[han]

dburn, on Nov 12 2007, 06:44 PM, said:

The vast array of figures in the posts above are no doubt designed to contradict my assertion that mathematicians cannot count. They still can't, but ever since the proof of the four-colour theorem, they have had to pretend that they believe computers can.

Hehe, that's pretty good David, even if it doesn't rhyme.

But while your summary is spot on, is it really as obvious as you suggest? It seems like Mike Lawrence (if it was Mike who wrote the article) didn't even consider this, and to others it wasn't immediately clear what the best line is either. In general I think that people underestimate how much known holdings in side suits affect the odds for how suits split.

Also, I think it is quite interesting that the odds for Trinidad's line are so much better than the odds for Lawrence's line, would you have guessed that? Finally, some who read this might be more interested in how you can compute something than in what you can say at a party to sound smart.

[dburn]

Hannie, on Nov 12 2007, 08:04 PM, said:

Hehe, that's pretty good David, even if it doesn't rhyme.

But while your summary is spot on, is it really as obvious as you suggest?

No, it's not. Although West, if he has the queen of diamonds and understands declarer's problem, should play that queen as fast as he can from queen third, or even fourth, in practice he will not. Wherefore the Master wrote:

We don't need too much birdlore, do we,
To tell a flamingo from a towhee?
Yet I cannot, and never will,
Unless the silly birds stand still.

He concluded, perhaps having been swindled by a West who stuck in DQ from Qxx, that

I sometimes visualize in my gin
The Audubon that I audubin.