Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Doug Bennion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 32 33 34 35
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wondered if something along the lines of ‘display boards’ or ‘presentation boards’ or ‘poster boards’ might do a quick and dirty job of it. The price would be just a few dollars per table and stands are available …

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22poster+board+stand+holder%22&client=firefox-b-d&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=RPQBg_7H9QNPsM%253A%252C-Wr7BPAVuQVKfM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kQ2wHBfUhd4b79GCQfwdY7wRwTs0w&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVt_3204zkAhVERqwKHYqTAVUQ9QEwAHoECAgQBg#imgrc=RPQBg_7H9QNPsM:

You can purchase a pack of 20 2x4 cardboard sheets for ~ $2 per sheet. Cut a flap-hole, invest in some sticky-velcro, and you’re off to the races.

They would be light and cheap and almost ‘throw-away’. Dunno about the utility though, you'd have to check that out … they might be very not robust.
Aug. 18
Doug Bennion edited this comment Aug. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wondered if something along the lines of ‘display boards’ or ‘presentation boards’ or ‘poster boards’ might do a quick and dirty job of it. The price would be just a few dollars per table and stands are available …

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22poster+board+stand+holder%22&client=firefox-b-d&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=RPQBg_7H9QNPsM%253A%252C-Wr7BPAVuQVKfM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kQ2wHBfUhd4b79GCQfwdY7wRwTs0w&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjVt_3204zkAhVERqwKHYqTAVUQ9QEwAHoECAgQBg#imgrc=RPQBg_7H9QNPsM:

You can purchase a pack of 20 2x4 cardboard sheets for ~ $2 per sheet. Cut a flap-hole, invest in some sticky-velcro, and you’re off to the races.

They’d be very light, very cheap, almost ‘throw-away’, but dunno about the utility, you’d have to test that out.
Aug. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surprised responder didn't utter “really?” upon hearing the explanation. I suppose he'd be taken out and shot for that.
Aug. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm guessing the amusement resulted from the opener being a weak notrump.
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
9436 through Wed, headed for something like 13700, down close to 20% from 2014 Vegas total 16600
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This might be an algorithm for ‘cheating on lead’. In the double-dummy world, about 1/3 of the time a (normal) lead from any suit is best (all suits tied), and about 1/3 of the time there is only one suit that is best (I never find that suit). The remaining 1/3 of deals is split about equally between there being 2 suits tied for best, and 3 suits tied for best.

So for those deals when only one suit is best, if a pair is hitting well above ‘expected’, say, 40% of those ‘best’ leads … something might be fishy.

Or if you combine all those chances, the average hand-on-lead has about 2.5 winning suits, so if a player’s hit rate is much greater than that, maybe something is fishy.

(That ‘one-third’ business, I derived from leads against 3NT contracts and might vary by contract type and level and etc)
July 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just used DM Pro on 25K notrump contracts … balanced 14 opposite balanced 10. After dealing, the option to proceed with Deep Finesse tells me 3NT makes 8945 times, whereas proceeding with DDS tells me 3NT makes 8945 times. Other comparisons (making xNT) are likewise identical.

The DDS calculations are much faster, on the order of 5X or 6X.
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
DM Pro uses two different DD engines. At the end of the ‘dealing’ phase, if you continue with ‘DF Analysis’, DM Pro uses Deep Finesse. If you continue with ‘Continue’, DM Pro uses Bo Haglund's DDS (which I find is considerably faster). Outputs are different.
July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A couple of years ago I surveyed double dummy leads against a ‘blind’ 3NT contract. I was impressed with how many ‘ties’ there are for ‘best lead’.

Only 32% of the time, the best lead was from one suit.

Some 12% of the time, two suits shared the honor.

About 16% of the time, you could successfully lead from three suits.

Most surprising, to me anyway, was that 39% of the time, a lead from any suit would achieve the same results.

I don’t know how this randomness would be factored into any ‘lead analysis’.
June 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good spade raise. 3 is minimum raise.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ahhh that works nicely, thanks.

Years ago I modded some fonts with FontMaker, so that ‘[’ became , and so on. Doesn't solve the colour issue though.
June 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's weird Doug. Colors don't show on my Windows desktop, but do on my Android tablet and phone.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks.

Just checking to see if copy/paste from a Doc using your nice script works when commenting … seems to for the symbols.


June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's possible for Programmer to build an ‘unlikely to have’ table that the proxy deals would ‘consider’ (can’t be tough, I’ve done it). In your example, from RHO’s perspective, LHO would be considered ‘unlikely’ to have the King, having not beaten the Jack.

There are all kinds of situations that could apply. Another might be: Declarer leads from xxx in dummy, and LHO wins with the King, the play having gone x-x-9. Both declarer and RHO could now ‘consider’ that LHO has neither the Queen, Jack, nor Ten.

Hold-ups and falsecards wouldn’t be handled well.
June 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks. So when leader’s partner is ‘determining’ best play when he is on lead, the proxy deals will skew to xxx(x), with poor prospects, so he looks to switch. High-spot leads from weakness would help a lot, but Programmer would have to intercede.
June 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Question: Against 3NT, do the bots lead the ‘2’ equally from, say, KJ72 and 9752 and 972?
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
West bot doesn't continue spades because declarer *must* have the spade jack on your bidding. If you play outside the rules of the game (as understood by the bots), you will continue to be plagued by, umm, unusual bot defences.
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks. Makes at least two of us who don't understand the ruling.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anybody have a link to this video #4? Thanks.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 is weak, should have so specified. Dunno if 3 forcing. Not even sure if 4 is forcing although 2 bidder thought it should be.

RF: 3NT would have been down several after heart lead, diamond back.
May 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 32 33 34 35
.

Bottom Home Top