[PhantomSac]

 helene_t, on 2015-March-10, 05:57, said:

ximp poster
1229 karlson
966 Mbodell
903 foobar
834 Gordontd
707 Rhm
582 mikeh
567 Poky
454 NickRW
441 cherdano
438 Jinksy
406 BenLessard
392 Zelandakh
338 manudude03
331 PhantomSac
260 Nige1
157 cyberyeti
-19 WesleyC
-35 gnasher
-68 PaulG
-81 wanoff
-121 y66
-144 eagles123
-153 eilidh
-179 AyunuS
-235 JoeFortune
-341 gwnn
-566 helene_t
-649 Remnard
-882 KurtGodel
-1002 Hanoi5
-1390 MrAce
-1554 gszes
-1586 wbartley


I have ignored the 4S bid by Gnasher which PhilKing assumed was a typo.

I have ignored those bids that were posted after PK revealed the "solutions".

Thanks Helene. Cross imps is a lot better than total points, especially because it feels like I did better in that format

[Jinksy]

 gwnn, on 2015-March-10, 07:37, said:

No matter how stupid your decisions, you'll always have some company

Multiple companies.

[Jinksy]

Thanks to PK for a really fun quiz, and helene for a helpful breakdown.

I will wear my award with far more pride than it merits.

I have very restricted time for the forums atm, but would be really aggreived to miss a similar thread. If PK (or anyone) does another one and anyone thinks of it, please could they PM me to let me know?

[Jinksy]

 helene_t, on 2015-March-10, 07:00, said:

Justin already noticed that he and Arend would be compatible partner's. Here you can see how we cluster based on number of agreements.

Presumably the best people to partner with would be those who made approximately oppositely conservative calls to you?

[gszes]

That's a LOT of work well done.

[Trick13]

 WesleyC, on 2015-March-09, 23:16, said:

Thanks again for such a great post. After thinking about a few of the hands overnight, I went back and redid the quiz this morning (without reading any of the analysis). The second time through 3 of my choices changed (B2 X -> 4S, B9 X -> 4S, B21 X -> P) so I might've lost the flexible double award .

I think it would be valuable to put together a double dummy analysis of the hands in order to provide more general insight (rather than just a table result from 1 arbitrary full deal). However, in order to do that I need some help coming up with a range for 1H, P and 4H both in standard and limited openings (and also how much each call would vary based on the vul).

The main part I could use some input on is determining what hands partner is going to act with (especially with a 1S overcall) and what hands constitute a 4H bid playing limited openings, because the style of these bids varies a huge amount even between top players.

Any thoughts on what criteria might be suitable (or perhaps someone already has Deal 3.19 tcl script for a similar situation)?

Here is a dealer script I ran for one of the hands. http://www.bridgebas...aler/dealer.php


predeal east SAK953, HK8, D82, CAKT8

limited = 0

south_1H = hcp(south) >= 11
and hcp(south) <= (limited ? 15 : 20)
and hearts(south) >= 5
and spades(south) < hearts(south)
and diamonds(south) <= hearts(south)
and clubs(south) <= hearts(south)
and losers(south) >= 5


north_4H = (hcp(north) <= 8 and ((hearts(north) >= 5 and not shape(north, any 5332) and losers(north) >= 7)
or (hearts(north) >= 4 and losers(north) <= 7 and losers(north) >= 6)))

or

(limited and hcp(north) >= 8 and hcp(north) <= 13
and losers(north) <= 7 and losers(north) >= 6 and hearts(north) >= 3)


west_overcall = (spades(west) >= 5 and hcp(west) >= 8 and top5(west, spades) >= 2)
or (clubs(west) >= 5 and hcp(west) >= 10 and top4(west, clubs) >= 2)
or (diamonds(west) >= 5 and hcp(west) >= 8 and top4(west, diamonds) >= 2)
or (clubs(west) >= 6 and hcp(west) < 10 and hcp(west) >= 6 and top4(west, clubs) >= 2)
or (diamonds(west) >= 6 and hcp(west) < 10 and hcp(west) >= 6 and top4(west, diamonds) >= 2)
or (hcp(west) >= 18)
or (hcp(west) >= 15 and shape(west, any 4333 + any 4432 -x2xx) and top3(west, hearts) >= 1)
or (hcp(west) >= 12 and shape(west, 41xx + 42xx))
or (hcp(west) >= 8 and diamonds(west) >= 5 and clubs(west) >= 5)
or (hcp(west) >= 11 and diamonds(west) >= 6 and top4(west, diamonds) >= 2)
or (hcp(west) >= 11 and clubs(west) >= 6 and top4(west, clubs) >= 2)

produce 10000
condition south_1H and north_4H and not west_overcall
action frequency "spades/hcp" (spades(west), 2, 6, hcp(west), 5, 10)

[MrAce]

 helene_t, on 2015-March-10, 05:57, said:

ximp poster
1229 karlson
966 Mbodell
903 foobar
834 Gordontd
707 Rhm
582 mikeh
567 Poky
454 NickRW
441 cherdano
438 Jinksy
406 BenLessard
392 Zelandakh
338 manudude03
331 PhantomSac
260 Nige1
157 cyberyeti
-19 WesleyC
-35 gnasher
-68 PaulG
-81 wanoff
-121 y66
-144 eagles123
-153 eilidh
-179 AyunuS
-235 JoeFortune
-341 gwnn
-566 helene_t
-649 Remnard
-882 KurtGodel
-1002 Hanoi5
-1390 MrAce
-1554 gszes
-1586 wbartley

Helene!! Are you sure you did not post this list upside down??

[benlessard]

Usually when i do stuff like this to student i put the hand in groups, all vul, none vul etc..this of course help the students because its easy to compared the hand with each others in the same group.

Im also not used to red and amber the way Phil has done. What im use is red= all red,white= all white, fav & unfav but there is no default here. I like green for fav, but we need a color for unfav, however using red for all vul will annoyed those who are used that red is unfav.