contract from other room

[gwnn]

I wrote something in another thread and I think it was ignored because it sounds silly. I guess it does but I would still like to know what other people think.

 

(typo edited)

I think even knowing to 100% degree of confidence the contract and result from the other table would be a largely useless piece of information (as long as you do not know the opening lead, for instance).

So what do you think, how big an edge is it to you to know the contract and result from the other table? How about just the contract?

[aguahombre]

Interesting question.

 

If that knowledge is available to each player, it isn't an edge. If it is only available to me, it is illegal.

 

So, it either changes the game I love or I should be barred from the game.

[MinorKid]

If you were above average, you can bid the contract immediately according to the norm result. That way you cannot be fallen behind. :)

 

If you were below average, you can try your luck to set the contract higher for extra bonus if the norm result indicates overtricks. For example, Other tables were 3NT +3. If you find a minor suit fit early you can try for 6C/6D.

[gwnn]

Interesting question.

 

If that knowledge is available to each player, it isn't an edge. If it is only available to me, it is illegal.

 

So, it either changes the game I love or I should be barred from the game.

Well, suppose it is available to N/S and not to E/W. E/W would need to be compensated by a certain number of IMP's to make this a fair deal, the question is: how much? It would not be a WBF-sanctioned event of course. It would be a WSATNSBF (world score-available-to-north-south bridge federation) event.

[gwnn]

You can bid the contract immediately according to the norm result. :)

Well there are two rooms, you don't know wether the other room are playing the norm contract.

[aguahombre]

Well, suppose it is available to N/S and not to E/W. E/W would need to be compensated by a certain number of IMP's to make this a fair deal, the question is: how much? It would not be a WBF-sanctioned event of course. It would be a WSATNSBF (world score-available-to-north-south bridge federation) event.

Why would E/W need to be compensated? E/W in the other room are facing the same situation.

[Codo]

Hmm? What a horrible idea. You wrote that on april 1. , didn't you?

 

Do you want me to know the "norm result", so that I do not need many bidding tools anymore, I just bid what I can make? Yes, I will fail if the norm contract depends on finding a singleton king behind A/Q, but I will pay for that.

 

Or do you want me to know that they just arrived in 4 ♠ just making and I was not sure whether I should make a slam try?

What about getting to know that they made a vulnerable game? Now it is much easier to sacrifice, because you know, their game is on.

What about getting to know their +430 in the moment when you decide whether or not it is worth to bid 3 NT with a good minor in a bad hand?

And what about -870? You now prefer to bid 2 ♠ instead of passing his takeout-double with Qxx,KTxxx,xx,xxxx.

[gwnn]

Why would E/W need to be compensated? E/W in the other room are facing the same situation.

No they're not. The other room played the boards before us.

[Fluffy]

So what do you think, how big an edge is it to you to know the contract and result from the other table? How about just the contract?

 

Usual club cheaters will know better (those who gather results from other tables and even write them down), but I can think of examples such as our side playing slam, where you will know how to take partner's jump to 3 spades as forcing. even when slam went down.

[Zelandakh]

Imagine for a moment the auction (1♠) - 2♥ - (4♠). You have a good hand with heart support. Do you not think it would be rather helpful to know if the score in the other room was 4♠=? Or 4♥+1, or whatever. Similarly holding ~9hcp opposite partner's 15-17 1NT opener and knowing if the result was 3NT= or 3NT-1. When you wrote this in the other thread I misread it to mean that the result could not be discerned without knowing the opening lead. Knowing the result in advance is often going to be helpful whatever the opening lead in the other room was.

[gwnn]

Yes that is quite silly in hindsight, still just the contract would be interesting.

[Codo]

No Czsaba, it would still be bad.

F.E: Yu play a team game and you lead 25:12 at half time. What will you do second half with the critical descissions whether to bid partial/game or slam and or whether to secrifice or not? You will copy their results to ominimisze their chances to create swings.

 

I would even prefer not to play barometer tournements....

[gnasher]

Knowing the contract in the other room would be quite valuable if you were defending a lead or trying to recover a deficit.

 

If we had no considerations of that sort, I think it would not often be useful in constructive auctions, where I would be reluctant to substitute someone else's judgement for my own. There are exceptions, of course: if you're considering bidding a grand slam it's useful to know whether the opponents bid six, and sometimes the opponents' contract might tell you about a secondary fit that you didn't know of, or it might tell you whether partner is maximum or minimum for his bidding.

 

In competitive auctions it could be quite valuable. If I am considering bidding 3♦ over the opponents' 2♠, the knowledge that our teammates were in 3♠ would encourage me to bid.

 

In the play, especially defence, the knowledge of a different strain in the other room could tell you something about the opponent's hands. But most of the time they'll be in the same strain, or the information would be too vague to be useful, so that's a rare benefit.

 

All in all, I think it would be useful sometimes, but not that often.

[kenrexford]

I wrote something in another thread and I think it was ignored because it sounds silly. I guess it does but I would still like to know what other people think.

 

(typo edited)

 

So what do you think, how big an edge is it to you to know the contract and result from the other table? How about just the contract?

 

 

Many years ago, in a Swiss Teams final, our team was playing against another team and we were all friends. In fact, you could shuffle the eight players and pull them out of a hat to form the team, as every player on every team played on the other team on another day.

 

S, I had a decision as to whether to bid 6♦ or not. The person in my seat at the other table was easy to read. He would get to that decision himself and then decide what I would do and copy that. So, I stopped thinking about what I should do and instead thought about what he would think that I would do. I acted accordingly. Later, over drinks, he confirmed to me that he bid based upon what he thought I would do, and his guess as to what I would do was exactly what I thought he would think. So, we ended up in the same contract.

 

That was important because it meant that this decision did not result in a swing on the bidding guess. We won on the other hands and on the play/defense.

 

So, I'd say "knowing" is valuable.

[gwnn]

No Czsaba, it would still be bad.

F.E: Yu play a team game and you lead 25:12 at half time. What will you do second half with the critical descissions whether to bid partial/game or slam and or whether to secrifice or not? You will copy their results to ominimisze their chances to create swings.

 

I would even prefer not to play barometer tournements....

How can it be good or bad? I'm just asking how big of an advantage it would be. The answer is somewhere between 0 and 24 imps (in practice, it might be negative of course, if someone consistently overthinks situations).

[Quantumcat]

Mostly related - I know of someone at a bridge club who used to pinch the hand records printed out for the next session off the copier. He'd copy down the double dummy contracts onto a score sheet so no one would notice. When discovered and confronted and asked whether he derived any benefit from this, he admitted it made him play worse.

[barmar]

Usual club cheaters will know better (those who gather results from other tables and even write them down), but I can think of examples such as our side playing slam, where you will know how to take partner's jump to 3 spades as forcing. even when slam went down.

It doesn't have to be cheating.

 

I don't know if it's where gwnn is coming from, but this subject came up a few weeks ago in the IBLF. We were discussing the inferences one can make if the the previous player didn't shuffle his cards well before putting them back in the board. One player estimated that this would give him a 2 IMP/board advantage, as he can guess the contract and some of the play.

[Codo]

I am quite happy that I understood you wrong, it sounded like a kind of suggestion to me. I guess the advantage for a player is very small, but for a pair it is valuable around an imp a board- at least...

[Finch]

Knowing contract+result is worth a lot. Even though it doesn't tell you if it's the right contract, it tells you how to gain or lose imps. The more I think about it, the more it's worth. The amount it's worth depends on how good your two teams are relatively; it's worth most when you are of similar standard I think.

 

Knowing contract is interesting. There's also a big difference between just you knowing the contract and you and your partner both knowing. It's definitely worth something, but possibly not a huge amount. This time, it's simply the worse your opponents are, the less valuable the information is.

[Fluffy]

We need to clarify is this info is suposed to be known to you, and not known to anyone else including all players after the game is over.

 

The biggest possible advantage would be something like this: if my opponents play 4♠ it is extremelly cheap to psyche 1♠ opening with 3 cards. And this would happen kinda often.

 

But this is something yo can't just pull out every deal, so if you bar psyches the advantage becomes slim, I'd say between 0.2 and 0.5 IMPs/boards

[Finch]

The origin of this conversation was not much more than knowing the denomination. that's also slightly interesting information, but is worth less.

[lamford]

The origin of this conversation was not much more than knowing the denomination. that's also slightly interesting information, but is worth less.

I would think that even knowing who the declarer was in the other room would be valuable, so that even if you could just see that, in the board you are waiting for, the dummy is down on your side, but the opponents seem to have the balance of points, you could conclude that your side decided to sacrifice. Taking into account the skill level of your team-mates, and their system, you could decide whether that sacrifice was likely to be worthwhile. Also, whether North or South was declarer in the other room could assist you with an opening lead against as mundane an auction as 1NT-3NT.

 

It is almost impossible to prevent someone seeing who declarer is on one previous occasion a board is played in a pairs event. The unsrupulous player might note, for example, that on board 24 South was dummy, and use this information when the board appears. Not enough is done at bridge events to prevent unauthorised information from another source.

[Mbodell]

How can it be good or bad? I'm just asking how big of an advantage it would be. The answer is somewhere between 0 and 24 imps (in practice, it might be negative of course, if someone consistently overthinks situations).

 

It might also matter if everyone knows that this is going on, including the other table. It might be good mixed strategy to sometimes give up an over trick at the first table to turn a sure -650 into -680 and tempt the opponents in the other room in to a no make slam.

[gwnn]

It might also matter if everyone knows that this is going on, including the other table. It might be good mixed strategy to sometimes give up an over trick at the first table to turn a sure -650 into -680 and tempt the opponents in the other room in to a no make slam.

I would then try to get new teammates. ;) (But OK it would work to duck a trick as declarer to turn +680 into +650)