
>     3S                3N
>     4S                5D
>     5N                P

Bob Silverman has already pointed out the problems with the 3S
bid, but I'd like to take exception with 3N (as well).  With the 
South hand, I'd bid 4C over 3S.  In clubs, your hand is worth 
(almost) 5 tricks.  In notrump, it's worth about 3.
--

Matthew Merzbacher	ARPA:	matthew@CS.UCLA.EDU
Moo - Moo Moo  		UUCP:	...!{uunet|rutgers|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!matthew
               		This time, *with* the oys
From: kempr@cs.man.ac.uk (Ray Kemp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Classical v. Crowhurst Acol
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:08:33 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, U. of Manchester
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1b1

There has been a little discussion on modifications to Acol described by
Eric Crowhurst in his book 'Understanding Acol', specifically the notion
of 'false preference'.  This book raises several other controversial
issues and I think it would be of interest, to acolites at least, to
widen the discussion a little.

It seems that the main change in emphasis is the move towards 5 card
majors and the importance of discovering 4-4 or 5-3 major fits.  Although
his approach patches over some of the cracks in Acol there appears to be
a definite cost, principally that opening and re-bid no trump hands are
virtually totally distributional.  For example, he gives the following
hand :

           K J 9 4,   A K Q 7,   A 5 2,   7 4

which he suggests should be open with 1H and over a 2D response he
re-bids 3NT.  Isn't this approach too cavalier even for pairs?  I would
like other people's opinions on this, particularly any partnerships that
have tried incorporating these ideas into their bidding and whether it
has been successful or not.

Note, I'm not too interested in widening the discussion to include Acol
versus other systems (this kind of discussion usually gets out of hand)
but just Crowhurst Acol versus 'classical' Acol.

Ray Kemp.
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, audio curmudgeon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Bidding of Hand, is there a good way to do this?
Summary: Distributional to say the least
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:39:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23348
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, audio curmudgeon)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

I must say that we lack any good way of interrogating (re)opener
over that person's pre-empt.  Advice and suggestions are more than
welcome.

The hand.

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
I won't answer for their side since I don't read minds!)
Declarer north.  Whoops, sorry, didn't rearrange it.

How to show the preposterously long suit in second seat and the
strength in 4th?  Like I said, suggestions are welcome.
-- 
 Bush    *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   vs       *by USENET and like free facilities granted. Said permission is
 Clinton  --    *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 Just Say !NO!       *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: report 8 from the EBL juniors
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:46:42 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

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
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Problem Solvers' Panel 15.3
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:22:52 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Nick Martino writes:
>This may be a matter of partnership style to some, but I consider it
>unthinkable at IMP scoring to bid 3C in first seat at unfavorable
>vulnerability on a 6-trick hand (e.g., x xx xxx KQJTxxx).

>Nonetheless, I can't help but wish a few more of my opponents would
>have 3C bids that don't make 6C opposite the SOUTH collection.

Personally, I can't help but wish that a few more of my opponents
would pass with KQJTxxx of clubs and let me have an unobstructed,
constructive auction.

                                        David desJardins

P.S. to Nick: Why do your postings have the following useless From:
line?
                From: Nick Martino

Is this an intentional way of preventing people from replying to your
messages?
From: feng@phy.duke.edu (Yutao Feng)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: bridge software for Sun or Mac?
Keywords: none
Date: 29 Jul 92 19:32:38 GMT


I'm a beginner of bridge and looking for a computer program by which I can 
practice with the computer. Can someone tell me if there is a ftpsite I can
get share programs from? (for use on Sun or Mac) 
Thanks.

-- 
	Yutao Feng ~{7kSpLN~}			919-660-2644
	Duke University Dept. of Physics ~{6E?K4sQ'No@mO5~}
	Durham, N.C.      27706			feng@phy.duke.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: barth@bcse.enet.dec.com (Karl Barth)
Subject: Re: AKQJxxxx in hearts and 18 points
Reply-To: barth@bcse.enet.dec.com (Karl Barth)
Organization: Bridge-o-matic, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 13:08:03 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
|>
|>N     S
|>1D    1H
|>2D    7H
|>
|>Because my partner opened I decided to make 7H and I thought that I would
|>make it anyway so I made the straight raise.
|>7H is always 1 down because W have only two diamonds. In the other board
|>they made 6NT so we lost 17 IMP.
|>But how to make 7NT which is always home?
|>

I don't think I'd want to be in 7NT on a club lead.  If you promise me that they'll
lead a spade, then 7NT is wonderful.

What was their auction?  I'm not sure I'd be very comfortable passing 6NT with
the south cards.  Nor would I feel very good about bidding 6NT with the south cards.

K.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge