HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Precision
Date: 7 Sep 1992 13:26:26 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.cs.utexas.edu
Keywords: ACBL politics

In article <1992Sep7.112939.22043@galois.mit.edu> maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw (Dr. Weird) writes:

>>Did C.C. Wei really choose the 2D opening just to fit the ACBL's silly
>>restrictions?

>History time.

[Excerpts follow]

>C.C. used his not inconsiderable wealth and
>influence to get the okay for 2D "short diamonds".

>In those days you can play Roman 2D (because a number of US experts liked
>it) but not Roman 2C or mini-roman 2D.  Nobody thought that strange.
>Noises for making changes were shouted down with great aplomb.

>Don't blame C.C.  Rosenkranz get to play relays and his "dynamic no-trump"
>because of his wealth.  Mind you, Precision and ROMEX were both fine ideas,
>but without $$$$ you get no-where..

Around 1966 I was playing Schenken and K-S with various partners
and had the following conversation with one of my K-S partners:

Pard: Let's play Schenken with 5-card majors and a weak NT.
Me:   Schenken mentions the possibility, but points out there
      is no bid for 4-4-1-4.  What do we do about that?
Pard: Open it 2D.  Call it "Modified Roman 2D".
Me:   It's illegal.
Pard: Well, then open a very short 1D.
Me:   It's illegal.

I stopped playing bridge for some years thereafter.  When I started
up again, I had the following conversation with another partner:

Me:   I don't really like club systems at matchpoints.  Losing the
      1C opening leaves distribution too poorly defined in competition.
Pard: I don't mind playing Precision at matchpoints.
Me:   What's Precision?
Pard: Club system, 5-card majors, weak NT.
Me:   What do you do with the 4-4-1-4 hand?
Pard: Open it 2D.
Me:   Isn't that illegal?
Pard: No, the inventor got the ACBL to go along.

"The" inventor?

Money talks.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: taylor@foraker.tivoli.com (Eric Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Ethics problem.
Date: 8 Sep 92 15:06:38 GMT
Organization: TIVOLI Systems, Inc.

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.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Law problem
Date: 15 Sep 92 14:51:17 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

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.

                                        David desJardins
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Bid these hands
Date: 14 Sep 1992 14:54:02 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: bovina.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Sep14.110325.8655@news.cs.indiana.edu> 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

2C(0)  3D(1)     0. Routine in Romex.  Game force unless 2NT rebid.
3H(2)  4C(2)     1. 5 controls.  2. Natural.  
4D(2)  5D(2)
5S(3)  6C(4)     3. CAB in spades.  4. 2nd round control.
7D(5)            5. Responder is marked with the 2 red aces.

Interestingly, with North as dealer the auction hits a gray area
of 4th suit forcing.  What is the difference between 1C-1H;
1S-2D; 2NT-3D and 1C-1H; 1S-3D?  Are both forcing?  Do both show
diamonds?

>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.)

I would pass over a weak 2S with the North hand.  S reopens with a
cuebid.  (2S) P 3S; 4C 4H; 6D seems possible.  It's difficult to
find out about the 2-loser hand in South or the two red aces in
North.  Preempts work.

I have trouble imagining a room in which many Norths decided not
to open.  Begin(facetious_mode) But tell me where it is so I can
drop by for the next Epson.  End(facetions_mode)

>Thanks in advance,

>Kevin Likes
>Bridge Neophyte (but learning)

Uh, pardon me, but what's a bridge neophyte doing messing with Romex?
I'm not exactly a neophyte, and *my* time would be better spent going
through Kelsey's books on play and defense.  Not that studying arcane
bidding systems isn't fun, of course.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson)
Subject: Re: assign the blame
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:40:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.140036.15400@walter.bellcore.com> mie@faline.bellcore.com (Martin I. Eiger) writes:
>Regular matchpoints game, NS vulnerable
>
>            S-A98753
>            H-3
>            D-654
>            C-T72                         W    N    E    S
>S-KQ642                 S-T              ---  ---  ---  ---
>H-J9742                 H-KQT86           P    P   1H    D
>D-2                     D-T9             4H   4S   5H    D
>C-86                    C-AKJ93           P   5S   P     P
>            S-J                           D    P   P     P
>            H-A5
>            D-AKQJ873
>            C-Q54
>
>Down three for minus 800 was a cold bottom for north and south.  5H
>doubled, going down 1, would have been better.

I would have overcalled 3N with South's hand.  That would have solved
the problem on this hand.  Nevertheless, the problem posed, of what to
do with very strong one-suited hands, is a good one.  Suppose we change
the diamond ace to the club ace in the South hand.  My inclination would
now be to bid just 2D, even though it does seem pretty heavy for the bid.

North should probably pass the double of 5H, but I can certainly
sympathize with his plight.

************************************************************************
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: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson)
Subject: Re: Ethics problem.
Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth, RI
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 20:26:14 GMT

In article <3904@tivoli.UUCP> 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?

This is simple.
Assume your partner is behind a curtain
and you don't know about any alerts or failure to alert.
If 2D is alertable under normal circumstances,
it's alertable now.  What is your agreement?

*          2D should show a full opener.

You must bid as if your partner has bid correctly,
i.e., your partner has a full opener.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: MIT Bridge Club
Date: 14 Sep 1992 04:45:48 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: ne
NNTP-Posting-Host: gandalf.think.com

		    Play Bridge at the MIT Bridge Club

The MIT Bridge Club meets Thursday and Saturday nights in the MIT Student
Center, 84 Mass Ave in Cambridge, in room 491.  MIT affiliation is not
required.  This is an extremely informal and friendly club; players of all
experience levels are encouraged to come (we'll teach you to play if you
don't know how).  We have produced a number of regional and national
champions, and you'll often get to play with some of them.  Game time is
7:30pm, and free lessons will be given at 7:00.  The card fee is only
$1.00.

Note: the MIT Bridge Club is not the same organization as the Draper Lab
Bridge Club, which meets in the Student Center on Tuesdays, although
there's quite a bit of overlap in membership.
-- 
Barry Margolin
System Manager, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com          {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: PSP #20.5
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:03:19 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Matthew Merzbacher <matthew@CS.UCLA.EDU> writes:
>  Do you go for the throat by passing?
>  Not a good idea.  Especially if you make the normal spade lead.

          AQ872
          J
          AK63
93        Q97       KJ64
87                  AK9432
JT42                8
AT853     T5        K6 
          QT65
          Q975
          J42

Well, I voted for 2S, but on further reflection I pass and lead a trump.
+200.  Bridge is an easy game.

Of course, if I didn't have the six of hearts, I would bid 2S.

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: gerry@bluemoon.rn.com (Gerard M. Foley)
Subject: Re: Ethics problem.
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 07:53:51 EDT

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.

Not an expert, nor qualified director, but my guess is no,
not then, but at the end of the bidding before play.

gerry@bluemoon.rn whose home bbs has trouble getting the 
mail out sometimes, so it may go here instead.
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Ethics questions
Date: 12 Sep 1992 23:53:18 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

In article <1992Sep11.171646.8@dcs.simpact.com> ahollander@dcs.simpact.com writes:
>In article <18quljINNa45@overload.lbl.gov>, asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) writes:
>> Analogy -- 1NT, you overcall 2H showing the majors.  Partner explains as
>> such and bids 2S.  You look at your hand and suddenly realize that your
>> spades are really all clubs.  Can you correct to 3C?  Of course not.
>
>Of course you are allowed to bid 3C.  B U T, partner has to interpret it in 
>the light of the 2H hand as showing the majors.

THis is just plain wrong -- you may really honestly know what you are playing
but this would never ever be allowed to stand by a committee or director.

There is no way to judge when you forgot your convention and when you misspoke/
missaw, missorted, they all have to be judged consistently, which is:

Once you screw up, you are screwed unless you are playing with screens.

>I don't think any committee would think that you've 
>been awakened by partner's explanation -- unless by some quirk you also 

It doesn't matter what they believe -- they must rule the same in all cases.

>yet another opinion from Al

Save your opinions when matters of judgement are being discussed, this
is a matter of law.

-- 
"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: ahollander@dcs.simpact.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Meckstroth-Rodwell book
Date: 8 Sep 92 09:34:18 PDT
Organization: Simpact Associates, San Diego CA

In article <1992Sep8.011448.25069@galois.mit.edu>, Professor WHO? writes:
> Dennis Kibler asks:
>>
>>Is this book good? i.e. do they describe system
>>clearly and without contradictions. For examples
>>Goren's book on Precision has several inconsistencies
>>where assertions on page n are contradicted on page n+m, for small m.
>>
>>If book is good, where can you get it?
>>
>>dennis
> 
> 
> I apologise to all the readers who were misled by my post as Dennis did.  
> I was merely remarking on the fact that M-R has a HUGE volume of notes that
> by his own admissiobnwas at least 400 pages long or so.
> 
> I have no doubt that if they DOpublish it it will be good.
> 

I spoke with Jeff Meckstroth during the Pasadena nationals and it seems 
clear that the only way the public will see these notes -- in any fashion 
-- will be the opening of a time capsule.

With the exception of a few expert PAIRS that they have exchanged notes 
with, the only people to see the notes are the folks that play it, 
Meckstroth and Rodwell and their part-time partnerships and Marty Bergen 
in his partnership with ?? (the fellow from Iceland or one of the 
Scandinavian countries)

Too bad, I think they'd still beat up on the world even if others studied, 
and or played their system.

Al
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: You pays your money ...
From: avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:47:09 GMT
Organization: Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel) writes:
: ... and you takes your choice.  My choices last night seemed never to
: work out, and I certainly paid my money.
:
: Both vul, second seat, IMPs, what do you open with
:
: S:Kx H:x D:QJ C:AKQJxxxx?
:
: If you open 1C, what do you bid over a 1D response with the opponents
: (miraculously) silent?  If you open 2C (Gag!  4 fast losers in a minor-
: suit hand and about one defensive trick) how do you plan to continue?
: If you open 5C, do you expect partner to bid 6 with AK and A, hoping
: they are the right ones?
:
As usual, when Don posts a problem, you can bet it is going to be a toughy
Frankly I don't know how to bid this hand is SA. in Blue Team Club, this is
easy. you open 3C, which describes a solid club suit, and an outside stopper.
I am playing a version of multi 2D which includes a strong minor suit hand.
This is a good one for it (we require a hand with 8 playing tricks).

If you are playing Walsh, you know that partener is unlikely to hold a 4 card
spade suit. In this case, I think that I would open 1C, and bid 2S over 1D.
If I play 1C-1D-1S as forcing (which makes sense playing Walsh) then I'd bid
1S. This may work, and then again it may not.

Finally, playing SA, I would open 1C and follow with a jump to 3C on the 2nd
round.
:
: At unfavorable, third seat, IMPs, partner passes and RHO opens 4C,
: preemptive in clubs.  You hold
:
: S:KQT9xxx H:Kx D:QJ9xx C:--
:
: I presume you bid 4S.  LHO bids 5C and partner doubles.  Do you pull?
:
Yes. I am concerned that partner may be counting on tricks from diamonds.
Partner is unlikely to hold a club stack, so he would not have doubled with a
spade fit. It is likely that he holds the red suit tops. If this is the case,
by sitting for the double you are risking a double game swing. Partner could
have, for example, something like xx, Qxxx, AKxx, xxx.
However, it depends on the opponents style of preempts.
:
: Finally, 3rd seat nobody vul, IMPs, partner bids 4S and RHO bids 5H.
: Things haven't been going well, but you might make up some of the
: difference by making the right choice on this hand:
:
: S:KTxx H:AJx D:QJ9x C:Qx
:
: Pass, bid, or double?  Assuming you pass or double, what do you lead?
:
: You have 2 defensive tricks, so I think that a double is out the question
Either bid or pass. The answer depends on your agreement concerning the 4S
opening in first seat. Do you use 4D with a strong 4S opener?

My tendency is to pass, and lead the K of spades, expecting partner to give
a suit preference signal.

Avi
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: pi@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Raymond L. Gilbert)
Subject: Re: PSP #20.6
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 03:19:40 GMT


In article <4100@tivoli.UUCP>, Eric Taylor writes:
>|> AK2
>|> A93
>|> J8
>|> AK862
>I count this as an unflawed 20 pt hand (extra point for club),
>and would open it 2N.  What about others?
What do you mean by an "extra" point?  Sure you have length in clubs,
but do you think that JD is worth a whole pt?  I'd say this is a 18-19
pt hand any way you look at it.  Then again, what do I know? :-)
-- 
/----------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Raymond L. Gilbert       | "...the present rule in computing the circle's  |
| pi@indiana.edu           |  area is entirely wrong..."                     |
| IUB Dept. of Physics     |  - Bill No. 246, Indiana State Legislature, 1897|
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: Professor WHO?
Subject: Re: bidding
Summary: Are you sure?
Originator: boyiny@kovalevskaya
Keywords: system, agreement, theory, bidding
Reply-To: maboyiny@ccvax.as.edu.tw (Dr. Weird)
Organization: Ayatollah's Correct Bidding Lessons
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 13:35:25 GMT

In article <92256.162844RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu writes:
>i think that bridge would be a much more interesting game if you weren't
>required to tell your opponents what your bids mean.

I dunno--- I might find that enjoyable, but I suspect that playing against
me would not be, whether you or anyone here on the net.....

I mean, I hope this is NOT serious.


Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: assign the blame
Date: 10 Sep 1992 18:01:02 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cypress.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Sep10.140036.15400@walter.bellcore.com> mie@faline.bellcore.com (Martin I. Eiger) writes:
>Regular matchpoints game, NS vulnerable

>            S-A98753
>            H-3
>            D-654
>            C-T72                         W    N    E    S
>S-KQ642                 S-T              ---  ---  ---  ---
>H-J9742                 H-KQT86           P    P   1H    D
>D-2                     D-T9             4H   4S   5H    D
>C-86                    C-AKJ93           P   5S   P     P
>            S-J                           D    P   P     P
>            H-A5
>            D-AKQJ873
>            C-Q54

[...]

>What's your opinion.  Who's to blame and why?

1. I think North should have passed the double.
2. It is easy to construct North hands where NS should have been
   in 6D, either to make or as a sacrifice.  South's double was
   probably the best he could do, but it was an outright guess.

People have said on the net, recently, that you shouldn't use a
club system at unfavorable vulnerability because of the possibility
of preemption; and that two-suiters should not generally (or ever)
be opened 2C.  I may not entirely agree with either of those
positions but I believe they have merit.

Consider this situation, though.  South has a strong hand.  The
opponents have already bid a suit he is short in.  He has a hand
that is really only useful in one suit.  His bidding system
requires him to make a bid that shows either (1) fair values and
support for all unbid suits or (2) 16 or more points, any
distribution.

It is my opinion that people who play such a system should be
willing to take their losses on hands like the one above, in the
belief that the gains from very light overcalls will compensate.
I don't believe it myself.  I want to be able to overcall diamonds
on the South hand.  I'm willing to choose between a jump overcall
and pass on J xx KQJxx Qxxx.

-- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
From: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: A curious question.
Keywords: ethics, laws
Date: 9 Sep 92 22:33:40 GMT
Reply-To: asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux5.lbl.gov

In article <1992Sep9.172348.9033@leland.Stanford.EDU> altus@leland.Stanford.EDU (Steve Altus) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.141817.184@ms.uky.edu> satadd00@nx06.mik.uky.edu (scott andrew taddiken) writes:
>>what if two pairs sit down to play in, say, the US Open Pairs competition,
>>and cannot agree on what system they are playing?
>>The simplest example I can think of is this:  One pair announces to the other
>>that they make VERY undisciplined use of weak two's (made illegal now, from

Not illegal at all, this is a myth.

>>what I hear, but this is a hypothetical question).  The other pair say, ok, in
>>that case they will play the Fishbein convention, which allows the player over
>>the weak two bidder to double for penalties with the right kind of hand.  Now
>>thefirst pair look startled and say, well, they won't play those undisciplined
>>weak two's after all.

Too bad, they don't have a choice.  In these cases, each team gets one chance to
decide what they are playing.  Then you must stick to it.

Same reason the law says you can't change your system during the session.

>legend has it that the so-called "Merry-Go-Round Rule" applies here, and

Merry-go-round?
-- 
"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: msl@hpcvlx (Mark Laventhal )
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Strategy for bidding this hand
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:32:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5


I would be interested in hearing what strategy (not just initial bid) people
would use for bidding this hand:

	S: A
	H: x
	D: AKQJT
	C: AQTxxx

after right-hand opponent had dealt and opened 1C (SA: 13+ points, 3+ clubs).

You can email replies if you prefer not to clutter up the net with responses.

Thanks,
Mark Laventhal
msl@cv.hp.com
From: rainbow@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Rob Buchner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Least of evils
Keywords: what guess?
Date: 8 Sep 92 22:06:47 GMT
Organization: St Barts


Don't send it in. You have 9 points, good support, and only one
bid available. There is no guess here. Make a simple raise to 2C.

You could preempt 3C, but with 3-3-3-4 you are taking a view
by mis-describing your hand, then again its only matchpoints,
maybe your partner will be the one to guess right what to do.

> Favorable at pairs, you have
> 
> xxx xxx xxx AKQx.
> 
> The auction has gone
> 
> You   LHO   Part   RHO
> Pass  Pass  1C     1H
> 
> What is your call?
> You are playing negative doubles and are
> not playing inverted minors in competition.
> 
> I do not have the full hand (as I was not there), so I do not know
> which, if any, call(s) are correct resultwise.  I am more interested
> in what the number of votes for each call is before I start calling
> this a four- or five-way guess.
>
> BTW, I am thinking of sending this to The Bridge World for consideration
> in the Master Solvers' Club.  I would appreciate opinions concerning the
> appropriateness of this problem.  (The MSC consists of a panel which will
> answer the question above and discuss it in print.)  Since this problem does
> have at least four possible answers, I thought it would be okay at least to
> send.  What do you all think?
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge