[RedSpawn]

[quote name='RedSpawn' timestamp='1491359647' post='918973']

Woah the longest post yet. I must have struck a nerve for you to respond with an English composition with snarky emoticons included.

Yet no analysis of 106 and 108 as expected.... just more peacock feathering, a strawman argument accusation, and peanut gallery tagteaming

And I'm still guffawing on the 1.00 probability. Yes I have this hand in front of me, what is the likelihood I have this hand in front of me. Well it exists in front of you so its 1.00. This relates to the post I had where I didn't get an answer but just this snarky one. Oh well, to be expected.

Everyone has done gymnastic somersaults over 106 and 108 so I await an analysis.

Oh and jonnyquest I don't really expect you to care about whether I respect you. Its obvious from the way MsJennifer was treated in this forum already that manners are in short supply. You can tell a lot about folks about how they treat others. I am so very glad that I am not a part of your bridge social circle. I can't imagine the boorish behaviour and manners you would exhibit at a bridge table when you don't get your way.

Your diatribe in this last post confirms everything I was thinking about your self-aggrandizing ways. If you didn't give a rats behind about whether I respect you or if you didn't care what I said or think you would have kept it much briefer or not even responded at all or focused on what I asked. But I still don't see the analysis on 106 and 108.

It was summarily dismissed by "The Get Red Crew" and alleged that Google was my source when the sources are listed. I already have various bridge websites I use so I don't need the google search engine for this project.
Patiently awaiting.

[masse24]

RedSpawn, on 2017-April-03, 18:17, said:

I don't need beginner books. You should give those out to the folks on BBO who run away from the tables after making world class preemptive bids with low class HCP values and anemic honor holdings.

Timo, can you contact Jeff Meckstroth for his address? I have some books I'd like to send his way.

[RedSpawn]

So who said Jeff was one of the runners from tables on BBO? Are you linking the runners of bad preemptive bids on BBo to Jeff simply because he voted 4♥. Please do not misapply my quote like that.

To be fair there were a lot of passes on the poll but from people that were alleged by MrAce to be fair or less than good players.

Also, keep in miund that I am willing to take at face value with no proof that the poll was done with absolutely no lead-ins, no baiting or interference and conducted in complete objectivity when said "favor" was called in for Jeff to vote on the hand.

Interesting leap of faith I am doing here considering what I have seen on this forum so far. There is a lot of cliquish behavior.

Everyone on this site seems on the up and up and beyond reproach.

[RedSpawn]

More delaying and tag teaming. Less addressing of topic #108 and #106 that was posted way before 110.

[diana_eva]

RedSpawn, on 2017-April-04, 21:39, said:

More delaying and tag teaming. Less addressing of topic #108 and #106 that was posted way before 110.

Stop bumping this thread if you have nothing new to add.

[FelicityR]

Oh my God! I'm reasonably new to this forum and I didn't realise that things can get as feisty as this on here!

I voted 'pass'. I gave my reason why, and I have been proved wrong. At the time of writing 12 votes for pass, and 32 votes for 4♥. I accept that there are far more better players on here than me, and the majority are in favour of a pre-empt. I graciously accept their decision. Thank you for enlightening me.

Bridge is a game where you will learn something new until the day you meet your maker. If you cannot accept that, then you will get nowhere in this game, or in life for that matter...

[RedSpawn]

msjennifer, on 2017-April-01, 03:16, said:

It appears you want to teach EIGHT voters to drop out of the class.I have not seen even a single renowned book on bidding various systems advocating to open with s bid Of 4 H on the garbage hand.Perhaps your new book may change the face of bridge and I wish good luck to you.Your super champion intentions are meant only to obstruct opponents and also your partner.I follow what is given in the text books and my teacher ,who has international repute having won many events like the Reisinger et all.He just asked me to IGNORE your and others comments saying "They have the right to open 4H ,but at the same time they are not ENTTLED to ridicule others not agreeing with them".A very POLITE answer indeed ! So I shall just ignore the rebukes and continue to enjoy bridge in my own way by not opening on the garbage.Good Luck.

I regret I did not read this in its entirety early on. Jennifer and her teacher are right.

You can tell the measure of a gentleman by the way he treats the women around him. I am not sure why Jennifer was maligned and ridiculed for having a dissenting vote (not agreeing to 4 hearts), but when I reread these strings, I see she was spot on. This forum wasn't really about a passionate bridge discussion and building each other up as players even when we disagree. That's what camaraderie is.

Ah yes, this forum appears to be about sizing people up, tearing them apart and establishing who's top dog. It appears to be about arbitrarily determining who's " good" versus who's "bad" versus who's real versus who's fake according to each other's expert opinion.

I am assuming Jennifer didn't make the cut according to the experts here, so she got what she had coming.

No woman deserved the kind of treatment she received in this forum. Even if you think she somehow sullied your reputation, it did not warrant the cliquish attack and rebuke she received.

Gentlemen are held to a higher standard to our ladies even in the BBF. We should know better and do better because we are gentlemen. As I write this, I guarantee you that 100% of the gentlemanly men here did not even apologize to this lady after she signed off on this forum topic. You don't have to when you have a heart of stone and don't care about other people and the human condition.

I find it ironic that everyone championed Jeff's 4 ♥ vote but very few here demonstrate his world class humility, camaraderie, professionalism, and sportsmanship. And if you do, it certainly wasn't demonstrated in this forum on this topic to various users--especially Jennifer. The air was rife with condescension from almost everyone--man and woman, seasoned veteran forum members and newcomers (and me)--when our votes didn't match. Jennifer was just one of the first casualties.

If you are a gentleman who plays bridge, you respect people at the table and in the forum--especially the women. It's that simple. I'm sure Jeff would agree.

If I somehow offended any of the ladies here on the forum I apologize upfront.

I apologized to MsJennifer on behalf of the men here because she may never get an apology from her attackers. That's what we're supposed to do when we don't defend their honor from cruel, malicious attacks. I should have acted promptly when I saw the dog-eat-dog mentality. I, and a host of other gentlemen, failed to act. We neither condemned nor repudiated this type of behavior.

I wish all of you the very best and good luck in your games.

[jogs]

RedSpawn, on 2017-April-04, 08:35, said:

Probable Percentage Frequency of Distribution Patterns

Pattern	 	 	 	Total	 	 	 	Specific
4-4-3-2                         21.5512	 	 	 	1.796
4-3-3-3	 	         	10.5361	                    	2.634
4-4-4-1	 	 	 	2.9932	 	 	 	0.748
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
5-3-3-2	 	 	 	15.5168	 	 	 	1.293
5-4-3-2	 	 	 	12.9307	 	 	 	0.539
5-4-2-2	 	 	 	10.5797	 	 	 	0.882
5-5-2-1	 	 	 	3.1739	 	 	 	0.264
5-4-4-0	 	 	 	1.2433	 	 	 	0.104
5-5-3-0	 	 	 	0.8952	 	 	 	0.075
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
6-3-2-2	 	 	 	5.6425	 	 	 	0.470
6-4-2-1	 	 	 	4.7021	 	 	 	0.196
6-3-3-1	 	 	 	3.4482	 	 	 	0.287
6-4-3-0	 	 	 	1.3262	 	 	 	0.055
6-5-1-1	 	 	 	0.7053	 	 	 	0.059
6-5-2-0	 	 	 	0.6511	 	 	 	0.027
6-6-1-0	 	 	 	0.0723	 	 	 	0.006
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
7-3-2-1	 	 	 	1.8808	 	 	 	0.078
7-2-2-2	 	 	 	0.5129	 	 	 	0.128
7-4-1-1	 	 	 	0.3918	 	 	 	0.033
7-4-2-0	 	 	 	0.3617	 	 	 	0.015
7-3-3-0	 	 	 	0.2652	 	 	 	0.022
7-5-1-0	 	 	 	0.1085	 	 	 	0.005
7-6-0-0	 	 	 	0.0056	 	 	 	0.0005
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
8-2-2-1	 	 	 	0.1924	 	 	 	0.016
8-3-1-1	 	 	 	0.1176	 	 	 	0.010
8-3-2-0	 	 	 	0.1085	 	 	 	0.005
8-4-1-0	 	 	 	0.052	 	 	 	0.002
8-5-0-0	 	 	 	0.0031	 	 	 	0.0003
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
9-2-1-1	 	 	 	0.0178	 	 	 	0.001
9-3-1-0	 	 	 	0.0100	 	 	 	0.0004
9-2-2-0	 	 	 	0.0082	 	 	 	0.0007
9-4-0-0	 	 	 	0.0010	 	 	 	0.00008
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
10-2-1-0	  	 	0.0011	 	 	 	0.00004
10-1-1-1	  	 	0.0004	 	 	 	0.0001
10-3-0-0	  	 	0.00015	 	 	 	0.00001
 	 	  	 	 	 	 	 
11-1-1-0	  	 	0.00002	 	 	 	0.000002
11-2-0-0	  	 	0.00001	 	 	 	0.000001
 	 	  	 	 	 	 	 
12-1-0-0	  	 	0.0000003	 	  	0.00000003
13-0-0-0	  	 	0.0000000006	 	  	0.0000000002

What the heck is specific?

[johnu]

RedSpawn, on 2017-April-04, 15:31, said:

I then present the mathematical probabilities tables showing the expected frequency of the various hand patterns. The tables show that the expected frequency of getting 9-2-1-1 shape or 9-card or 8 card or 7 card suits is exponentially lower than the common 4-4-3-2 and 4-3-3-3 hand shapes.

No response from Vampyr or you. No, "that's crazy. That's absurd." Nothing. . . Interesting.

I nominate this post for Post of the Year!

Who knew that 9 card suits hands happened exponentially less than 4432 and 4333 hands? This is the frontrunner for my fact of the day.

[johnu]

jogs, on 2017-April-05, 10:31, said:

What the heck is specific?

Apparently the chance of any specific suit distribution happening.

e.g. For 4-4-4-1, the overall probability for any 4-4-4-1 hand is 2.9932. The singleton can be in any of 4 suits, so any specific 4-4-4-1 distribution is 2.9932/4 = .7483.

Why is this important to the discussion? I have no idea.

[masse24]

johnu, on 2017-April-05, 12:25, said:

I nominate this post for Post of the Year!

Who knew that 9 card suits hands happened exponentially less than 4432 and 4333 hands? This is the frontrunner for my fact of the day.

Groundbreaking stuff, this. Who knew?

[Vampyr]

RedSpawn, you may not be aware that Diana is a mod and can ban you.

[MrAce]

RedSpawn, on 2017-April-05, 10:10, said:

I regret I did not read this in its entirety early on. Jennifer and her teacher are right.

You can tell the measure of a gentleman by the way he treats the women around him. I am not sure why Jennifer was maligned and ridiculed for having a dissenting vote (not agreeing to 4 hearts), but when I reread these strings, I see she was spot on. This forum wasn't really about a passionate bridge discussion and building each other up as players even when we disagree. That's what camaraderie is.

Ah yes, this forum appears to be about sizing people up, tearing them apart and establishing who's top dog. It appears to be about arbitrarily determining who's " good" versus who's "bad" versus who's real versus who's fake according to each other's expert opinion.

I am assuming Jennifer didn't make the cut according to the experts here, so she got what she had coming.

No woman deserved the kind of treatment she received in this forum. Even if you think she somehow sullied your reputation, it did not warrant the cliquish attack and rebuke she received.

Gentlemen are held to a higher standard to our ladies even in the BBF. We should know better and do better because we are gentlemen. As I write this, I guarantee you that 100% of the gentlemanly men here did not even apologize to this lady after she signed off on this forum topic. You don't have to when you have a heart of stone and don't care about other people and the human condition.

I find it ironic that everyone championed Jeff's 4 ♥ vote but very few here demonstrate his world class humility, camaraderie, professionalism, and sportsmanship. And if you do, it certainly wasn't demonstrated in this forum on this topic to various users--especially Jennifer. The air was rife with condescension from almost everyone--man and woman, seasoned veteran forum members and newcomers (and me)--when our votes didn't match. Jennifer was just one of the first casualties.

If you are a gentleman who plays bridge, you respect people at the table and in the forum--especially the women. It's that simple. I'm sure Jeff would agree.

If I somehow offended any of the ladies here on the forum I apologize upfront.

I apologized to MsJennifer on behalf of the men here because she may never get an apology from her attackers. That's what we're supposed to do when we don't defend their honor from cruel, malicious attacks. I should have acted promptly when I saw the dog-eat-dog mentality. I, and a host of other gentlemen, failed to act. We neither condemned nor repudiated this type of behavior.

I wish all of you the very best and good luck in your games.

Can you please explain who mistreated Msjennifer?
Which particular reply/post in this topic sounded inappropriate for a man to say to a lady, that made you write such a long dramatic reply out of it?
Were there posts that are deleted and I did not see?

[RedSpawn]

MrAce, on 2017-April-06, 08:54, said:

Can you please explain who mistreated Msjennifer?
Which particular reply/post in this topic sounded inappropriate for a man to say to a lady, that made you write such a long dramatic reply out of it?
Were there posts that are deleted and I did not see?

I answered all of these questions on the other posts with the dubious email signatures included. Apparently we can include profanity (offensive language) in our email signatures attached to the posts that are already filled with veiled suggestions about lack of bridge skills and it is fair game.

The receiver of such messages is to take all of it as a harmless joke with no ill intent.

Before we declare a clearcut victory for 4 hearts, the author of the bridge winners poll should supply the breakout of votes by each voting category block. For reasons unknownst to me, the hearts bid votes at the 2,3,& 4 level were aggregated to compete against one category (PASS) for presentation of final results. That is too skewed to even be acknowledged as legitimate or balanced or democratic.

We don't have an election of individual Republican and Democratic candidates and then aggregate the results by party--the final election results are reported at the candidate level because that's the way it was asked on the ballot.

We should remain consistent and give each voting block the opportunity to stand on its own two feet without aggregation (skewing).

Please present the final voting results for the 1098765432♥ hand by each level of bid from PASS up to 5♥ and let the results speak for themselves without questionable aggregation. Thanks.

[Nabooba]

2♥: 1 vote (1%)
3♥: 18 votes (17%)
4♥: 53 votes (49%)
5♥: 1 vote (1%)
Pass: 36 votes (33%)

[RedSpawn]

Nabooba, on 2017-April-21, 22:23, said:

2♥: 1 vote (1%)
3♥: 18 votes (17%)
4♥: 53 votes (49%)
5♥: 1 vote (1%)
Pass: 36 votes (33%)

Tyvm. At the bid level the forerunners are 4hearts and pass. This polls presents more questions than it resolves.

And to aggegrate 2,3,4,& 5 hearts against pass is neither democratic nor intellectually honest. It just muddies the fair results and distribution you presented.

The arguments here have basically been 4 hearts versus pass and pass did not get a butt whipping. It is 2nd place in the total voting population. And out of 109 people 36 voted pass thats about 33%. About 49% voted 4♥. I would say that warrants further review. Pass is not as insane as it appears. That is a fair statement given these results.

I am deeply disappointed by the aggregation maneuver of the author. It leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. It may have been unintentional but it just paints the worst possible picture to group 4 categories and % numbers against 1. 67% to 33%. That result is markedly different than pass coming in 2nd place among 5 categories carrying 33% of the vote.

But of course, the author will get a "hall pass" because the aggregation maneuver produced the results that supported his narrative even more. If I were to aggregate data like this...the collective would ask me to explain the need and validity of the action and poke holes at it with snarky comments.

[Nabooba]

You posted
MORAL OF THE STORY:

Play your position;
Stop bidding your partner's hand;
Pre-empt with decent suit quality; and
Engage PASS button with bust hands containing 0-3 HCP!

This means you disagree with 2/3/4/ H
Personally I disagree with all but 4H, however all are far better than pass. Incidentally pass is not a bid, but rather a call.

[Phil]

Don't know how I stayed out of this cesspool of a thread.

More straw men here than a week at Burning Man.

[RedSpawn]

Nabooba, on 2017-April-21, 23:23, said:

You posted
MORAL OF THE STORY:

Play your position;
Stop bidding your partner's hand;
Pre-empt with decent suit quality; and
Engage PASS button with bust hands containing 0-3 HCP!

This means you disagree with 2/3/4/ H
Personally I disagree with all but 4H, however all are far better than pass. Incidentally pass is not a bid, but rather a call.

I also posted the following the EXACT SAME POST:

West has the same predicament but for some reason almost everyone on BBO is saying bid 4♥ in 2nd seat with a very QUESTIONABLE ♥ suit. The best answer is PASS because your partner: 1) has a better bid if you will only let him make it and 2) has a more accurate assessment of where asset values lay in auction as the 4th seat bidder. . . but you must PASS with a bust hand containing 2 HCP.

Hard to do, isn't it?

Can you honestly justify taking out your partner's 4♠ overcall of a 2♣ open? Your partner has a good 8 card ♠ suit containing 3 of 5 honors. He has the goods to place the partnership in a relatively safe place - West DOES NOT!

....

The opposition does NOT have a slam and bidding 4♥ is down 3 which is NOT good bridge. And your team has 4♠ cold as the cards lay. A player should not make executive decisions about the partnership's future while sitting in 2nd seat and holding a bust hand.

Please note that I maintain intently focused on 4♥ in this post and talking about the attendant risks. I am not getting on board with the 4♥ bid. And I honestly thought each bid or call was going to be mutually exclusive and stand on its own two feet. Thus, no aggregation.

msjennifer, on 2017-April-01, 06:19, said:

Unfortunately one was born an expert(?) One was never ever a beginner. Those who open 4H have not answered my question that what will they open on x,AKxxxxxx,xx,xx ? They can't open 4H ,as that bid is reserved for the garbage hand,so Pass,1/2/3 H are left.Judge for yourself !


Jennifer that is an UNFAIR question. Once you are in the Advanced and Expert level, the range for bids increases exponentially. That means that 1-of-a-suit opening bids and preemptive bids can mean WHATEVER YOU WANT IT TO BE.

In second seat with both teams vulnerable, 4♥ could range from a textbook classic of x♠,AKxxxxxx♥,xx♦,xx♣ to gourmet goulash garbage 9♠ 10987645432♥ Q3♦ 9♣ .

It is YOUR responsibility to be amazingly clairvoyant about your partner's suit quality and to know from looking at your hand if your partner is bidding the former or the latter (even if you are void of ♥).

Of course I am kidding, but sadly, I think this is the unwritten "rider clause" in most partnership agreements on BBO.

We are not going to argue over semantics--bid versus call. But I will post all of the 4 heart statements I made. I don't mention 2 hearts or 3 hearts in the string because the discussion focused on the 4 ♥ commandeering the auction. That bid effectively places a gag order on the partner across the table as presented to alok c.

We argued vehemently about 4♥ versus pass and when people posted about 2♥ and 3♥, I did not knock that down in the string. The disagreement was when a lot of people started saying 4 hearts for this hand in 2nd seat when vulnerable. 4 hearts leaves no room for your partner across the table to bid reasonably. So when alok c misquoted Benito, I even asked him how do you find your partners suit controls per his own quote if you open up 4 hearts.

I will post more examples of the 4 hearts discussion but it was over 4 hearts versus pass. Not against 2heart,3hearts,4hearts,5 hearts versus pass.

I am still shaking my head of the point of combining four categories of heart bids to compete against pass. How stacked can the results be if we were to do such a thing? Stay tuned for a whole lot of 4 heart quotes.

[RedSpawn]

.