Frequency
#1
Posted 2004-July-02, 15:52
8-10 hcp with 5+card any suit, not 5332 but all unbalanced hands 5+-4,
5-5, 6+ etc.
Wiste
#4
Posted 2004-July-04, 12:05
Is there a program for that ?
Mike

so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
#5
Posted 2004-July-04, 12:08
Trpltrbl, on Jul 4 2004, 09:05 PM, said:
Is there a program for that ?
Mike

Pretty easy to simulate with a program like Dealer or Borel.
With this said and done, HCP and shape are independant of one another, so its pretty east to multiple the percentage chance that opener has shape ABC by the chance that opener has HCP XZY...
#6
Posted 2004-July-04, 12:30
http://www.bridgeguy...MathTables.html
or Mathematical Tables in the Encycolopedia Of Bridge.
Peter
#7
Posted 2004-July-04, 14:04
Mike

so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
#8
Posted 2004-July-05, 04:00
hrothgar, on Jul 4 2004, 01:08 PM, said:
They are not independent of each other. A 13-0-0-0 will always have 10 hcp. The flatter the hand the higher the chance for more hcp i think.
/Mattias
#9
Posted 2004-July-05, 05:46

I once tried to find the % of finding a ♠K on a 4♥ contract where you know west has 2♠+ 19/20 HCP against west who is known to hold 4-5 HCP +5♠, the result was so disapointing: it depends on wich exactly 24 HCP you are missing, I mean, depends on wihch honnors you miss exactly and in wich suits... imposible to calculate in time.
#10
Posted 2004-July-05, 05:52
blahonga, on Jul 5 2004, 01:00 PM, said:
hrothgar, on Jul 4 2004, 01:08 PM, said:
They are not independent of each other. A 13-0-0-0 will always have 10 hcp. The flatter the hand the higher the chance for more hcp i think.
/Mattias
URK. I standard corrected. Mattias is completely correct. If we start looking at extreme shapes, the two dimensions are no longer independant. With this said and done, I don't think that this would matter much for MOST calculations.
In general, I prefer to use Monte Carlo simulation anyway.
MUCH easier...
#11
Posted 2004-July-05, 07:13
Mike

so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
#12
Posted 2004-July-05, 07:25
Trpltrbl, on Jul 5 2004, 04:13 PM, said:
Mike

Monte Carlo simulation is a technique in which you using a constrained random simulation to model a complex problem.
As I noted earlier, Dealer is a great freeware program that can be used for this type of analysis.
#13
Posted 2004-July-05, 07:56
Mike

so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
#14
Posted 2004-July-05, 08:01
Trpltrbl, on Jul 5 2004, 04:56 PM, said:
Mike

http://www.dombo.org/henk/dealer.html