And I think with that last post, we'll call our Introduction to Bridge Simulations finished. I hope it made some sense. The example hand I plucked out of thin air on day one didn't turn out to be quite as interesting as I'd hoped but that wasn't the point of it all. The idea was to show the processes involved in doing simulations like this, what sort of things we can find out, what sort of questions we need to ask ourselves, and how we can evaluate the results we get.
I started this blog because there were basically no resources on the subject that I could find. Therefore, thought I, I must be a universal expert perfectly placed to impart my great wisdom. Bollocks! I don't know anything really and I expect you all to point out any flaws or inaccuracies in any of the below.
What next? Posting will still be intermittent (so you'd be a fool to check back daily) but I hope to just get down and run a bunch of simulations — anything that interests me or that crops up when I'm playing. I might even take requests, but don't be offended if I ignore you. Just post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well, you seem to have to much time on your hands, M!
Good stuff this though, as I have enough time on my hands to read all of this. I feel like I should make a suggestion, but, er, OK how about this: WE all play club pairs type games and we always see daft 3NT contracts on the traveller when we play in 4H/S (just because we have a 8 or 9 card fit). Maybe some simulations on the matchpoint benifits/ lack thereof of random 3NT punts would be good. Or just some definitive answer as to how much the computer says they should be losing by... :-)
PSS
Well, if managing to get together 9 blog posts in four months is "having too much time on my hands" then I'd hate to know what it's like to be busy!
Will think about your simulation. "Random 3NT punt" is a bit hard to define, so how about this:
Partner opens 1NT and we have any balanced hand worth 3NT, regardless of major length. Of the hands where we have an 8-card major fit, how much better is it to play there than to play in 3NT?
Any guesses?
well, General Clarke, that would depend on the parameters you use. I would expect the answer to be dependent on the strenght of the hands (individual and combined), your definition of balanced, and if we are talking 4-4 or 5-3 fits (or 5-4 fits, 'cos I'd love to know what the chances of getting lucky are).
But the question now being asked is one that is surly modellable. Give one hand 12-14 bal (or 15-17 bal if your me) give the partership the values for game, and go though it, generating fits with the various distributions, strengths and extents of fits. Important facts that I would really like to know are:
-one-
As responder with a 4-3-3-3, should I bother looking for a major fit (even if we could locate a 5-4, and is it really true that 4-3-3-3 opposite 4-4-3-2 rates to be better in 4(maj), and how does a combinded 25,26,27,28 ect affect the results.
-two-
As above, but with 4-4-3-2 responsive hands
-three-
As above, but with 5-3-3-2 and a 5-3 fit (and a 5-4 fit, for kicks).
Now I know the simulation will not include the fact that 1NT-3NT auctions give oppo blind leads that make them better than
1NT - Blah; Blah - 3NT, so I'm interested in knowing how close these situations are (one and two, esp.).
My guess: 4-4-3-2, GF, opposite 1NT may as well just bid 3NT. (Assuming pard will not have a singleton!). The sim will make it close/tie, and there will be a pick up from the blind lead, which we will just have to discuss/argue about.
PSS
Post a Comment