PMetsch

Hi Fred, Another small problem: I have 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT defined as a relay (disposition). If I save, stop FD and start FD, then diposition is changed to signoff and a 2 is added at the first position of the description. Probably the same problem as the transfer problem.

Hi Fred, Another small problem: If you define 1NT-2NT as a transfer, save the file, stop FD, and restart FD again, then the disposition of 2NT is changed to "signoff" and in the description field a 0 (zero) is added at the first position.

1. yes 2. 2♥, though the hand is very good

Hi Fred, I think I found a minor bug in FD. If I enter the following line in FD then wrapping in the description field of the pop-up box goes wrong: FG, 4+♣, may have 5-6 ♦ or 4441♦♥ The part "4441♦♥" should appear on the second line, but it doesn't. Other descriptions are wrapping correct. I think it doesn't wrap, because the first character is numerical. EDIT: have done some experiments: it is the suit symbol at the end of the line, that causes the problem.

copied from: http://crystalwebsite.tripod.com/double_dummy_accurate.htm The following table is a break down of the numbers by the level for NT contact. actual play double dummy difference level 1 7.34 6.93 0.41 level 2 7.86 7.56 0.30 level 3 9.29 9.10 0.19 level 4 10.25 10.10 0.15 level 5 10.34 10.25 0.09 level 6 11.40 11.48 -0.07 level 7 12.27 12.40 -0.12 The following table is a break down of the numbers by the level for spade contact. actual play double dummy difference level 1 7.83 7.64 0.19 level 1 8.18 8.06 0.13 level 1 8.61 8.52 0.09 level 1 9.86 9.87 -0.00 level 1 10.30 10.23 0.07 level 1 11.45 11.57 -0.11 level 1 12.26 12.39 -0.12 Obvious the last table should read level 1 untill level 7 If the data above is true then you are not the only one :). At higher levels the defense make less errors/wrong leads.

Just looked at all those numbers at the website, but I could not find info about errors nor other data to calculate errors. Another interesting point about the comparison of DD solver vs.OKBridge: The OKBridge declarer takes more tricks than the DD solver declarer. Now assume the DD solver is correct, then how can OKBridge declarer beat the best possible result? I think he must be playing worse than the DD solver, but the OKBridge defenders play much worse to compensate.

Here are some conclusions from a Peter Cheung. He has done a lot of statistical work (also with OKbridge data). All the numbers can be found at: http://crystalwebsite.tripod.com/index.htm I am no expert, so I can not tell if all those numbers make sense. copied from double dummy accurate section The most important general finding is that double dummy analysis is very accurate as compared to actual play from OKBridge. The overall total number of tricks taken by the declarer is 9.21 (9.22 for imp and 9.20 for mp). The double dummy analysis of the same deal produce 9.11 (9.12 for imp and 9.11 for mp). So actual play by OKBridge player takes 0.1 tricks more then the double dummy analysis result. This is from 383,000 deals and over 25 million plays. copied from final contract section Out of 25 non-slam contracts only 8 contracts are shown to have positive results. They are 1H 1S 1NT 2H 2S 3NT 4H 4S. This is the case for both imp and mp scoring. I call them "our contracts" or "Peter's 8 contracts". If it is our hand we prefer to play in "our contract". If it is their hand, we prefer them to not play in "our contracts" You may also be interested in data on the folowing page: http://crystalwebsite.tripod.com/hand_patterns.htm

Maybe you should add a 3♥/♠ response as singleton ♥/♠ and (54)minors. It is usefull if 1♣ is balanced and it is great if 1♣ is opened with a long minor.

your system: 3♠ sayc or 2/1: 4♠

I would rebid 3♦ on the second round. This is no minimum, a 6-5 with 3 aces and a working queen. After the 2NT bid by partner I think you can play him for a 2=5=3=3 distribution, after all he didn't support spades, didn't rebid hearts and didn't bid 3 of a minor. With that info, south knows about the diamond fit and can jump to 4♦ to show a good 2-suiter (what else could it mean). Maybe then north can cuebid ♠K and slam may be reached.

I think 3♦ is forcing. With 3 aces and 2 kings I bid 4♥, with less 4♦.

You are right about 6♣, I was thinking of 6♥.

If south shows at least 4♥ by his DBL, then north should bid at least 3♥. I don't know how to get to slam, but on the other hand it is 1 down after a diamond lead and west ducking the first club from the dummy (unless you finesse the ♣T).

1) I think the hand is too good for 2♠, I would DBL 2) 5♠, this seems no forcing pass situation. Don't know who can make a contract at the 5-level. The opps don't know either, so they may bid 6♥.

It works for me at this location: http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/docde...onvention+Cards

You can also play a partial elemination: A♥, ♠A, ♠K, ♣K, ♦A, ♣A, ♣ruff, ♥Q, ♥K, ♣ruff and a diamond. This wins if ♦K or ♦Q is doubleton in the hand with the doubleton trump (and spades 3-2 and hearts 4-3). edit: must be ♦K doubleton, otherwise partner can overtake and give ruff

This is the document about systems http://www.geocities.com/daniel_neill_2000...-collection.txt

I play ♦AK and ♣finesse. A ♦ finesse would also require ♦3-3.

I think a 2/1 is not unreasonable with your hand. It is a pitty partner didn't bid 3♦ instead of 3♥. I guess after a 3♦ bid by partner you will end up in 5♦.

Need to endplay west, to do so requires 8 tricks outside spades. So rise with the A and quess what west hand is most likely: Qxxxx=xxxx=xx=xx : ♣A, ♦Q, ♦A, ♣K, 3♥ Qxxxx=xxx=xx=xxx : ♣A, ♦Q, ♦A, ♣K, 2♥, ♣ruff Qxxxx=xxxx=x=xxx : ♦A, ♣A, 3♥, ♣K, ♣ruff Qxxxx=xxx=x=Qxxx : ♦A, ♣J, 2♥, ♣A, ♣K, ♣ruff I like to play either option 1 or 2 depending on heart carding of opps. If I can't draw any conlusions from the heart play, then I choose option 2.

I can ruff clubs in the dummy, this requiers west to hold another club or west to hold exactly 9x of spades. I can also play for the ♦K to be with east, and eliminate all red cards of west before throwing him in with a club. I can not be sure about how the red suits are divided, but I think it has more chance than ruffing a club. Besides if I play 3 rounds of trumps and west has only a doubleton spades, then is squeezed if he has 3♥ and 3♦. He has to dscard a red suit, otherwise I set up clubs, and then I can ruff the red suit he does not keep.

If I play a club to dummy and take a ♠ finessse, then I am badly placed if it looses and RHO plays a ♣. So I try a spade to the jack at trick two. If RHO wins, then I try to drop a doubleton ♣Q or take a ♦finesse. If LHO wins and returns a ♦, then I must decide if I take a ♦finesse or a ♣finesse.

I think you don't need the cross-ruff. If the club finesse wins, you have 1♦, 3♣ and 1♥ already. You can draw 2 rounds of trumps, pitch hearts on both the ♦K and 3rd♣, then back to the hand with a ♦ruff, ♠Q. Now play a high ♥, if it is ruffed you make 5♠ tricks, if it holds you make 2♥ tricks (and 4♠ tricks).

I think the spades are breaking not worse than 4-1. West didn't lead them (despite east double), and east returned a diamond. If east has long spades, he will return a trump to reduce ruffing of diamonds and try to make communications harder. There is a distinct possiblity that east has ♠QJ9x and ♥T9xx, but then west has 12 cards in the minors and didn't bid on the first round. East may have 4 trumps for his double, but then he can hardly be sure that will set the contract more than 1 trick. East double and diamond play may very well be a bluff to take a diamond finesse, instead of the percentage play. And playing east for 4 trumps requires a trump coup that can not be combined with other chanches (I won't play for that). So I win the ♦A, ♠A and spade ruff (if east has 4♥ I still can escape for 1 down, loosing 3IMPS).

I am afraid I don't understand what you are trying to say (I don't read BW). Do you mean the limit raise should show more/less points or more/better hearts or a specific distribution (BAL/UNBAL) or (lack of) stoppers? Or does the sequence ask to bid game with good hearts or a maximum?