[han]

Round 4 has been over for a while, there has been a tiny bit of a discussion but no posts for the last few days. I think that it would be good if it can be determined quickly who will bid in round 5.

Then, we should perhaps think about how we can make this more interesting. At this point there is only discussion about the scores. This is to my mind the least interesting part. What we want is a discussion of the auctions and systems.

I think that the hands are mostly interesting to pairs that have bid the hands themselves. If only two pairs bid the hands, almost nobody will care.

I suggest that any two forum posters can bid the hands and have their contracts and scores listed afterwards. The two pairs that bid in the competition should plan beforehand when they are going to bid the hands so that this can be announced on the forums and people can go and watch. I think this will be most fun if the kibitzers have already bid the hands beforehand, so perhaps the contestants should wait about 2 weeks before bidding the hands.

Also, there should be less discussion about scores, preferably no discussion. That means that the scores should be determined beforehand, and they should be good. I don't have any ideas of how to get this done, except for stealing hands from old magazines and such. Another idea is to use single or double dummy simulations. Double dummy is easier, single dummy is better.

[Free]

han, on 2010-November-17, 07:15, said:

Double dummy is easier, single dummy is better.

LOL!

[kayin801]

Good points, but I will add one thing on discussion of the hands is that quite often people already know what their mistakes were, decline to share them, and only discuss them with their partners. I know not everyone wants to share what dumb thing they did on board X, but if it's a quick toss-up it makes for less discussion than other topics anyway.

I also think that this set was a series of high-level decisions that were really, "take your best shot" and there were fewer hands that were "bid constructively to the right game or slam," so my reaction to a lot of them were "phew" or "&#$*"

[Mbodell]

han, on 2010-November-17, 07:15, said:

Then, we should perhaps think about how we can make this more interesting. At this point there is only discussion about the scores. This is to my mind the least interesting part. What we want is a discussion of the auctions and systems....
Also, there should be less discussion about scores, preferably no discussion. That means that the scores should be determined beforehand, and they should be good. I don't have any ideas of how to get this done, except for stealing hands from old magazines and such. Another idea is to use single or double dummy simulations. Double dummy is easier, single dummy is better.

I think another way to make more discussion be about the auctions is to capture and post the auctions when the hands are first posted. That may not have been practical when there were 10+ pairs bidding, but now that we are getting late it should be possible. If the auctions are presented then people can talk about where they went right/wrong and also compare and contrast the various pairs.

[han]

That's a good idea M.