HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heathd@ucs.orst.edu (Du Shi-hua Heath)
Subject: question of pcigc40.exe
Organization: University Computing Services - OSU
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:58:39 GMT

hi,

I have a question about pcigc40.exe.  I have a monochrome monitor.  The
board of go is black and the mouse cursor is also black, so I don't know
where is the cursor on the board.  Is there way I can see it on a
monochrome monitor?

I could use neither kermit, nor procomm, after i use pcigc40.exe.  Those
program was frozen.  I had to reboot my pc.  Could anyone tell me what
went wrong?

Thank you,

Wen



Newsgroups: rec.games.go
From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Subject: Re: AI, games, go...
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:10:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.174703.1@acad2.alaska.edu>, asek@acad2.alaska.edu writes:

> A book which continues to fascinate and tantalize is:
> Winning Ways for your Mathematical Plays, by J.H. Conway and colleagues
> ----------------------------------------
> 
> Some time ago the newsgroup  sci.math  entertained a discussion on the
> topic of  "How Intelligent are the Winning Ways?"
> 
> The book seems trivial at first but probably provides one of the better
> introductions into modern knowledge about a GO algorithm.

In case anyone has been misled: the book (actually two fairly thick volumes)
says practically nothing about Go. It's concerned with various aspects of the
mathematical theory of games (meaning games of the same general type as go,
chess, tic-tac-toe); it's terrific fun, and has some very interesting mathematics
in it too, but (I repeat) if you're interested only in Go you'd be wasting your
time reading it.
From: ar354@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jason Perusek)
Newsgroups: rec.games.go
Subject: NEW RPG GAME. FULLY TESTED. $25
Date: 12 Sep 1992 23:33:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


Brochure says.
 
 
                             Bio - Tech
                       THE ROLE PLAYING GAME
 
            Written and Illustrated by: Jason J. Tomaric
 
BIO - TECH
Time: 3025
Location: 3rd dimension, Earth
 
You are a member of a very distinct startfleet known as the Galactic
Federation. Your mission, explore space in hopes of expanding, 
charting space, and meeting other lifeforms.  That has all changed now,
and you are also fighting for your life and for the life of the entire
human species agianst an enemy so powerful, the greatest minds in the
Federation never thought could exist. They are known as the Yanchunii,
and they have sent their elite battle fleet called they Bio - Trons to 
come and assimilate the universe's cultures. You must retrieve the 
almost extinct human race and attempt to destroy this enemy before they
assimilate... everything.
 
Bio - Tech: The Role Playing Game has many great features to its fully
developed stucture.  The main handbook contains:
   
       o Over 190 pages
       o Over 50 detailed illustrations
       o Valuable charts for quick-find info
       o Fully explained instructions designed for the beginner,
         but challenging enough for the expert
       o a 17 page adventure
       o Federation startships stats
       o Sections describing Command Functions and starship facilities
       o Galactic Federation regulations
       o a regular and combat glossary
       o a Bio-Tech timeline
       o over 120 character skills
       o a variety of weapons and equipment
       o a variety of starships and other vehicles
       o The game has been fully test played
 
Additional text and supplements also available. Inquire at 
ar354@Cleveland.Freenet.edu for further information, prices, costs,
questions, and or publishing dates.
  
Check it out :)
-- 
Jason Gone!
Snap Snap :)
                                  CFN: AR354@CLEVELAND.FREENET.EDU
                                  YFN: NOT THE ABOVE :) OF COURSE.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: Ethics problem.
Reply-To: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:13:43 GMT

taylor@foraker.tivoli.com (Eric Taylor) writes:

>You (South) hold :

>xxx
>Ax
>x
>KQxxxx

>Bidding :
>S      W       N      E
>P      P       1S     P
>2C(1)  P       2D(2)  P

>(1) Reverse Drury (but not alerted as such).
>(2) Am I duty bound to alert this or treat it as natural?
>         2D should show a full opener.

Nope -- you treat it as you would have had partner alerted 2C.. you
just play what you are supposed to be playing.  If 2C was Rev. Drury
by your agreements, then thats what it is -- regardless of whether
partner alerts or not.

Another situation is when you are unsure of whether you are playing
Rev Drury or not.  In that case you CANNOT bid 2C and THEN decide
whether its Drury (rev or not) based on parts alert or not.  You
should decide what it is before you bid it and stick by that (you have
to assume that you are stone deaf and blind to what partner says:-).
Bharat
--
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)-244-1263 (O) 337-6498(H)
Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
From: RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: bidding
Date: 12 Sep 92 21:28:44 GMT

i think that bridge would be a much more interesting game if you weren't
required to tell your opponents what your bids mean.
From: arndt@c3consult.comm.se (Arndt Jonasson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Beginner's question: what do you bid?
Date: 7 Sep 92 08:21:21 GMT
Organization: Communicator C3Consult AB



In a recent matchpoint event, the following hand turned up:

(S dealer, none vul)


          KJT765
          J7
          842
          83
AQ98                32
-                   AQ62
T93                 AKJ7
QJT972              AK4
          4
          KT98543
          Q65
          65


I was E, and the bidding goes:

S   pass
W   1C		(usually shows 13-21 hcp and at least 4 clubs)
N   2S		(I would have bid 1S - I didn't ask why he bid 2)
E   ?

As E, what would you bid here, and which contract would you land in finally?

I bid 3S, in order to show strength, and make my partner tell me more
about her hand. We don't have an agreement on this situation, and I thought
she might not take out a double. What do you have "double" mean here?

[Since people here make such a point of it: We don't have an agreement
on what to do in this situation, otherwise I would have trusted
partner to remember our agreement. So "trust your partner" doesn't
arise.]

6C or 6NT go one down, and seemed to be the most common result. Two
pairs seemed to have gotten to 6NT, and persuaded opponents to lead a
spade.

Incidentally, 3S went two down, and we got 5 points (out of 32), which
was 5 more than I had expected.

--
Arndt Jonasson				Communicator C3Consult AB
arndt@c3consult.comm.se
--
Arndt Jonasson				Communicator C3Consult AB
arndt@c3consult.comm.se
From: sater@cs.vu.nl (Hans van Staveren)
Subject: Finals results after 80 of 96 boards
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 13:55:26 GMT

France - USA  186 - 136

I heard that Deutsch played the first 32 boards and that it was a disaster.
This is just a rumour though. The score is real enough.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: Professor WHO?
Subject: Re: A curious question revisited.
Summary: More Merry-Go-Round
Originator: boyiny@kovalevskaya
Keywords: Merry-go-round, WBF laws
Reply-To: maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw (Dr. Weird)
Organization: Ayatollah's Correct Bidding Lessons
X-Subliminal-Message: It is FUN to double for penalties.
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 00:28:25 GMT


[Scott Taddiken, about the Merry-Go-Round Rule:]
>... I tend to overcall EXTREMELY light for lead directing purposes whenever
>I see that the opponents are using negative doubles.  From what Professor WHO
>has said, I gather that, once I have announced this fact, my opponents are
>allowed to say, "In that case we shall not play negative doubles," and I will
>have to stick to the weak overcalls I promised.

More or less.  What I mean by that is depending on the jurisdiction, you
MAY have the choice of switching back to sound overcalls (and you will
incur penalties overcalling light if you do so) after learning of the
opponent's countermeasures to the two styles IN SOME PLACES.

>... I have on my card the following.  I overcall with 10+ points,
>occasionally light, EXTREMELY light for lead direction vs negative
>doublers. ...

Illegal, by the Merry-Go-Round rule.

It is okay to say either of the following, WBF-wise, according to WBF
regulations, as interpreted by the Bridge World:

"We will overcall extremely light against people who use negative doubles
against ALL KINDS of OVERCALLS."

Or

"We will not pass easily over a strong club with relay follow-ups."

WHY THE LATTER?

The reason is, presumably a pair playing relays will do so over ANY pass
that is semi-natural, that is, not carrying any positive suit- or strength-
connotations.  

IF opponents wish to change their uncontested club structure after hearing
this announcement, they MAY, with no penalty.  In actuality no one would
ever do that, so it is to be presumed that the opponent's system stays
constant in that aspect.  The aspect which deals with INTERVENTION may very
well change with the style of overcalls, however.  [Mine does.]

It is also valid to ask:

"Do you use penalty doubles against light overcalls?"

And decide to play sound (but possibly incurring a penalty if you DO
overcall light afterwards) after receiving an answer in the affirmative.

As for ACBL regfulations, our Asya does that better than I do, so I
will stay quiet....




Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: jaffray@oreo.berkeley.edu (Alan Jaffray)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Notrump Runouts
Date: 9 Sep 1992 00:38:57 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
Reply-To: jaffray@zippy.sonoma.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: oreo.berkeley.edu

In article <Bu9Mzz.Kt2@rice.edu> danil@owlnet.rice.edu (Danil Patrick Suits) writes:
>
>What is the net.opinion on the following style
>
>1NT  X   P   P
>??
>
[...]

The question arises: Why is opener running at all on this sequence?
Responder had a chance to run, but did not.  This implies that he has
a semibalanced hand with some values.  If opener wants to run with a
minimum hand and a good 5-card suit, that's understandable, but running
routinely with random 4-4's seems excessive.

If you play a mini-notrump style where opener could be semibalanced,
you might want to have a system where opener can show various 5-4's as
well as 1-suited hands, but otherwise natural is sufficient.

The same applies, even more strongly, to 1NT-P-P-X.  Here responder will
not only have a chance to run, but we may also have the majority of the
points even when opener is minimum, and he might even want to *redouble*.
The opps are often in serious trouble, and opener shouldn't get in the way.

-- Alan
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Precision
Date: 12 Sep 1992 20:52:21 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Sep8.094454.4@dcs.simpact.com> ahollander@dcs.simpact.com writes:
 
>> History time.

>The only time I recall seeing a description of Precision-Flannery (4S5H or 
>3-suiter with 44 majors and either minor shortness) was for a 2D opening 
>that Jeff Meckstroth wrote up in CC Wei's short-lived periodical "The 
>Precision Club".

Sontag and Weichsel in _Power Precision_.  I used to use it myself,
before I realized it wasn't legal.

>> In those days you can play Roman 2D 

>Only in major events!  I believe everything Roman (except Roman Blackwood) 
>was considered class F until late 70's or early 80's when the strong 
>variety of 2D was allowed unconditionally.

Now it's time to strain *my* memory.  I remember playing bridge
against one of the better chess players in Kansas, and he used
Roman 2D, and it was legal.  The last time I played bridge in
Kansas was in 1967.  I led a trump and beat 4H.  Roman 2D was
defined as 17-24 HCP 4441 with any singleton.  The Official
Encyclopedia of Bridge of the time said "Defense: pass throughout
the auction and lead a trump."

Flint and Pender used it as early as 1963.  It's mentioned in
_Tiger Bridge_.  I suspect it was added to the list of legal
conventions about that time.

IMHO there is no area of ACBL nonsense that has been as political
over the years as the list of allowed conventional meanings for
2D.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Competitive Decision
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:18:01 GMT

It's the first board in a 7-board regional Flight A swiss match. 
You and your opponent have 70+ VP out of 80 after 4 rounds.
[i.e. you may assume competent opponents]

You hold:

K98xx
-
Qxxx
Jxxx


All red.  Partner bids 2C in first seat and RHO jumps to 6H.

Your call? [I'll express my opinion; I think a forcing pass is best].
 
More later............
--
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: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Re: Law problem
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:11:02 GMT

In article <1632@idacrd.UUCP> desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>Warren Usui <aardvark@locus.com> writes:
>>On a related note, rather than claim, is it considered okay ettiquette
>>to continue to play the hand but hold it so that everybody at the table
>>can see it (making it obvious that you are exposing your hand)?
>
>I don't know if it is polite or impolite, but it is certainly improper.
>Intentionally exposing your hand is the same thing as claiming.  Your
>opponents can and will insist that you state your entire line at that
>point.

Generally, when this happens to me, I already have stated my line of
play, several times.  I lay my hand on the table and continue to play
because they have insisted on "playing it out".

The thing that I have never seen a really good, conclusive answer to is this:

	What do you say to opponents who reject your claim and insist on
	"playing it out", when you know, in your heart of hearts, that
	the rules explicitly forbid you to play it out?  I.e., once
	someone makes a claim, play is over on that hand.

************************************************************************
A note to new readers:  the weasely :-) symbol is frowned upon in this
group.  Any questions, see Phil Gustafson who will gladly rearrange your
diodes for you.
			- From the AFU FAQ -

	- 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: maillist@base.cs.ucla.edu (Generic Mailing List ID (Guest))
Subject: PSPs out of order
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:07:33 GMT

I seem to have problems with the "at" command.  

PSP #9 was sent out pre-maturely.

Apologies.


-- MM
--

Matthew Merzbacher	ARPA:	matthew@CS.UCLA.EDU
Moo - Moo Moo  		UUCP:	...!{uunet|rutgers|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!matthew
               		This time, *with* the oys
From: taddiken@ms.uky.edu (scott taddiken)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: A curious question revisited.
Summary: An attempt at resolution of the question.
Keywords: Merry-go-round, WBF laws
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:59:39 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

I'm trying to see if I've got it straight.  Suppose (as is in fact true)
that I tend to overcall EXTREMELY light for lead directing purposes whenever
I see that the opponents are using negative doubles.  From what Professor WHO
has said, I gather that, once I have announced this fact, my opponents are
allowed to say, "In that case we shall not play negative doubles," and I will
have to stick to the weak overcalls I promised.  Negative doubles are a more
formidable weapon than I had ever supposed.

An attempt to crystalize the argument: Suppose I have on my card the following.
I overcall with 10+ points, occasionally light, EXTREMELY light for lead
direction vs negative doublers.  Suppose my opponents have on their card the
following.  I use negative doubles against people who overcall fairly
constructively, i.e. with about 10+ points, but I use penalty doubles against
opponents who tend to overcall very light.

Who has to back down?  I suppose that I do.  I hope that I am not forced to
make very weak overcalls against opponents who wield penalty doubles.

Thanks so much for the interesting replies.
--------------------------------------------
Scott A. Taddiken, University of Kentucky
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Vugraph on the Internet
Date: 11 Sep 1992 20:43:14 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Distribution: world
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

Later this month, Bridge Today is having its annual All-Star individual
in Novato Ca, just North of San Francisco.  If OKBridge is going to be-
come a fixture in the bridge/computer world, maybe we should set up a
vugraph of that?  There will be World Champions at every table, and the
publicity should be good both for Bridge Today and for OKbridge.

Two questions though:

How many people would watch the game?  (It's Sept 21, 22, mon, tue
sessions at 12:30 mon, 12:30 Tues and 7:30 Tuesday, all times Pacific)

What would be involved in getting it going?  I know it would take someone
to sit behind one of the tables and enter everything that's going on.

How did the hands get entered in?  Before hand?  Isn't that a security
problem?  Someone e-mail me and tell me what's involved, and ifyou would
like to watch this -- e-mail me and tell me so, so I'll know how much 
interest there is.
-- 
"In nature there are no rewards or punishments, only consequences"

Asya Kamsky	      e-mail: asya@ux5.lbl.gov                   Go Red Sox
"In order to command you must first learn to submit" - chinese fortune cookie
From: tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Law problem
Date: 9 Sep 92 14:03:23 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <18j804INN2ks@overload.lbl.gov>, asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) writes:
> In article <6232@transfer.stratus.com> tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
> >> |> West lead C3 and saw the board. Then he asked the tournament director
> >> |> to see the situation. He claimed that he wanted to lead hearts.
> >> He can't change the lead, but the score may be corrected.
> 
> That is correct.
> 
> >Law 47E2a:  A player may retract the card he has played after a mistaken
> >            explanation of an opponent's conventional call or play and
> >            before a corrected explanation, but only if no card was
> >            subsequently played to that trick.
> 
> This does not apply -- 13 cards had been exposed since that trick was led to!

Asya's statement makes sense, but I can find no basis for it in the letter of
the laws.  The law clearly says "no card ... played", not "no card ... exposed".

If the intent of law 47E2a is as Asya states, then the law should be reworded
in the next revision.

- Tim
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Law problem
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:03:48 GMT
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

In article <6232@transfer.stratus.com> tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
>> |> West lead C3 and saw the board. Then he asked the tournament director
>> |> to see the situation. He claimed that he wanted to lead hearts.
>> He can't change the lead, but the score may be corrected.

That is correct.

>Law 47E2a:  A player may retract the card he has played after a mistaken
>            explanation of an opponent's conventional call or play and
>            before a corrected explanation, but only if no card was
>            subsequently played to that trick.

This does not apply -- 13 cards had been exposed since that trick was led to!
-- 
"In nature there are no rewards or punishments, only consequences"

Asya Kamsky	      e-mail: asya@ux5.lbl.gov                   Go Red Sox
"In order to command you must first learn to submit" - chinese fortune cookie
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sperbr@marcus.its.rpi.edu (Ron E Sperber)
Subject: Re: Bid these hands
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:05:11 GMT

likes@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Kevin Likes) writes:

>The following hands came up in a local duplicate game last week.  I am
>interested in seeing how people think they should be bid.  Please feel free to
>use your favorite system.  (I am especially interested to see a Romex auction,
>if anyone can come up with one.)

>Matchpoints
>Vulnerable vs. Not
>Dealer East

>  N
>-----
>S KTxx
>H A
>D AJx
>C QTxxx

>  S
>-----
>S (void)
>H KQJ987
>D KQxxx
>C AK
with east dealer, passing in 1st seat I would bid this as folloing(playing 
2/1)

South         North
----------------------
 1H            2C(1)      
 2D            2S           
 3D            4D         
 5C            5H
 5NT(2)        6C(3)
 7D            P

(1) Game-forcing
(2) Grand-slam force
(3) Holding the A,K, or Q of diamonds

I don't want to open the south hand 2C because a)I don't like doing that
with a 2-suiter) and b)it really doesn't have that many tricks opposite
a hand with no red-suit support

>Hypothetical question:  If west were to open 2S, how should things proceed?
>(In reality, West was the dealer and opened at one table, after missorting
>his hand.  From what I understand, many Norths decided not to open (!), which
>is why I state the problem with East as dealer.)
with west opening 2S I suspect I would have an auction like this:

W      N       E      S
------------------------
2S     P       P      x
P      4c      P     4H 
P      5d      P     6D
>Thanks in advance,

>Kevin Likes
>Bridge Neophyte (but learning)

-Ron
-- 
    Ron Sperber  sperbr@rpi.edu Ron_Sperber@mts.rpi.edu Ron_sperber@rpitsmts
	"All the World's indeed a stage/And we are merely players"
	"Performers and Portrayers/Each anothers audience        "
	"Outside the gilded cage"                     	-Rush,"Limelight"
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Optimal preempts? Depends on opponents.
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:46:48 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Dr. Weird <maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw> writes:
>Watch it, Lars-- I know that you DID score a second in the Mixed Pairs, but
>Fred Stewart is a fine player.  The problem came from one of the inherent
>advantages of the multi-- the opponents often have no convenient cue-bid
>available and 3D here WAS the substitute cue (a general probe).  As far as
>Stewart was concerned, Weinstein probably had a semi-balanced hand with at
>least one club and his diamonds are VERY suspect.....!

Nevertheless, the Iceland gain did not come mainly from the Multi, but
from the fact that the Iceland pair (guessed or judged) much better than
the US pair, to bid 3D over the preempt rather than passing, and to
raise diamonds rather than insisting on clubs.

Also, I don't quite see why Stewart didn't double 4D to show his
diamonds.  Then he could have bid clubs later, and North would have been
able to correct.  What could their agreements be not to permit this?

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge