Trumpace

Sorry for off-topic post. It was a surprise to me to see that otiose is not a typo! :)

If I recall correctly, this is a mixed strategy (or game theory) problem and the answer was to cover with probability 1/3. Perhaps someone can answer for sure. btw, if you have a count, you don't need all this :) It looks like LHO is 2-2-3-6 (yes ♣J and ♣K could be false cards, but if I ruff one club before playing ♠Q... {didn't try to time it out though})

I had played this a long time back but at some other site. Strange this seems to have been copied ditto without any attribution (or maybe I am mistaken, in which case, I apologise). Anyway, after comparing scores etc, me and my friend came to the conclusion that the speed of your computer matters and the time in seconds does not mean much. So my guess is that kenrexford has a really slow computer. I suggest you buy a new one for all the bidding simulations you do :)

on ♦ LHO plays 3, 4, 7. RHO 2, 5, 9. on ♣ LHO play 2, 5. RHO J, K. I guess I go for the drop then.

How about ruffing out one of the minor suits first? You might get some extra information.

I agree. If we manage to attract a lot more good players, it would be a really great learning opportunity for the others. The experts could then discuss freely without having to bother with spam, while the others can read each post with assurance of quality and hopefully learn something. If we go this route, perhaps we should create two new forums, "Expert Discussion" where only some posters are allowed to post and "Ask the Experts" where anyone can post and ask questions (either new or about the discussions in the other forum). I believe the A/E was created with such a goal in mind, but alas...

I am curious to know if this thing is even read. If people read this, we would probably not be having some of the recent discussions that came up. Perhaps this poll will serve as a refresher to those who have read it but have forgotten. The terms of service is here: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=33 which is a pinned topic, right here, in the General forum. Quoting the guidelines section: btw, I think we are going to see 100% Yes votes, whether that is the truth or not :P

Crap! I didn't see the trump lead.

How about just playing East to hold the ♥9, which he seems to have pretty much and at least 3 card club suit? At the point West is unable to overruf the third ♦, it seems to be more possible than Qx or Qxx with East (didn't do calculations, though) So play goes ♦ A + ruff, ♣K + ♦ ruff, getting news that east might hold ♥9, ♣A, ♣ ruff with 7, ♦ ruff with 8, ♣ ruff high, ♦ ruff high, claim. You make 9 trumps, ♣AK, ♦A. This goes down if either East or West have a doubleton or smaller length club holding. (Though you might still make if East has Qx, and trumps are 2-2).

If possible, can you please explain your reasons? I feel like the added safety of the D9 does not outweigh the fact that they will have more diamonds than hearts on average. Interesting. You have given me something to think about. Thanks.

If possible, can you please explain your reasons?

Sorry, I don't have either the time or the inclination to do it. This was just meant as a FYI and not a thread expecting discussion. Maybe I should have mentioned that. (btw, "Go at it" was misleading, but was meant as a joke meaning "Please don't".) Besides, you are free to ignore whatever threads you want. I understand concerns about thread bloat about the same topics, but there is also an issue of bringing dead threads back to life. Anyway, lock/delete this thread if you guys want. I don't care.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/11/vatican_on_darwin/ Random news link I found on google news. Not sure how reliable this is. Go at it :D

It is hard to notice if a pinned topic has changed unless you are looking for it. Is it possible to perhaps colour it differently when such a topic has changed, say in the past 1 or 2 days, so it will be easily noticed. Thanks. PS: which is the forum for discussing BBF issues? Other Products section?

Interesting hand, but I am not sure if your partner took the best line. Not saying that this is better, but I would probably play ♠K on trick 1 (i.e win in hand), ♥AK, ♣ to A and ♦Q, covered and ♦J. If the ♦T falls, I can throw a spade on the 3rd club. If the ♦T does not fall, throw the ♦9 on the 3rd club and ruff a ♦. If ♦3-3 I make it, otherwise, I can (probably, depending on East) still play to squeeze West in the spades and diamonds.

Tsk tsk. Ivory about the staste of this forum.

This hand was posted by Dave Flower to rec.games.bridge. [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sakhaqj3dj432caj9&s=sq42hk6daq95ckt82]133|200|Scoring: Rubber Lead spade 3.[/hv] You are South in 6NT and the spade 3 is led. Can you guarantee the contract? As usual Adv/+ please don't post spoilers too early.

What did Meckstroth say?

This is surprising. :)

This space intentionally left blank.

Quoting JLOL: "LOL". I am probably ignorant, but I found this funny for some reason. Don't bother to respond :P

I actually meant that posting our CVs seems like the intellectual equivalent of a pissing match and isn't going to convince anyone one way or the other. No, never. You caught me. I'm just mouthing off without any idea about anything. *sigh* Yes, I have, Mike... I read "God Delusion" too, just for kicks. And Miller, and Dennett (not a scientist), and others. I only recently read Diamond's "Third Chimpanzee", and I admit to not having read any of his other books. However, I've read other journal articles by people who don't hit the bestseller list as part of my job. I'll be going to a "Darwin Day" lecture by a prof here that will bash ID... I've done, and continue to do, my primary source work. Let me underscore my point, again. I'm not arguing - for the sake of this thread, anyway - the particulars of evolutionary or 'intelligent design' science. I *am* saying that there are some (IMHO) no-so-scientific presuppositions that both sides bring to the table which compromise the objectivity of the science behind them. I think both camps would be better served to own up to those. It seems like you are involved in and respect the scientific method. If, after reading lot of the evidence favouring Evolution, you still think there are _huge_ gaps, I would suggest that you write up an article/paper about the flaws you think there are. Perhaps your insights will help others. Maybe you could start off by posting a couple of flaws here (not this thread, but perhaps a new thread in the WC forum) and let the Evolution Thumpers agree or point evidence closing the gaps etc.

The below is a screenshot of the hand that I see. http://puzzles.members.winisp.net/Bridge/Tools/ConfusingHandDiagram.png The avatar upload idea seems to have worked, but be careful! It might overwrite your old uploaded avatar if you use the same extension (.gif, .jpg whatever). [EDIT] Crap. Both the images seem to have disappeared now [/EDIT]. [EDIT] Restored avatar. [/EDIT] Seems like the upload idea will only work if you are willing to use the posted screen shot as an avatar. [EDIT] Restored screen shot by placing onto web server [/EDIT]

This forum does not support attachments, but I think (haven't tried, though) you can get around that by uploading an avatar image, getting the url and using the IMG tag in a post. Or you just just put in on your own web server (if you have access to one) and post the url here.. If there are other ways, I would be glad to know.

For single dummy for Int+ I would recommend Eddie Kantar's Test your Play Volume 2. The one with the Red cover (in case I am mistaken about the volume number). He also has a black one (Vol one i think), but I wouldn't recommend that for Adv-. Even though he usually does not discuss alternatives, I would say go for it. There are many books following the theme of "Play these hands with me" by Reese and others, which will discuss alternatives etc, but might be a little advanced for beg/int. Bridge Master vs Bridge Amateur by Horton might help too, but I haven't read it so I cannot say how good/bad it is, it is also supposedly aimed for the int+ levels.