Sunday was bridge day with lots of children time too

I had a lovely Sunday.  Colin, Luise, Jessica and Marcus slept over.  The kids love a sleepover.  We had pancakes for brunch.  I made some batter and the kids put strawberries, bananas and chocolate chips into custom pancakes.  After that we watched Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs.  I have to say that Jessica liked Walt Disney’s Snow White (which we watched the night before) a whole lot better.  Walt Disney had magic.

After the kids left the day was full of bridge.  I pondered systems over 2.  Do you like playing control showing responses?  I was thinking about inverting 2 to show more controls than 2 because it seems to me that when you have more controls you need more space not less.  Thoughts on this matter are welcome.

Later on I watched the finals of Women’s Canadian curling while I played some bridge.  Fortunately I have a TV mounted right beside my computer.  (Okay maybe my bridge playing was a touch distracted).  It was an exciting final and an interesting display of “fear of winning”.  Going into End 8 out of 10 the Prince Edward Island team had a formidable two point lead with the hammer.  They did badly in eight, nine and ten and eventually lost in an extra end.  It was as if knowing that they would be the first team ever to win a major curling championship from PEI, the pressure was just too much.

Back at my bridge game, this deal provided a bit of a bidding challenge for me.  I held: A94 Q54 A107 KQJ2

I opened 1NT in second chair and partner raised to 4NT.  Is slam worth a go?  I have 16 points right in the middle of the range and the spot in diamonds and spades might be helpful.  The J is a better card than than some jacks.  But I decided to pass.

It was the 4-3-3-3 shape that did me in.  I was happy I had passed when I saw my partner’s hand.  She had J32 AJ KQJ A9854

6NT is not a good spot.  It does have some play.  If the heart finesse works you might make via a squeeze of some sort.  If my LHO holds the top two spades along with the heart king there is a simple squeeze and it works with or without the count.  You can just run winners or you can lead a spade towards the jack earlier on.

Is 6 better?  It requires less card reading but it does need the same holdings in the east-west hand.  Best to play in game as we did.  Well done partner.  If she had transferred to clubs and then bid 4NT (as I might have done) we would have been in the poor slam.

Here was one more interesting decision.  Your hand is:

3 AK7532 Q54 KQ43

Your partner opens 1 at favorable vulnerable and RHO bid 1.  You bid 2 and partner bids 2NT.  Righty isn’t finished; vulnerable or no, he bids 3.  What do you do?

I think double here should just show a good hand.  You can’t have trump.  You are just setting up a force and letting partner decide.  You could bid 3NT or 4 but maybe you are better defending.  Let partner decide.  That was the decision of my expert partner and it was a very good one.

I held: QJ6 J6 KJ1062 A102

I wasn’t sure it was the right thing to do but with only one spade stopper I was going to have to run nine tricks in 3NT and I didn’t fancy the 5-2 in hearts (which broke 5-1 not too surprisingly).  3 doubled only went down one but this was a great result since we could make nothing.

Just after this I had a session with Colin.  Here is another deal in my series bidding slams without Blackwood.  With both side not vulnerable Colin held

875 AKQJ9 A2 K73

He opened 1 strong and I bid 2NT.  This shows 12-14 HCP, with no suit longer than five cards.  RHO bid 4, and Colin bid 4, showing his suit.  He knew that I had a good hand and it was important to get his suit in.   I wouldn’t give up on a suitable hand. I had

AQJ 10653 K943 A9

I suppose I could bid 4NT, keycard.  If I do Colin will bid 5 (3).  I could bid 5 which would get 6.  I could bid 6 and Colin would bid 6 which would end the auction.  There is nothing wrong with this auction. 

But once Colin shows a hand worth 16 points or more and hearts nothing is keeping me from slam.  The bigger issue is should we be in 7.  Would Colin go to the grand with the hand below over keycard?  I don’t think so.

87 AKQ932 AQ K73

What I actually did was bid 5 over 4. Colin bid 5 and I bid 5. Colin bid 6 which was doubled.  I bid 6.  Now would Colin have bid 7 on the hand above?  I pretty well have to have the diamond king, club ace, and the spade king at least.  Do I absolutely have to have the spade ace?  It seems likely.  We will never know the answer.

Colin had to play carefully because the hearts were 4-1 and the long hearts had four clubs (and fortunately also the K.  A dummy reversal looks attractive (ruffing diamonds in the long hand) but in fact I believe it needs the same things.

Do you like my bid on the next hand or not?

97 J42 K3 AQJ642

Red on white 1 was opened in front of me and I bid 2 which worked out well when we won the auction with 3.  I know I don’t have much but my bid takes up a lot of space and other excuses.  Here is a second slam hand (I wimped out and bid Blackwood.)  However I think the play is the thing on this board.

We arrived in 6 after Colin showed five clubs, heart support and stuff.

Colin

A4 975 KQ4 A9864

Me

K763 AKJ82 A K102

The opening lead was the J.  Maybe the best line is to draw trump.  Suppose I win the spade in dummy and hook the heart.  I can win the return, say a club in hand.  Draw another round of trump and play spades ruffing the third round in dummy.  I can get back to my hand with a diamond and draw the rest of the trump.  If trump behaves decently I can throw my losers on the diamonds, twelve tricks.  If the heart finesse wins I follow the same line but I have extra chances.

What does this line need?  Only one heart loser basically.  If hearts are 3-2 and the finesse loses then I can’t stand spade ruff of the second round or a spade ruff in the third round with the 10. I think any line involving setting up the clubs is just not as good (even though the club spots are nice).

What I actually did was win the spade in hand and start with a high trump from hand.  When the 10 came down on the first round I was much better position for a spade ruff so I stopped drawing trump, cashed the diamond, crossed on a spade, played diamonds pitching my losers, returned on the K, ruffed a spade and played the 9. LHO, who started with Qxxx, could only make one trump trick. I still don’t know what the mathematically best line is.  I just know mine worked.  I had the added disadvantage of a kibbitzer (who shall not be named) standing in my office and yelling at me to do the wrong things.  Here is the whole deal and if you have some comments I would be interested.

	A4 975 KQ4 A9864
Q1085 Q643 9872 5		J92 10 J10653 QJ73
	K763 AKJ82 A K102

I had one other hand that Colin announced was Linda proof but it really wasn’t. Here was the hand which I did make (but not without some sweat).

	1094 QJ98 K10864 9
	A5 AK102 AJ74 KQ5

After opening 2NT I arrived in 4.  I won the opening lead of the K and tried two rounds of trump with RHO showing out on the second round (won in dummy).  I tried a club from dummy.  RHO won the K with the A and played two rounds of spades.

	10 Q9 K10864 –
	– K10 AJ74 Q5

I ruffed high and drew the remaining trump in two rounds.  Now all I had to do was guess diamonds.  About this point I am thinking couldn’t I have played this hand on a safer line.  Well, if you are going to play like this you better be able to guess well. I don’t really have a count.  I know RHO has four hearts and three spades and some clubs.  I am missing nine clubs so if they split somewhat equally he has three or four of them at least.  I think he is odds on to be short in diamonds.

I played the K and both followed (rats).  Now I am thinking diamonds were never bid by our side.  With four trump and a spade sequence how likely is it that you would lead your stiff diamond?  I decided not that likely so I finessed and that was right.  So it was Linda proof and I made five in the end.  Given that I only had to make four maybe its safer to play diamonds earlier!  Perhaps I should duck the opening spade lead, win the continuation, play the two top hearts and then play diamonds finessing.  West can ruff but I still make it.

	1094 QJ98 K10864 9
KQJ3 7654 9 A864		8762 3 Q32 J10732
	A5 AK102 AJ74 KQ5

How Bidding Decision Matters

I think there is some luck in bidding and also some judgment.  It seems like you have a lot of choices to make and some times the decisions turn out awfully well.  It is hard to distinguish whether that is luck or skill except over many deals, I suppose.

Here is a few decisions from my session yesterday with Karen.

What do you open this hand white on red in first at imps

KJ76432
void
Q65
A86

pass, 1, 2,3,4 or 4 (if you play Namyats)

I personally like 1.  You do have some defense and it is possible that playing high numbers of spades is not best.  But I can see 4 as a choice I suppose.  Maybe the opponents can make lots of hearts and you are certainly making it harder for them to find their spot.  I don’t like 2 or 3.  What is your poison?

Anyway, Karen bid 1 and we had no trouble finding slam.  Actually I probably would have tried for and gotten to slam opposite any number of spades.  My hand was

AQ8
A53
AJ42
KJ10

3 would have been the hardest to deal with.  I wonder if without discussion 4 is some sort of slam try in spades?  It probably should be.  My opinion is that anyone who opens 3 on this hand is not unlucky to miss slam, they deserve to miss slam.

Here is another choice.  First what do you bid on Karen’s hand with

A8
KJ97
AJ10982
K

You are vulnerable against not and it goes 2 pass 4 to you?  Do you like double?  If partner passes you are okay with that and if partner pulls to clubs you plan to convert to diamonds.  This is the bid Karen made.  I prefer bidding to passes and I think double is fine.  5 seems reasonable to me too.  Anyway this was my decision now

5
A864
K6532
543

I figured that on this auction Karen can’t have a spade stack.  She is doubling on high cards or shape.  We figure to be able to play a red suit contract.  I picked 5.  I figured that if she was really short in diamonds she could pull to hearts.  Maybe we were lucky, maybe we had good judgment But 5 was a great contract.  I was able to element the black suits and have a 100% contract with a chance for an uptrick by hooking the J.  6 isn’t a terrible contract but it doesn’t make on the lie of the cards.

Some times it seems like you just have a series of these decisions.  They are close decisions and you have to make a choice.  I suppose the really good players based on their experience and talent get them right a lot more than we lesser mortals.

Playing With Karen

I had a chance to have a game with Karen Cumpstone today. We played a session on BBO with very little discussion. I have found that those are the sessions were you don’t have misunderstandings. You are both being quite careful. Still there were a few auctions to think about. Before any of that I thought this was an interesting position.  Here is the whole hand

	Karen
	QJ1098
	98
	752
West	A92	East
AK		76542
AKQ74		10
AJ3		Q1086
K73	Linda	Q106
	3
	J6532
	K94
	J854

The opponents arrived in 3NT after West showed a strong balanced hand with hearts.  Karen led a spade of course.  Declarer tried the J which was ducked.  He conceded a diamond to me and I got out a small heart which declarer won in hand. 

At this point he had to play the club suit.  Our declarer led a club to the 10.  This seems superficially attractive because if he can make two club tricks he doesn’t actually need to reach dummy.  But actually it is still 50-50.  If both are onside all works and if both are offside nothing works.  If the J is onside then the 10 works but if the A is onside then he has to rise with the Q since if he guesses wrong he not only will only have one club trick but he won’t be able to get to dummy.

If either of us has the A doubleton and he puts in the 10  he can still get to dummy true.  But he gets the same result if either of us has the J of clubs and he puts in the Q,

The presence of a ninth trick in dummy changed the odds in the club suit.  Cool.  Of course he might have led the K from his hand first.  We might make a mistake but in addition if Karen had a doubleton club honor even if she ducked he would see it and know what to do.  That is certainly the best play.

Here was a hand where no discussion played a role.  How do you bid this crazy hand:

AKQ73 J A AKQJ52

Red on white Karen opened 2.  I wanted to bid 3 but people play that as all sorts of things.  Would see take it as natural and forcing?  I thought about 6 which would probably work most days.  Anyway I bid 2.  This bid makes me wince when I look at it again.  Karen bid 3 and RHO decided to come in with 3 no doubt influenced by the vulnerability.  I bid  6.  Now that bid doesn’t make me wince.  Anyway Karen did not have a perfect hand for me and it turned out that both slams needed pretty much the same thing.  Here was her hand:

85
K9
Q1087652
43

Playing in clubs is better because you can try for the remote chance that if spades don’t break that the four spades are with the stiff club.  In any case neither slam was making today.  Thinking about it again I should just have bid 6 right off.  Then I wouldn’t have had to wince and I would have played in the right contract.

It was a lot of fun and Karen was awesome.

Squeezes everywhere

Our good friend Bill Milgram sent me a squeeze to look at (and classify) that allowed him to make 6C in a high quality game at the bridge club.  Ray commented that his opponents were unlucky that Bill had been the declarer since he was one of few players (maybe the only one) who would have made the contract.  However the defense did err at the beginning of the hand.  So this is a challenge for you.  Would you have made 6?

Here is the hand

Leah (patient wife)

AK872

632

J10943

void

Bill

6

AJ10

7

AKQJ6532

The spot cards are approximate and I don’t have an auction.  But assume there is no helpful information from the opponents.  The opening lead is the 6.  West wins the K and returns a small diamond which you ruff.  Can you make it from here?

While you are thinking about the hand, the Clyde E. Love practice deals are now available as a free download at www.ebooksbridge.com.  So if you like squeezes enjoy the twenty practice hands which cover a wide range of different types of squeezes and be sure to let me know if you find any mistakes.  People who provide useful input will be acknowledged in updates to the practice deals so this is your chance to be famous.

Back to the Bill’s deal.  It looks to me like both hands guard diamonds.  You have no entries to dummy to ruff anything out.  One possibility is that one hand guards spades and hearts.  Then when you run all the clubs you reach this ending and the victim cannot hold three spades and the KQ of hearts.

Leah (patient wife)

AK8

void

J

void

Bill

6

AJ10

void

void

Is there anything else?  The problem is the entries (non-existent).  If West holds spades and East hold hearts when you run clubs you end up in a similar ending:

	Leah (patient wife)
	AK8
	6
	J
	void

West
QJ10
9
Q
	Bill
	6
	AJ10
	void
	3

On the last club West still has an idle card and can throw a heart.  Dummy has no useful discard.  The double squeeze does not work.

Is there any other lie of the cards that works?  We need to make West’s life a bit tougher?  You can make the hand if the heart honors are split so long as West holds spades.  This is a double guard squeeze.  Let’s look at the ending since it was the squeeze that existed at the table.

	Leah (patient wife)
	AK8
	6
	J
	void

West		East
J109		Q
Q		K98
Q		A
	Bill	void
	6
	AJ10
	void
	3

When Bill led his second last club West was squeezed in three suits.  He had to give up his diamond guard.  Anything else would leave immediate defeat.  Bill throws a spade from dummy and East can discard a spade.  Now Bill cashes spades and arriving at a two card ending.  East is squeezed in hearts and diamonds. 

The nice thing about the hand from declarer’s point of view is that the hand sort of plays itself.  You really don’t have any other choices but to run clubs and when you do both the triple squeeze and double guard squeeze will operates.

The defense did err though.  At trick two when in on the top diamond, East has to damage declarer’s fragile entries.  Either a spade lead or a heart lead will do the trick.  Here is the whole deal:

	Leah (patient wife)
	AK872
	632
	J10943
	void

West		East
J109543		Q
Q7		K9854
Q86		AK52
87	Bill	1094
	6
	AJ10
	7
	AKQJ6532

Those Special Moments

There are a lot of reasons why people like to play bridge. Its a terrific social activity and you belong to a very special group of people. Most of the time its not really about winning, at least for me. There is usually nothing of real importance to win. The best thing is the enjoyment of each deal. Some of them are magic, some even funny or ironic. A few make me sad or angry. (And then there are the times where it is about the winning … )

Anyway here is an example of a tiny special moment or two from a session with a favorite partner last night.  Your hand with everybody vulnerable is:

South – You

QJ764

6

Q1085

K52

Partner opens 1 which could be three and you bid 1.  West with a great BBO name (Red Baron) doubles, partner passes and East bids 2.  I have three choices:

• pass, prudent or mouselike?
• 2 I have five but partner has at most two (no support double)
• 3.  (at this point she has to have at least four diamonds).

Well I am no mouse so I bid 3.  West bid 4 and partner doubled.  One of these doubled games had already made (See later).  But I really had no choice but to pass.

I led a small diamond and a ferocious dummy appeared:

RB’s Ferocious Dummy

AK982

AJ97

2

AJ10

Partner won the K and switched to the 10.   Were we beating this? 

The question was answered in a second.  Declarer led a small heart from dummy and partner won the 10.  That was quite soothing.  Some errors by declarer led to +800.  Declarer held 4-4-4-1 with a stiff spade and the Q as his only high card.  A 3 bid would have been more circumspect by RB but after the 3 bid perhaps it sounded too competitive for RB.  Some times Snoopy has his day.

I think this hand was satisfying because of the roundness of +800, because some opponents are so very aggressive (that’s what you like to do) and because you survived your own overbidding.

Now here is a hand that was very satisfying for someone (not for me).  You hold

Soon To Be Satisfied Opponent

432

AKQ873

K97

10

You are in third chair with nobody vulnerable.  Two passes to you.  What do you do?  What do you do if I am in fourth chair and you want to irritate me?

1. Pass – the most friendly bid, giving opponents a nice free ride (nobody is this wimpy)
2. 1.  You have a full opening bid with a good suit.  Partner will know what to do and your bridge teacher will be happy
3. 2  That will put it to the opponents.  You might some day miss a game but not many days
4. 1  I only know a few people who would venture into this territory and most of them aren’t of drinking age

At my table the bid was 3, sock it to you.  Do you like that one?    So here I am with

Yours Truly

KQ985

4

65

AKJ64

I have played a system at times where I could bid 4 here to show clubs and spades but that was not on the system card with this partner.  I suppose I could pass but (see earlier comment about not being a mouse) I bid 3.  LHO bid 4 and partner doubled.  Should I pull?  Partner probably doesn’t have a heart stack on this auction.  She probably doesn’t have a lot of spades.  She therefore has minors.  5?  Well if you figured that out you would have been right.  5 is likely down one and 4 doubled was gin.  Curse you RB.

Red Baron Victorious

AJ76

9652

Q4

Q83

Do You Want To Be In This Slam- Read At Own Risk

Don’t read on unless you are into rather dull analysis but here goes…

I came on to watch the last board or two of an Icelandic match on BBO.  This rather interesting hand came up.  I have rotated the deal.

North

KQ107

J87632

AK8

-

South

J8642

A

J

AQJ1053

Both tables reached 6 and I can tell you right now it is not a “Bob Hamman” slam.  On the lie of the cards it doesn’t make.  So as declarer struggled we had an abstract discussion about whether it was or was not a 50% slam.  My argument was that it makes almost all the time the K is onside and some times if it is offside.  Having played with the hand in Deep Finesse I can tell you that if I put the K onside it makes every time double dummy.    That doesn’t mean you will make it all the time.  The trouble with that sort of analysis is that declarer gets to pick one line and he may not always find the one that works.  If declarer had the 9 he would be better off but if he plays to basically draw trump and take a ruffing finesse in clubs as he line of choice lets see how that works out.

So let’s pick a line and then see how it works on the various breaks.

You win a diamond lead in dummy and you play a high spade.  East wins and returns a heart.  You try the ruffing finesse twice (you can’t stand a 6-1 break most of the time), nobody covers but it works.  You lead a small club and ruff high.  If East follows the K is coming down so you can just draw trump and claim.  If East shows out then you do have a guess.  You cross to hand on a red suit ruff and ruff the last club high.  Now you lead a spade from dummy and have to decide whether to play for spades 2-2 or for East to have the 9.  You have a reasonable amount of information about the hand by this time having played quite a few cards.  Generally the finesse is probably right.

This line requires the K onside and works when the clubs are 4-3 and the spades are 3-1 or 2-2 with almost no exceptions.  It works if clubs are 5-2 and spades are 3-1 or 2-2 and the ruffing finesse works except if the 9 is doubleton or tripleton with the clubs.

This line is obviously less than 50% but it does exclude the chance that the defenders will help out a bit.  A trump lead would help (and a club but that seems very unlikely to impossible).  A heart lead might be a bit helpful as it does allow some play in the heart suit which might work on some distributions.

Can we improve this line?  It might be better to try for some cases where the club king is short offside even if that gives up on some of the hands where the trump break 3-1 in the offside hand.  Is it wise to bring hearts into the mix?  I don’t think so after the diamond lead.

If we change the line so we start with a trump and play a small club when in hand with a heart and then cash a high trump in dummy we have some decent changes when the trump are 2-2 and the K is offside doubleton or even in some cases where trumps are 3-1.  Does this bring it back to 50%?  I don’t think so.

With due consideration this contract is less than 50% but close enough that considering the choice of opening lead and possibly less than accurate defense its within spitting distance of that number.

I admit this type of analysis is tricky but it was sort of fun to do.  If anybody wants to take it the next step.  Enjoy!

Not My Very Best Watching

Commentary on matches on BBO takes some skill to do right.  At least I think it does.  There are different approaches.  One approach is what I would call the macho man .  This person is invariably male and he is there so everyone can appreciate how very well he can see the hand.  Before a bid is made he is calling the result.  His focus is on dummy play and he expects to dominate the chat.  He speaks with disdain at almost anything anyone else has and never admits an error.

Macho man can be a good analyst or a poor one.  He is often talking double dummy.  Poor declarer doesn’t always know how the cards lie.  Macho man always has a reason why declarer should drop the stiff king offside or take an unusual finesse.

Then there is chatty Cathy.  Chatty may be male of female and just is in there to say something anything.  She will repeat exactly how you can find the scores for the match or what the weather is like or just about anything else, occasionally even talking about the game.

Then there is the lawyer.  He will argue with anybody about anything.  Some times he has favorite “opponents”, sorry I mean fellow commentators.  David Bird has one who apparently never ever agrees with anything he says.

In general I am much happier commenting when there are no more than 2 others.  Its hard to have any sort of intelligent discussion otherwise. 

All this being said, I commented on two matches today.  One just for a few deals was very pleasant and interesting.  The second was more of a struggle with just too many people.  I probably wasn’t at my best.  I do have an unfortunate habit of sometimes saying the opposite of what I mean.  He should lead a spade, no I mean heart.  I usually have a chance to correct my error, no harm done.  But not always. I made a pretty serious analytical error on one hand but was helpfully pounced on by one of the other commentators.  Fortunately the bridge was pretty interesting at times in the ten short boards. 

I thought the East-West pair in my room (the OR) clearly had the best of it and the score certainly reflected this.  Even when they made contracts I didn’t always like their approach.  Here is an example.

North had limited his hand to 7 points after his partner opened a strong club.  South showed a strong notrump 15-17.  What would you bid on this hand:

KJ76

10872

Q93

J6

Pass comes to my mind.  Even if I was playing Garbage Stayman where partner is forced to bid his better major I would pass.  Our North bid Stayman and they played in 2NT (as opposed to 1NT at the other table).  Declarer made it by guessing how to play diamonds with A10432 opposite dummy’s J6.  As it was all was very friendly.  So this one got by.

This is an opening lead problem

AKJ109

10742

10752

-

You overcall 1 with 1.  Your LHO shows a game force with clubs and checks for a spade stopper.  Your RHO bids 3NT.  RHO has Qxx of spades almost certainly.  Maybe Qxxx.  Do you lay down an honor or do you lead a small one or how about a clever red suit lead?

Actually anything but a small spade works.  The spade gives declarer nine tricks without a club finesse.  On any other lead declarer must take a club finesse to partner and the spade return picks up declarer’s Qxx. 

I would have lead the A myself and I would not have lead the J as did our South.  J is really only right if declarer has QXXX and partner has XX and partner doesn’t have two side winners.  Partner could easily have a stiff spade so I see an argument for a red card. 

This is quite a sad hand.  South was the perpetrator of a bridge crime.  I think if you wanted to pick one of the seven deadly sins it would be SLOTH.  Here is the hand.

QJ43

K

AK1085

AK8

A1087

8632

94

Q42

North opens 1 and East overcalls 1.  You double and West bids 2.  Partner doubles, you bid 2 and partner raises to 4.  The opening lead is the J.

How do you play this hand? 

You can see that you have three clubs, two diamonds, three spades in hand (at least).  If you can make a heart ruff or two in dummy there is no problem at all.  An alternative approach is to set up diamonds.  Hearts seems a bit safer.  You win the opening club lead and play a heart.  If you do this you have very little risk.  Our declarer started with trump   Winning the club in dummy to play clubs, he ran the Q and J.  This won but West showed out on the second round.  He played one round of diamonds both following love and now he changed course and belatedly played the heart.  East won and returned a trump won in hand. 

At this point South has some guessing to do.  One approach is to ruff a heart, cross back on a club, draw the last trump and take five minor suit tricks, four spades, and a heart ruff.  But East is known to be 4-5-?-? with at least one club.  This line will fail if West has only one club.  Is there any line that works on more minor suit distributions?

Let’s say you play the Q now.  If East shows out he cannot ruff.  Diamonds are 3-3 and you can’t be stopped from setting up diamonds with your clubs as an entry (or a heart ruff).  So let’s say he discards a heart.  Now you play ruff out the diamonds.  Cross to dummy on a club and let East make his trump whenever he wants.  If East shows in I would probably finesse the diamond.  If East wins and returns a trump I win and repeat the finesse.  If East plays hearts now you have to ruff in dummy and decide the distribution.

Anyway, the real mistake on the hand was at trick two.

I am tired and sleepy, time for a nap.

Cloudy with a chance of …

Ray and I just got back from Vancouver where for once the whole family was together.  He was sick while we were out there and now it is my turn.  So my brain is not only jet lagged but also diseased. 

Ratbert finished going through the Love problems and if my brain cooperates I am going to try to work through the corrections now so the problems should be online in a few days.  The new books came into today and I love my Love.  Its really got a great cover.  If you want a look at it here is the link on Amazon

Love Revised And Beautiful

I have my own author copy to admire.

I was thinking that my next project along with fund raising for Canadian teams, ABTA teacher of the year, ebooks and marketing ,.. would be more software from our current books.  When Luise gets back I will get her to show me how to work with the LIN files.

I have been thinking about the Hall of Fame and I really believe that players should be chosen based on ability as well as results.  I know its hard to evaluate ability but that is why you have selectors.  If it was only on results you could do it with a computer and a spreadsheet.

But, the Hall of Fame I want to see would have players from all over the world.  And I like the idea of having a player category along with say a builder category for people who contributed as great writers, (Terence Reese perhaps, he may be too tainted as a player but he wrote some great books) or administrators.

I did try to play mini-bridge with my older grandsons and they really like playing cards.  I downloaded the BBO client and I am hoping that Cassidy will join me online soon.  He is 10 very bright and really eager.   His seven year old brother Malcolm loves cards too.

So if you see Cassidy99 on BBO say hi to him.

I am taking my cloudy brain to bed now.

Baseball Hall Of Fame

Judy Wolff has been discussing the issues with what I think of as the American Bridge Hall of Fame.  I say this because the only players in it are Americans.  A few Canadian players are included in different categories but not nominated as players.   As a result the Canadian Bridge Federation will be establishing a Canadian Bridge Hall of Fame and it will be interesting to see how they set up the process.

After reading Judy’s blogs and some emails and some comments I thought I might look at the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To me it is the pinnacle of such ventures.  I have been to Cooperstown more than once and it is well worth the visit.  It goes far beyond honoring the best of baseball.  I love it.

Players can be elected by the Baseball Writer’s Association or by the Veteran’s Committee.  The Veteran’s Committee considers non-players such as managers, umpires or executives as well as players back further in time.  While the writers are focused on players who have retired more recently.

Any writers association members ( for bridge IBPA members) for at least ten years can nominate players.  The players they select must have played in the major leagues 5-20 years before the date of the election.  (For bridge players above 60 and perhaps no more than 90, alive or dead).

The next step is for nominees to go through a screening committee.  The committee consist of 6 writers appointed by the BBWAA (like the IBPA).  There screening committee votes and basically the player must get at least 2 votes.  From zero to 10 candidates are put on the ballet and their are no write-in.  The player must receive 75% of the vote of the writers association membership.

Now here are the criteria used by the screening committee: record, ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contribution to the teams he played on.

The veteran’s committee is comprised of members who are Hall of Famers.  Candidates must have been retired 21 years but otherwise the process is identical (for bridge players alive or dead above 90 perhaps). 

It is a lengthy process but players who make it to the HoF deserve it. 

So what should bridge do?  Some thing along the same lines.  By broaden t

Would this work for bridge?  I think so.  Although perhaps there are not enough reliable members of the IBPA to make it work and others might be added.  Maybe the IBPA isn’t the right body.  What do you think?

I think the idea of having a player category and a builder and administrator category is pretty good.  And hey if you don’t want to include Canadians its okay with me but maybe you should change the name.  But please add the criteria skill to the decision making and don’t make it solely on record.  It is important in baseball where you can be a good player on a bad team and vice versa.  It is important in bridge too. 

Without that criteria you might as well call it the American Bridge Hall of people who won a lot of things.   If you are going that route you don’t really need selectors.  Just get a printout of the players from the US who have won the most events and aren’t currently in the ABHPWWLT.  Its kind of a master point scheme really.  You will need to think about how to fit women and seniors into the ABHPWWLT since they can win a lot of things too in their own events. 

New Downloads Available

If you are waiting for the Love problems they are delayed a bit.  Colin (alias Ratbert) is reviewing them and he has found some problems with them so we are waiting for him to finish so we can correct them.  It won’t be that long so stay posted.

Bob MacKinnon’s new book Bridge, Probability and Information is available for download now from www.ebooksbridge.com. In his book, Bob explains how information theory can provide some practical answers to bridge problems.  That is, some ideas that will make you a better bridge player.  There will also be free downloads are available to accompany Bob MacKinnon’s book shortly.  The supplemental material is free to everyone, however, it does some times go beyond the ideas in the book so it may not be for everyone.  But if you are interested in seeing how probability changes over time and how knowing vacant spaces (that is the number of cards in a particular hand still not placed in suits) you can make better decisions.  The download on virtual vacant spaces starts out with a diamond lead against declarer’s spade contract.  Can that help to decide which defender has the trump queen?  How does it change the odds?  There are six missing diamonds.  Suppose you can deduce that the diamond lead is from length.  How does that change the probabilities?  I seem to remember somebody once telling me it doesn’t change it because after all the defender had to lead something.  But not so.

I know that I have heard people talk about using a different point count scale and I know that I upgrade aces and kings and downgrade queens and jacks.  Bob shows a mathematicians view of point count.  How do you feel about 6-4-2-1?  Read about Opening Bids On A Different Scale.

Divisions of Sides?  This is a concept that is discussed in Bob’s book where he looks at how suits split between defenders and declarers.  So a 7-7-7-5 division of sides is the most balanced.  That is neither side has a fit of more than seven cards.  What does this mean?  Do you want to play or defend?  Bob talks a bit about this.  But if you read this article you will probably need to peak at the book to fully see how sides affect things and how you can use this concept.

The Clyde Love ebook is also available now.  I am not sure about the problems … so as we say in the office, “more Love to come.”