nikos59

I agree with Roland. To draw an analogy: duplicated boards do offer some scope for cheating -but no one has ever suggested abolishing duplicated boards because of this. Apparently, the benefit they offer is deemed much more important than the eventual risk. Same with real-time Vugraph. nikos

As I said, 1996 onwards exists already in .pbn/lin format. There also exists the 1992 Olympiad thanks to Gianni Baldi. An eminent BBO member has already volunteered to type the 1991 BB final (Yokohama) and I had sent him the first scanned pages from the book. This was in response to my original post that began this thread, so it was before mrdct suggests the Virtual Vugraph. Today, as I was scanning some more pages to have available, I discovered in my horror that even in the final not all hands are covered -for instance segment four omits three deals (only reference: board 57 was a flat game but x-y got carried by their relays and went to 6H, down one, 11 imps to Poland). Now I fully realize why Kaplan was so vehement against this practice. Brian Senior may have the missing data, but it's a needle in a haystack. The 1989 book (Perth) is complete, all 176 hands. The 1993 book (Santiago) is also complete, but there is already someone who may want to do the conversion or who may already have some data in electronic format. I also have myself some .gam and .dea files from the round robin and I don't know what to do with them (open them with a text editor works). The 1995 book (Beijing with Fred) is complete but my own copy is not in very good condition, because my then baby daughter has entered her comments on the bidding in many pages. As Denis OKane has pointed out, older books were less readable but more factual, reporters going out of their way to avoid criticizing and to mention spot cards. nikos

Yes, the scoring difference is an obvious problem but restricting the field to post-1987 events makes for a too narrow selection (we already have all the big events after 1996). In the old matches that have already been converted (1955 and 1957 finals) the modern scoring is used -these matches not only used old scoring but also total points. Obviously, a non-vul. action that was reasonable under the old scoring looks reckless under the new one, but I can live with this. There are also other problems: the event has to be one where we have full records; even the official book in some years does not contain full records (I remember Edgar Kaplan criticizing this). Then, there is the big problem of implied spot cards, i.e. the book report says "declarer drew trumps in three rounds then played a heart to the king" without mentioning spot cards unless it makes a difference. So the operators must have done some homework. All this being said, I wonder which match would you people would consider as an appropriate match to replay? Nikos

Why, this sounds interesting! I don't know about the logistics of the matter, but operators need only have a copy of the hand records (with bidding and play), no? And the hands themselves will be unknown to the great majority of the spectators. Any comments? nikos

Since the announcement is not exactly prominent in the Bulletin, you have to go to page 6 and find it at the bottom right hand corner. Nikos

Hi all The Vugraph project proudly presents a major new offering, the 1957 Bermuda Bowl, in lin and pbn format: http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge/vugraph/v1957.html All 224 hands from the North America v. Italy match, taken from the official handbook, in lin and pbn format, thanks to our good friend Denis O'Kane (who has also done the 1955 BB previously). It would be fitting to say that we offer this event, which marked the first victory of the Blue Team, as a tribute to the recent victory of the Italian team in Estoril, but actually it is a mere coincidence. Before Denis took over, I had started to input those files myself but I only had completed two segments of the 18. Entering data manually from books is rather tedious and there are a lot of great bridge championships of the past that wait to be converted in lin format, so I would like to appeal to all Vugraph fans. You can also help, even entering one segment is useful. The deal is as follows: you email me at sarant-at-pt-dot-lu and I send you scanned pages from an old Bermuda Bowl. You enter the hands, bidding and play and you send me back the pbn or lin file. I do the editing etc. How to input data? Denis is using GIB to enter the data (setting all four players as humans). The BBO online viewer offers also a movie facility (I am told). Bridge Manager, another program, may also help. Which data? I would suggest the 1959 BB to begin with but if you have a preference you are welcome to work on this; please do ask me for the relevant books -I have all the Bermuda Bowls from 1954 and all the Olympiads from 1964 (i.e. missing the first one). (I am not proposing the 1958 BB because I have the book in very bad photocopies which are almost un-scannable; if you have the original book and want to scan it etc. you are most welcome:-) I also have books about some Australian and US national events, also the 1938 World Champ' book (Austrians v Culbertson) and some books about old matches. You could also suggest books to convert, provided they cover an event fully. When? If you do want to help, you had better hurry because my scanner, my bridge books and myself are seldom all in the same place. While I do not expect an avalanche of offers, I do hope there will be some interest. I have already an implied offer (you know who you are) about the 1993 Bermuda Bowl. Thanks in advance Nikos Sarantakos

We also had the Generali Masters and the Prokom tournament from Warsaw, but we must also keep in mind that the current version of BBO viewer is not well adapted to matchpoints. Nikos

About the 1992 marvel, I may be wrong but the reason of this comprehensive coverage is that we gave the data of the onsite Vugraph program of Prof. Baldi. I mean, the onsite Vugraph had six-table coverage (this was a decision of the organizing committee) and all these data have been conserved and after successive suitable conversions are available to anyone. The excellent Vugraph program of Prof. Baldi has been used extensively in the past by WBF -I don't know if it is still used. Perhaps someday more data from the 90s will surface (for instance, Yokohama 1991 had four-table coverage). Nikos

What Roland is said is perfectly accurate, on the other hand the pie at Estoril is bigger than at Sydney. I, for one, wouldn't mind to watch, say, Garozzo-Forquet (they play for Italy seniors, don't they?) Nikos

I would bid 3H as North -he has a very good, chunky heart suit, almost worth six cards. He deserved the result, but South is innocent.

Hi all In my bridge pages I have an anthology of wise or witty comments by Edgar Kaplan gleaned from tournament reports in the Bridge World. Now I have added a lot of material in the "1985 to 1989" section. Previously I only had stuff from 1985 and 1989, now I added the interim years 1986, 1987, 1988. Please look at: http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge/kapnuggets.htm As always, there is more bridge stuff at: http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge.html and obviously the Vugraph project at http://www.sarantakos.com/bridge/vugraph.html Nikos

Oops, you are right. Well, now it should be all right. Thanks, Nikos

Tonight I uploaded the data at my Vugraph project site. See: www.sarantakos.com/bridge/vugraph/newer.html Nikos

Very good news! I see that among next week's tournaments there is an international "Goulash" tourney from Russia and I wonder if it really is a goulash tourney! Nikos

I guess I like Fred's answer best :)) (joking) Thanks guys! Nikos

The 4th Champions Cup is scheduled for next weekend. BBO had successfully broadcasted the two previous editions IIRC. Now there is no mention of it in the Vugraph schedule. Swan has announced that they will broadcast the event (from Brussels). I wonder, is this the case? Was it a decision of BBO or of EBL? Nikos

I am afraid Roland's suggestion to ask for people to pay 10€ per year for Vugraph will open a huge can of worms. For instance, * are we sure that commentators (most of them accomplished bridge experts) will still be willing to offer their time for free when Vugraph will not be free? Obviously, the income from Vugraph is not sufficient to even start thinking paying for commentators. * are we sure the sponsoring organizations will not start asking for money to let BBO broadcast if BBO makes "all this money" from Vugraph? * can we guarantee a minimum level of coverage in quantity and quality? If I pay you and you fail to broadcast the Greek Teams Trials, do I get my money back? Or, this year's coverage of USBC was deficient. In a paying scheme, would users be entitled to ask for a refund? * if BBO asks for money for Vugraph, will non-paying members have access to the lin files afterwards? If yes, then this is a dis-incentive against paying. If no, it is a huge dis-service against bridge. * I have a website with Vugraph data. Will I be allowed to publish those data? * the website is costing me a little money to maintain and a lot of time; should I start asking my visitors (dozens or hundreds per day) for a (much smaller) fee? * there are a few Vugraph fans who are sending me lin files to post at my site; should they start asking me a (yet smaller) fee? and so on...

Well, in my huimble opinion the fact that barometer is not a part of f2f bridge is because until recently f2f bridge was conducted manually and it was very tedious to organize barometers. Same analogy is valid with matchpoints vs IMP pairs; until recently matchpoints was the only option in f2f clubs, everyone played matchpoints at their local club not because it is a superior form compared to IMP pairs but because it was the only feasible form. Due to inertia at local clubs, matchpoints is still prevalent but here at BBO only 5-10% of tables are using it (and I am being generous). Same with barometer; here at BBO it is feasible and the great majority is using it -I guess they find it is more entertaining and/or exciting. Moreover, while dummy you can perform post-mortems of the hands already played. I would not be surprised if there is in the future some form of barometer in big matches of f2f bridge. n.

Pass. I would double at matchpoints but at imps I don't want to risk ulcers for 100 points

Pulling partner's double at high levels is one of GIB's many idiosyncratic features (perhaps the most annoying of them; some of the others, like the transfer to a four-card major after 1NT, violating agreement, have also an upside) nikos

For the record, about the "best possible results" vs "best results possible": the originator of the concept is not Zia, obviously, but S.J. (Skid) Simon, in "Why you lose at bridge"; and he was referring mainly to partner management at rubber bridge. nikos

Well, it seems that 6 out of 9 replies preferred pass over 2C. Let's see what happened at the table, the semifinal of the Indonesia tourney last week (Sweden v IndoSeniors) [hv=d=n&v=b&n=s97542hk1098d5c1092&w=sa103hjdaj104caj864&e=sj6h5432dq8ckq753&s=skq8haq76dk97632c]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Sacul passed as West, and when North bid 1S and South rebid 2H Sacul was forced to pass again. This was (unexpectedly?) passed out. So, while cold for 5C, EW sold out without uttering a word; to add insult to injury, 2H made with an overtrick. But Sacul needn't worry; at the other table, Sylvan also passed as West, North again bid 1S and now South rebid 2D. West had to pass again and this became (less unexpectedly) the final contract. The defence was generous, so Manoppo was allowed to make 2D and the net result was a 2-imp swing. In the other match, both Wests thought that passing was far risky (as I believe) and they bid 2C; at one table the result was 5clubs doubled+1, at the other 500 from NS's 4Sx-2. Yes, I know that one hand proves nothing at all, but it seems to me that passers got what they deserved. After all, when I have the majority of high cards and a 10-card fit I expect to declare contracts, not to defend at the two-level! And if it is risky to bid 2C at my first turn, isn't it much riskier to bid (3C?) over 2H? ns

Sorry, I forgot to specify that this was Imps. I will post a follow-up question shortly. nikos

At game all, you hold A 10 3 J A J 10 4 A J 8 6 4 LHO deals and passes, pard passes too and RHO opens 1D. I guess that double or 1NT is not an option for most of us (but I may be wrong), so there are but two options: 2C or pass. What do you choose? ns

Thank you Denis for the plug :rolleyes: Note however that there is a difference: the quotes in DStevenson's site are oral remarks made during Vugraph shows, whereas mine are taken (by me) from written tournament reports in the Bridge World. Hence, "mine" are less funny but perhaps more instructive -but, anyway, they served a different purpose. I intend to complete this anthology in the future. Note also that some BBO commentators offer very good witticisms -David Burn is one. Nikos Sarantakos