[luis]

Hi,

I'm proposing a rematch of the famous Bridge World "Scientists vrs Naturalists" match.
I can play Moscito with my pd Garland Foster and I guess The_hog & rwilley can also play moscito for our team. Do you want ?

Now I invite inquiry & pd to choose another pair for the "Naturalists", does BBO have a "way" to play a teams match ?

This re-edition of the faous match will be a test for the new state-of-the-art "natural" bidding: 2/1 and one of the most "advanced" relay systems with very light opening bids and so (Moscito)

Do you like the idea?
I hope to arrange the conditions/format and players using this thread.

Luis

[inquiry]

Gosh knows why anyone would want to call me out... there must be more challenging opponents to play against than me. Oh.. I get it, play against me so you are sure to win... clever, very clever....

But hey, I am up to anything. Maybe we should wait until TEAM Tournments are started... hopefully it will not be that long, so each hand can be bid by "naturalist" and "scientist". The tournment could be set up with just two tables and 20 boards or so.

BTW, who says I would even want to play as a naturalist? I am busy reviewing a forcing pass system, and I several hours yesterday re-reading ultimate club.

But I would be willing to participate..... now, let me go find a bunch of natural gold stars... :-)

Ben

[luis]

I agree we should wait until TEAM tournaments are "on", a 20-board match between the two teams seems to be fine.

[hrothgar]

We might be able to run this using the existing tournament software, and then IMP scoring boards by hand.

Be interesting to see what Uday has to say.

[luis]

And how can we make both tables play exactly the same 20 deals?
If we can do that then manual scoring and we are ready.
Can I close the Scientific team with you and your pd Richard?

[Yzerman]

There is a way to do it now. You can have 2 tables set up playing one the Spingold or Vanderbilt sets of deals.

[inquiry]

Quote

There is a way to do it now. You can have 2 tables set up playing one the Spingold or Vanderbilt sets of deals.

Or set up a 2 table tourment with 20 boards per round, and make sure the desired players are only people to enter... and worry about who sits NS and EW at which table. Reading Uday's post some of this should not be too hard...

At end of match, total imps win.... (table 1 NS + table 2EW total compared to table 1EW + table 2NS). Should be easy to tell.... The NS pair who is plus at one table, won... as his NS at the other table must be negative... and vise versa.

[luis]

Well, I didn't understand your last post Inquiry but if the conditions are ok then we just have to arrange the players and a date for the match.

Pls post proposed dates for the match so we can coordinate the availability of the two teams....

[hrothgar]

I would prefer NOT to use a set of canned deals if possible.

I'm not sure of the makeup of the "Science" team.
My guess is that The_Hog and I will both be playing,

He and I aren't a regular partnership, so Ron might prefer to play with a regular partner. Potentially we could play together. Please look at my web page for details on my preferred MOSCITO version.
http://web.mit.edu/~...www/MOSCITO.htm

If the Naturalists end up fielding a bunch of "all stars", I might need to call in a favor or two.

[inquiry]

Quote

Well, I didn't understand your last post Inquiry but if the conditions are ok then we just have to arrange the players and a date for the match.

Pls post proposed dates for the match so we can coordinate the availability of the two teams....

Ok.. I think something can be arranged... Is everyone in North America, so evening would be fine?

Let's take a few days to get straight, I would say a good window of opportunity would be starting next Wed and running about two weeks.... from 7:30 EST until 1 AM EST (not all that time, just a time frame). I will check a few naturalist... (I guess we have to play in the nude... at home of course)... but let's see if those times work (anytime on weekend would be fine with me, just not this weekend...)

I will captain one team and put it together.. one of you guys volunteer for the other side...

Of course we might have to decide what counts as natural... multi 2D? Good/bad 2NT? Flannery, etc/
Ben

[pbleighton]

Please post the times and allow kibitzing

[hrothgar]

Ron lives down under, as does his regular partner.
I'm not sure about his availability

The timing works for me, assuming that Luis and I can get enough practice in. I have some free time this weekend, however, I'm off in California on Monday and Tuesday.

We'll also need to make arrangements with Uday et all to arrange a tournament.

[inquiry]

The naturalist accept the challenge. Because of the protest... we will not field a bunch of "all stars"... just one star should do it.

Our team is tentatively scheduled to be,

Inquiry,
Malucy,
Kleek,
Fred.

As naturalist, we can play in any order, so our line-up is not set yet.

Kibitizers of course welcome... and anyone who can explain the scientist's bidding to the kibitizers of course would be welcome too.

Ben

[fred]

Quote

The naturalist accept the challenge. Because of the protest... we will not field a bunch of "all stars"... just one star should do it.

Our team is tentatively scheduled to be,

Inquiry,
Malucy,
Kleek,
Fred.

As naturalist, we can play in any order, so our line-up is not set yet.

Kibitizers of course welcome... and anyone who can explain the scientist's bidding to the kibitizers of course would be welcome too.

Ben

An honor to be on the team. I am looking forward
to swatting those mosquitos!

I am going to the USA Team Trials tomorrow and I
will not be able to play in this match until I get home
(and it is hard to predict how long that will be).

As such, if you can wait that long, it may be best
to try to schedule to match for the 2nd week
of June.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[hrothgar]

I'll see who/what we are going to be able to field.

As to understanding our methods.

Whichever partnership that I am playing on will probably be using a modified MOSCITO version.

Here is a brief description of the most important points to understand:

MOSCITO is a 2 system methods, using very light transfer openings in first and second seat and sound 4 card major openings in 3rd/4th seat, with fairly "standard" preempts in 3rd/4th.

We open light.
Almost all of our responses are natural and non-forcing.

The preempts from 2D+ are very non-standard.

The 2D/2H/2S openings are HIGHLY aggresive preempts based on assumed fit principles. For example, a 2D preempt could be made on a 2434 hand.

You really want to work on your defenses to these openings.

I strongly suggest looking over my web site. This provides a fairly complete description of my preferred system variant. There are also a series of suggested defenses to the non-standard openings.

I HOPE that this is detailed enough that spectators can make use of this during the event.

http://web.mit.edu/~...www/MOSCITO.htm

[hrothgar]

Second week of June works well on this end.
I'm graduating from MIT on Monday the 9th, however, the rest of the week is open.

Given this amount of time, I might see if I can convince Paul Marston to play with one of his regular partners.

[the hog]

I'm in - could also get my regular Moscito partner, or am happy to play with Richard. Can't be on Monday nights or not wed nights est- Bridge nights. I think we should make those naturalist guys play "Buller".

2nd week of June is fine. I am happy to play your exact system, Richard if playing with you, including Frelling 2s. Justin and I play the new relay structure but use different 2s, but no problem.

[fred]

Quote

The preempts from 2D+ are very non-standard.

The 2D/2H/2S openings are HIGHLY aggresive preempts based on assumed fit principles. For example, a 2D preempt could be made on a 2434 hand.

You really want to work on your defenses to these openings.

Herein lies my basic objection to system such
as Mosqito and why I think:

1) Such systems should not be allowed in any
events except for long team matches in very
high level events.

2) Many players who use such systems do so
in order to gain an edge, not because of the
superiority of the methods, but because of their
opponents' likely unfamiliarity with them (I am
not suggesting that Richard or any other specific
people have these reasons for choosing to
use such methods).

3) That all people who want to play weird
systems on BBO should be relegated to their
own (very) private (and preferrably invisible)
bridge club (just kidding).

The basic problem is that the need to spend
serious time having to prepare defenses to
unusual systems ruins the game for a lot of
people (including me). Then there are the 99%
of bridge players in the world who are simply
not capable of dealing with this stuff.

Now I do appreciate that there is a percentage
of bridge players in the world (I would guess
around .01%) for whom the game is ruined if
they are not allowed to play highly unusual
methods. Balancing the needs of this (vocal)
minority with those of the masses has been an
impossible problem that has plagued tournament
organizers since the earliest days of bridge.

For me bridge is a sufficiently challenging and
interesting game without having to play (or play
against) such methods. Bridge is supposed to be
fun and I do not consider it fun to have to spend
a lot of time devising defenses to conventions
that are designed primarily to cause confusion.

Doing homework is not fun!

I do not want to even look at the Mosquito
system notes and, unless my teammates have
different views on this subject, I would like to
propose that over any artificial preempt that
occurs in the upcoming match that:

- all suit bids are natural
- all notrump bids are natural
- Double is either 13-15 balanced (or perhaps
semi-balanced) or a hand too strong to overcall
or bid notrump directly
- All doubles not made in the direct seat (including
those after which some other direct seat action has
been taken) are "takeout" or "responsive" of the
suit the opponents most recently bid.

I realize this post may have opened a real can
of worms. Richard (or anyone) is certainly free to
express their opinions on why they think I am wrong,
but I don't think this issue is going to be decided here
(or in our match of course).

If there is one issue that will always divide the
world's bridge players, this is it. The best we can
do is agree to disagree

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebsae.com

PS Congratulations on your graduation Richard!
(who I should mention is a good friend as this
may not be obvious from my responses to some
of his posts!).

[hrothgar]

Quote

I'm in - could also get my regular Moscito partner, or am happy to play with Richard. Can't be on Monday nights or not wed nights est- Bridge nights. I think we should make those naturalist guys play "Buller".

Quick comment:

My understanding is that the dividing line for the match is

Sound Initial Action versus
Light Initial Action.

I am perfectly happy if the sound initial action camp also wants to play natural methods, however, if these players want to use transfers or forcing NTs or whatever, I'm equally content.

[the hog]

I was only kidding with Buller - Australian sense of humour!
Naturalists can play whatever they like afaik, including t/fer responses to 1C, Good/Bad etc etc

Ron
;D