[Halo]

If your aim is to apply mathematics to Bridge for practical reasons, then approaches that cannot be applied at the table are interesting but eventually unfruitful.

If this was always a 'purist' discussion independent of reality, I apologise for intruding.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

If your aim is to apply mathematics to Bridge for practical reasons, then approaches that cannot be applied at the table are interesting but eventually unfruitful.

Exactly what about the mathematical reasoning do you think cannot be applied practically at the table? You can always assign your own estimate of probabilities to an opponent's choice of plays if you feel he is deviating from correct defense & wish to try & exploit him. Just be aware that when you try to exploit someone, usually that leaves yourself open to be exploited if you are wrong about them. Ignoring the opponent, just playing for the theoretical optimal combinations, avoids you being on the losing end of any mind games. It also avoids you having the winning end also, as it fails to punish opponents who deviate from the proper frequencies of actions. But against a good player just guaranteeing not losing is probably right.


Math will always tell you exactly what to do. If opp does A between x% & y%, choose line 1, else if if < x% line 2, else if > y% line 3 etc. You just have to make an accurate determination of what the opp is doing if you wish to maximize vs. them. Or you give up on maximizing, assume they are playing properly, and guarantee yourself the normal level of success.

If you do not want to use math, how else do you propose to solve the problem accurately?

[han]

dburn, on Nov 2 2007, 08:09 PM, said:

I observe that I have just subtracted 108 from 924 and arrived at an answer of 906.

This might foster in some minds the notion that I am a mathematician, because it is well known that mathematicians cannot do simple arithmetic to save their lives.

I assure you that I am no mathematician of any kind, but I am typing this post (and the one that preceded it) after a friend's birthday party.

I see, however, that Halo has invited Stephen (who clearly is a mathematician, and an excellent one at that) to "consider the real world". Mathematicians should not be invited to do that. Nor, at times, should I.

Clearly you are no mathematician because you are talking crap. Mathematicians tend to be very very good at doing simple arithmetics. Stick to suit combinations and poetry I say.

[Halo]

Stephen Tu, on Nov 3 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

Math will always tell you exactly what to do. If opp does A between x% & y%, choose line 1, else if if < x% line 2, else if > y% line 3 etc. You just have to make an accurate determination of what the opp is doing if you wish to maximize vs. them. Or you give up on maximizing, assume they are playing properly, and guarantee yourself the normal level of success.

Stephen

I give in.

But I promise you next time you meet me and ask my name, I'll be disguised of course, and say 'dburn'. Maybe you have already modelled it - for every personating 'dburn' there is a 'halo', and the best of good fortune if that is what you conclude.

[dburn]

Hannie, on Nov 3 2007, 01:10 PM, said:

Mathematicians tend to be very very good at doing simple arithmetics.

Ernst Eduard Kummer (1810-1893), a German algebraist, was rather poor at arithmetic. Whenever he had occasion to do simple arithmetic in class, he would get his students to help him. Once he had to find 7 x 9. "Seven times nine" he began. "Seven times nine is er... ah... ah... seven times nine is..."

"Sixty-one", a student suggested. Kummer wrote 61 on the board.

"Sir," said another student, "it should be sixty-nine."

"Come, come, gentlemen, it can't be both!" Kummer exclaimed. "It must be one or the other."

Another great mathematician, Paul Erdos, suggested that Kummer in fact solved the problem himself as follows: 7 x 9 can't be 61 because 61 is prime; it can't be 65 because that is a multiple of 5; 67 is prime; 69 is clearly too large; so that leaves 63.

But if it's poetry you want, here is an indication of how to pronounce the Hungarian name of Erdos:

A conjecture both deep and profound
Is whether a circle is round.
In a paper by Erdos
That's written in Kurdish,
A counter-example is found.

[han]

I wasn't alive yet when Kummer was so I'll have to believe you on your word. And it logically follows that all mathematicians are bad at simple arithmatics, doesn't it? How wrong I was!

I like the poem, who's Erdos?

[ceeb]

Hannie, on Nov 4 2007, 08:38 PM, said:

who's Erdos?

If you're not kidding, Google "most prolific mathematician".

Charles

[han]

I was kidding, or perhaps hustling is the word.

[skjaeran]

Hannie, on Nov 5 2007, 10:19 PM, said:

I was kidding, or perhaps hustling is the word.

Hustling is indeed the word Han.