HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: baseggio@deshaw.com (Franco Baseggio)
Subject: Re: Ready for Flight A ?
Summary: ready to get clobbered :-)
Organization: D. E. Shaw & Co.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 20:54:21 GMT


In article <davidm.728076414@questor> davidm@questor.Rational.COM (David Moore) writes:
>willner@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes:
>
>
>>Here's an interesting play problem from a recent sectional Flight B Swiss.
>
>>The bidding has gone:
>>      W     N     E     S
>>     1C     P     P    2NT (=18-20 balanced)
>>      P    3NT   all pass
>
>>EW are playing a generic five-card major bidding system with 15-17
>>notrump.  The minor suit opening promised three cards.
>
>>The opening lead is the K of hearts, and you see:
>
>>        65   J93  AKQ5  9643
>
>>        AKQ3 82   T63   AKJ7
>
>>West proceeds to cash four rounds of hearts, having started with
>>AKQT.  What do you discard on the hearts, and how do you play to make
>>3NT?  West will not lead a club into your tenace.
>
[David Moore's response deleted.  Sorry I couldn't find original post
to respond to.]

Given the assumption that West has 3 clubs and at least as many clubs
as diamonds, I think the following line always works:
Pitch clubs on the hearts, then win the return and cash 1 trick in
each suit.  If anyone has shown out, you can count the hand well
enough to pick a squeeze (If west shows out in diamonds or spades,
squeeze him in the other plus clubs.  If not and East shows out in
clubs, squeeze east in diamonds and spades).  So assume everyone
follows.  Cash the other club.  If East shows out, cash a diamond.  If
West is out of diamonds, the last diamond squeezes him.  If West
follows, he can't guard spades so cash those, squeezing West in the
minors (degenerately if he has 3 diamonds).  If East has another club,
then West is assumed to have at most 3 diamonds.  Cash the diamonds
and one opponent will be squeezed out of their spade guard.  If West
shows up with 4 diamonds, maybe you can sneak the spade 6 through,
then face your hand claiming the SKQ :-).

Note that this line will also work when West is 3-4-4-2 (but not when
he is 2-4-4-3).


--Franco
From: jose@math.duke.edu (Greg Lawler)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: 2/1 question
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:10:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.182822.17803@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
> >I noticed that some people were discussing what to bid playing 2/1
> >over a one spade opener with
> >
> >    K x x x   A x   x x  A K Q x x
> >
> >
> >Excuse me for suggesting a reactionary idea, but how about a jump shift
> >in clubs (strong) followed by a raise in spades.
>  
> Not in 2/1 GF. 2C is strong and game forcing. Is it your contention
> that 3C should be "more forcing?". 
> 
> The strong jump shift does not come up sufficiently often to justify
> wasting a call (3C) in this way.  
> 
> You are wasting bidding room and duplicating calls if you allow
> both 2C and 3C to mean a strong hand with clubs. [even though
> I presume 3C would be stronger than 2C].
> --


It is not a waste of bidding room if one ends up
describing one's hand.  To bid
3C and then support spades shows: a) a 5+ clubs suit which is semi-solid
as a source of tricks; b) 4 card spade support; c) interest in slam.
It is very hard to show all of these if one starts with 2C.

The original question asked what people did with the hand above.
If you bid 2C and then support spades, this tends to show three card
spade support and the fourth spade is never shown.  If one makes a
forcing raise in spades instead, one never shows the clubs as a source
of tricks.  This really is a hard hand to bid without strong jump shifts.

It is quite acceptable to play 2/1 and strong jump shifts.

I have seen a number of hands bid by experts which were made much
more difficult than needed to be because they were unable to make a strong 
jump shift.  These hands are often slam hands so they cost a lot at
IMPS.  I don`t jump shift a lot, I admit; but when I do I describe
my hand very well and almost always get to a good contract.  As I said
before, I only jump shift on: self-sufficient suits, and hands with
strong support and a good side suit. After the jump shift the only
possible trump suits are opener's suit and responder's suit so no
other suits need be bid naturally.  (Of course, you might end up in NT).
Key cards in responder's suit are shown immediately by the simple rule
that you raise with a top honor and you don't raise without one.
(Hence there is no key-card Blackwood in Responder's suit).  

It is true that by playing strong jump shifts, I give up other uses
of 1S-3C.  By a passed hand I play that 3C is a strong limit raise in
spades with club cards.  

Greg Lawler
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan)
Subject: Re: How should this be bid?
Organization: Irvine Compiler Corp., Irvine, California, USA
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:50:10 GMT

In article <GRABINER.93Jan20145311@kovalevskaia.harvard.edu> 
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:

>   South dealer, both vulnerable, Swiss teams.  You are North, partner
>   opens 1S, and LHO passes  You hold
>
>   KQJxxxx
>   K9xx
>   xx
>   -
>
>   What do you do?
>   
>   Here's the South hand; how does your auction go?
>
>   ATxxx
>   Ax
>   xx
>   AKxx
>
>   Our auction was unscientific but quite successful:
>
>   S   W   N   E
>   1S  P   6S  P
>   7S  P   P   X
>   P   P   P
>
>   West led a heart, and we claimed 13 tricks for +2470.  (East held the AK
>   of diamonds.)

Just for fun, how about this sequence?

  S     N         
  1S    2NT(1)    (1) Jacoby 2NT, forcing raise in spades
  3S(2) 4D(3)     (2) No singleton or void, non-minimum.  If your agreement
  4H(3) 6S            is to rebid 3NT with this hand, fine.
                  (3) Cue-bid

North's plan is to bid 6S no matter what, and to cue-bid diamonds
along the way to try to inhibit a diamond lead.  I wouldn't bid this
way every time.  It depends on who my opponents are, how we're doing
in the match, what my table feel says, how much alcohol is in my
system, . . .

                                -- Adam

--
My name is Adam and I am a newsaholic.
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: bidding after a t/o double
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:43:00 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

Mea culpa, mea culpa mea maxima culpa. I posted a 14 card hand.

This is the same as earlier post but with only 13 cards

In article <1993Jan24.222142.1584@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>In article <1993Jan24.191124.5033@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
>>You hold:   AQ  AKTx  x  AQJT7x
>>Matchpoints
>>RHO  You  LHO  Pard
>>1S    X    P    2H
>>P     ?
>>
>>Your plan?  I don't want to hear if you didn't double the first time,
>>because then you are playing in 2C and it's not even a play problem.
>
>In any event, I now bid 4H. What's the problem? You certainly can't
>be thinking of more with 4 losers. If partner has 2 or 3 cover cards
>he will move over 4H.
>--
>Bob Silverman

Isn't this a little conservative given the opening bid on the right? Surely
the club and spade finesses have become substantially better than 50%
in this auction (especially since LHO couldn't find any bid over the double).
If partner has as little as:
xx	QJxxxx	xxx	xx
it seems to me that slam is a reasonable contract (depending upon the
defence all that it might need is a club finesse) and I wouldn't expect
partner to move after a 4H bid with this hand.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: bs@fatima.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Some questions about 2 over 1.
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:41:40 GMT

In article <23JAN93.13420138@nerus.pfc.mit.edu> mrl@nerus.pfc.mit.edu writes:
:In a previous article, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) wrote:
:>In article <1993Jan22.133457.26361@odin.diku.dk> turin@diku.dk (S|ren Turin) writes:
:> 
:>In reply I post what *I* usually play.
:> 
:>>1S-2C-2D/H-2S
:>>Is this merely a preference or does it show real spade support.  If it
:>>shows support, whats the difference between openers 3 and 4 spade
:> 
:>The way I play it shows real support, but is limited to 3 cards.
:>I use a jump to 3S to show 4 card support. It also shows EXTRAS.
:>[as does 3S]. A jump to 4S shows a balanced minimum.
:> 
:
:Another way to play it is that 3s shows 3 card support with extras.  If you had
:4 card support with extras, you would have bid Jacoby NT, Inverted Trump Swiss,
 
Jacoby with a good biddable 5 card suit? Never. e.g.

Kxxx
Ax
xx
AKQxx

Should ALWAYS bid 2C to show the suit, then support spades. This is much
more descriptive of the hand.
--
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 (Jeremy Mathers)
Subject: Re: HCP Diatribe
Reply-To: pynq@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: D. J. Dougherty & Associates
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:37:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.061308.2296@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
>In article <C1439q.5Fw@irvine.com> adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan) writes:
>>to bet that there are other ACBL rules that make this clear, so that
>>the rule you're quoting can't be interpreted properly out of context. 

>You're kidding, right?

Frayed knot.  What he is describing is a system a lot like our current
system of speed limits.  The posted limit is one thing - the actual
limit another.  The result: confusion and arbitrary enforcement.

>>Maybe so, if they can find another way to ban fert bids.  Assuming
>>that this is a worthy goal, the 8-HCP rule, together with an
>>understanding that players are allowed to add points for hand
>>evaluation, seems to me a reasonable way to accomplish the goal.
>
>Ferts are already banned as "any bid which is destructive in nature"

Yup.  Like pre-empts, weak two bids, and weak overcalls.

************************************************************************
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: rudy@netcom.com (Rudy)
Subject: Re: 2S X play question and answer
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:27:04 GMT

In article <1jlac7INN7f9@transfer.stratus.com> tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
>In article <1993Jan19.033526.1016@netcom.com>, rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
>> Here's a hand that was sent to me by a former rgb regular.  
>> 
>>      QT7    984   A743   842
>> 
>>      A9853  J62   KQ6    K8
>> 
>> You reach 2SX on the following auction:
>> 
>> 1S  P  1N*  X      of the forcing variety
>> P   P  2H   X
>> P   P  2S   P
>> P   X  all pass
>> 
>> Queen of clubs to the Ace, and ten of clubs back, lefty following small.
>> You chose to play a low spade, it goes low, seven, six...

Righty made a rather essentric TO double with: x AKxxx xx AT9xx so LHO
was KJxx Qx JTxx QJx

At the table, a sleepy declarer crossed back in diamonds, led another
trump, at which point LHO woke up and did was he could have done the
first time, rise King and play heart, heart heart pitching a cluba nd
now over ruff the club with the jack of spades.

>Plan B:  lose two trumps but only two hearts.
>> Now what?

In fact, once LHO misD'ed, you can make 3!  Ruff a club, three rounds
of diamonds, the ruff a diamond once the distribution becomes known.

>> Any chance LHO misdefended?
>Yup.  His last chance to collect three heart tricks vanished when he
>didn't play the SK at trick three.

Was there a better line of play?  Anyone for diamond to the ace, ruff a
club, *now* a low spade.  Does that cater to likely lies of the cards,
or just this one?
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: altus@leland.Stanford.EDU (Steve Altus)
Subject: Re: What to do when the rules conflict?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 20:00:14 GMT

In article <1jml68INNdr7@transfer.stratus.com> tnh@sw.stratus.com (Tim Hill) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.140619.19502@midway.uchicago.edu>, pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (Jeremy Mathers) writes:
>> Playing at the club last nite, we came to the table of a pair who was
>> already plenty annoyed at us, because we had made a ruckus during the
>> previous round, thereby disturbing their tranquility.
>> 
>> On the first board of the round, I dealt and opened 1C (alerted
>> as Precision).  Next hand bid 2C (not alerted).  Now, experience has
>> shown that on this auction, 75% of the time RHO doesn't know what the 2C
>> bid is.  That is, either its Michaels and RHO thinks it is Natural, or
>> vice versa.  In any case, they never alert it
>
>They're not suppossed to alert it, whatever it means.  Several years ago,
>the ACBL tried to end confusion over which bids in suits first bid by the
>opponents should be alerted by declaring that none of them should be.  In
>effect, "a cuebid carries its own alert."
>

am i missing something here?  doesn't the "don't alert cuebids" rule apply
only to bidding a suit that an opponent has bid NATURALLY?

certainly the auction 1NT-p-2C-3C where 2C is Stayman sounds like clubs!

similarly 1C (artificial, saying NOTHING about clubs) - 2C should be clubs
unless there's an alert;  so the "a cuebid carries its own alert" shouldn't
apply here.


--steve altus
From: parekh@cis.ohio-state.edu (Ashesh Parekh)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Wanted: bridge players in the Columbus, OH area
Date: 24 Jan 1993 11:58:49 -0500
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: spinaltap.cis.ohio-state.edu

A couple of us want to play bridge on a regular basis and are looking for
a couple more players.  We are graduate students at the Ohio State
University in Columbus, Ohio.  So this message is pertinent only for
Columbus folks.  We are not pros at the game and so don't expect much
out of us - lets just get together and have fun and improve our game!
I have played both auction as well as contract bridge.

If interested, please respond to my email address or call 784-8629 and
leave a message.

-Ashesh

==============================================================================
  Ashesh Parekh                                   parekh@cis.ohio-state.edu
  Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University
  Use "finger parekh@cis.ohio-state.edu"  for information about my schedule.
==============================================================================
From: henri@zircon.PHYSICS.ORST.EDU (henri jansen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: What to do when the rules conflict?
Date: 21 Jan 1993 18:14:36 GMT
Organization: oregon state university
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zircon.physics.orst.edu

I got in a similar situation last weekend:
1NT by me, 2S by LHO alerted, X by pard alerted
The double is negative if spades are real, but spade
cards if not. I did not know their meaning of 2S.
I asked the director afterwards and he suggested
something like:
alert, this may be an alert
and explain the possibilities.
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steven G. Myerson)
Subject: Re: bidding after a t/o double
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:21:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.191124.5033@netcom.com> Rudy writes:

* You hold:   AQ  AKTx  x  AQJT7x
* Matchpoints
* RHO  You  LHO  Pard
* 1S    X    P    2H
* P     ?
* 
* Your plan?  I don't want to hear if you didn't double the first time,
* because then you are playing in 2C and it's not even a play problem.

I might find partner with 4-3-3-3, but I'm bidding 4H.
Partner has promised zero points and I can insist on game.
If partner has more, it's his move towards slam.

* [rest of article deleted since it doesn't apply anymore]

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steven G. Myerson)
Subject: Re: What to do when the rules conflict?
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:01:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.140619.19502@midway.uchicago.edu> pynq@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

* Playing at the club last nite, we came to the table of a pair who was
* already plenty annoyed at us, because we had made a ruckus during the
* previous round, thereby disturbing their tranquility.
* 
* On the first board of the round, I dealt and opened 1C (alerted
* as Precision).  Next hand bid 2C (not alerted).  Now, experience has
* shown that on this auction, 75% of the time RHO doesn't know what the 2C
* bid is.  That is, either its Michaels and RHO thinks it is Natural, or
* vice versa.  In any case, they never alert it or and they usually
* explain it wrong.  But, in any case, partner passes, and I alert.  The
* reason for the alert is that, over an overcall, this pass shows
* specifically 0-5 HCP, and I've been told that that agreement warrants an
* alert.  However, in the instant case, I'm not real sure what it is going
* on, because I don't really know what the 2C bid is.
* 
* Anyway, RHO now asks me to explain the alert and I respond by asking
* what the 2C bid means.  She says that I cannot ask because it is not my
* turn to bid.  I say that I can't tell what the double means w/o knowing
* what the 2C bid means (note: in this environment, 2C could be anything,
* but it is most likely intended as either natural or Michaels)  At this
* point, she got nasty and said (essentially) that if I didn't have an
* answer on tap, that I should not have alerted.  I said (essentially)
* "OKfine."  She then called the director, and eventually I said something
* to the effect that if the 2C was natural, then the pass showed 0-5.
* 
* But I am curious as to what the theoretical solution to the problem is.
* How can I explain my partner's bids w/o  knowing what the opps bids mean?

If the 2C bid was not alerted, you should treat it as natural.
Your explanation is "shows 0-5 points".

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao)
Subject: Are you ready for Flight D?
Originator: daveshao@leland.Stanford.EDU
Keywords: counting
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 18:28:15 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.105413.3173@lth.se> f84beo@efd.lth.se (Bjorn-Erik Olsson) writes:
>
>   West/-/imps/decent opponents
>
>
>              Q62                 W   N   E   S
>              4                  1H* 2D   P  2NT
>              KQJ853              P  3NT  P   P
>              AJ3                 P
>     K75               A954
>     AK763             T92        *) 8-12 3+H, could be canape',
>     72                AT            denies a two-suiter with 5+H 
>     975               T642
>              JT3
>              QJ85
>              964
>              KQ8
>
>H6 H4 H9 HJ
>         |
>D2 DK DA D6
>      |
>HK S2 HT HQ
>|
>HA C3 H2 H5
>|
>H7 ...    3NT +4 +430
>
>Who, if anyone, is to be blamed?

Give West an elementary book on card play and don't let him come back
to the bridge table until he reads it.

Principle 1:  Analyze the play to the first trick.
West leads H6 and partner plays H9.  
Conclusion:  East does not have H8 (or the HQ either).
Corollary:  Declarer has H8 (and HQ).

Principle 2:  Watch the spots
After three rounds of hearts, West has seen the following cards:
HA, HK, HQ, HJ, HT, H9
Conclusion:  Declarer's H8 is now good.

Principle 3:  Count declarer's tricks
2 hearts
5 diamonds
1 club
Conclusion:  If declarer has SA he will make 3NT

Principle 4:  Count the defense's tricks
2 hearts
1 diamond
Conclusion:  If partner has the SA, taking the SK and SA will beat
the contract.

Principle 5:  Consider the method of scoring
It is IMPs.  
Conclusion:  West should seize any chance to beat the contract.
Corollary:  West must assume that declarer does not have the SA.
West should bang down the SK to give partner absolutely opportunity
to go wrong.



Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: reha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (reha.gur)
Subject: Re: Is this an infraction?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:06:01 GMT
Summary: no

In article <C1C78v.KAu@ais.org>, hampton@ais.org (Kevin Podsiadlik) writes:
> A hypothetical question on the Laws:
>  
>	...
> in his own hand.  "Wait a minute," says East, who then shuffles through
> dummy's diamonds to reveal that the ace among them is in fact the ace of
> HEARTS.  (The suit of the card was completely hidden from view, so that
> only the red "A" was visible.  Dummy was unavailable for comment after
> the hand.)
>
>	...

From the facts given, no (not unethical). All players have a right to
a clear view of dummy and can ask for the cards to be spread out.
This in no way implies that you have the card that was obscured.

It is easy to not give away what was in your hand,
but it could be the case that a person might exhibit behaviour
(such as looking at his hand multiple times, scracthing his head and possibly
saying "that CAN't be the ace of diamonds.) This would be clearly unethical.

On a related note, I was dummy and when a card was played to a trick by a
defender I noticed that it was two cards stuck together. This was a club game
with the opponent being friends. Should I have have pointed this out? Well
being the nice guy that I am I did, thinking that the person would pick up
both cards and play the correct one.  The person turned out to be a klutz
and exposed the other card which was now a penalty card. My opponents were
quick to point out that I was dummy and I should not have said anyting. 
was I justified or should I have kept my mouth shut.

reha gur
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: mrl@nerus.pfc.mit.edu
Subject: 2/1 defined?
Organization: MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:43:49 GMT

Being a non-tournament player, I'm not familiar with many of the systems in use
except from reading newspaper columns.  I recently picked up a book on 2/1,
i.e. by Max Hardy.  However, I see from reading here and watching okbridge that
there are many variations, not suprisingly.  Is there any one particular
version which is more popular than others or thought of as a standard? 
Thanks.

Mark London
MRL@NERUS.PFC.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
From: sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steven G. Myerson)
Subject: Re: Assess the blame
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:51:03 GMT

In article <C16n12.LE8@ais.org> Kevin Podsiadlik writes:

* This seems to be more a "What *didn't* go wrong?" than a "What went wrong?"
* sort of sequence.  I've a hunch the word "sick" will be used somewhere in
* the followups.
*  
* Pairs
* E-W vul (naturally)
* South dealer
*  
*  
*           West               East
*           AQ94               3
*           AQT9               62
*           K                  QT9865
*           A642               9853
*  
*                    (P)       P
*  (1H)     X        (2H)      3D
*           3NT                4D
*           4S                 5C
*           P        (X)*
*  
* *Who wouldn't!
*  
* Clubs were 3-2, diamonds were 3-3, the heart hook was on, and South failed
* to lead a trump.  So declarer only went down 800.
*  
* Assess the blame.

If South is dealer, then West is sitting in second seat.
And yet the auction starts with two passes!
I'll assume that North is dealer, since that's the only
way the bidding makes sense.

I think the first bad bid was 3D,
unless there was an agreement that this bid showed weakness.
East just doesn't have enough to bid, freely, at the three level.

3N was certainly reasonable given East's encouraging response.

If 4D was a bailout, then West should have passed.

I'd say that East should get 80% of the blame for the 3D call,
and West gets the other 20% for bidding over 4D,
unless 4D showed extra values, in which case East gets the full 100%.

Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge