Is bridge a fair game: references/heuristics?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Though not knowledgeable on card games or game theory, I've just learnt the rules of bridge, and I'm starting to wonder whether it can be proven that bridge is a fair game.



Of course, to give an answer, one must specify a scoring system, or else simplify the game (e.g. determining the trump by a die toss and aiming to win as many tricks as possible, instead of the messy business of bidding). And of course I ignore the 'trivial' symmetry which randomly determines who sits where and who leads - one wants to know whether bridge is fair after all that.



But if anyone could provide me references or heuristics in relation to the fairness of bridge, I would be grateful!




probability recreational-mathematics game-theory card-games




share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
    – Henry
    Aug 16 at 8:08










  • It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
    – BGM
    Aug 16 at 10:42










  • @BGM yes that's what I had in mind
    – Chris Sanders
    Aug 16 at 11:00














up vote
0
down vote

favorite












Though not knowledgeable on card games or game theory, I've just learnt the rules of bridge, and I'm starting to wonder whether it can be proven that bridge is a fair game.



Of course, to give an answer, one must specify a scoring system, or else simplify the game (e.g. determining the trump by a die toss and aiming to win as many tricks as possible, instead of the messy business of bidding). And of course I ignore the 'trivial' symmetry which randomly determines who sits where and who leads - one wants to know whether bridge is fair after all that.



But if anyone could provide me references or heuristics in relation to the fairness of bridge, I would be grateful!




probability recreational-mathematics game-theory card-games




share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
    – Henry
    Aug 16 at 8:08










  • It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
    – BGM
    Aug 16 at 10:42










  • @BGM yes that's what I had in mind
    – Chris Sanders
    Aug 16 at 11:00












up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











Though not knowledgeable on card games or game theory, I've just learnt the rules of bridge, and I'm starting to wonder whether it can be proven that bridge is a fair game.



Of course, to give an answer, one must specify a scoring system, or else simplify the game (e.g. determining the trump by a die toss and aiming to win as many tricks as possible, instead of the messy business of bidding). And of course I ignore the 'trivial' symmetry which randomly determines who sits where and who leads - one wants to know whether bridge is fair after all that.



But if anyone could provide me references or heuristics in relation to the fairness of bridge, I would be grateful!




probability recreational-mathematics game-theory card-games




share|cite|improve this question














Though not knowledgeable on card games or game theory, I've just learnt the rules of bridge, and I'm starting to wonder whether it can be proven that bridge is a fair game.



Of course, to give an answer, one must specify a scoring system, or else simplify the game (e.g. determining the trump by a die toss and aiming to win as many tricks as possible, instead of the messy business of bidding). And of course I ignore the 'trivial' symmetry which randomly determines who sits where and who leads - one wants to know whether bridge is fair after all that.



But if anyone could provide me references or heuristics in relation to the fairness of bridge, I would be grateful!





probability recreational-mathematics game-theory card-games





share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Aug 16 at 7:55

























asked Aug 16 at 7:49









Chris Sanders

1,148216




1,148216







  • 1




    There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
    – Henry
    Aug 16 at 8:08










  • It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
    – BGM
    Aug 16 at 10:42










  • @BGM yes that's what I had in mind
    – Chris Sanders
    Aug 16 at 11:00












  • 1




    There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
    – Henry
    Aug 16 at 8:08










  • It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
    – BGM
    Aug 16 at 10:42










  • @BGM yes that's what I had in mind
    – Chris Sanders
    Aug 16 at 11:00







1




1




There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
– Henry
Aug 16 at 8:08




There should be no reason to think Bridge should be fair between the pair bidding first and the other pair, or in your simplified version (Whist?) the pair leading first and the other pair. But a random allocation of position (plus rotation of position in successive hands) makes it fair by what you call the trivial symmetry
– Henry
Aug 16 at 8:08












It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
– BGM
Aug 16 at 10:42




It depends on how do you define fair. Say two teams are in the final of a team event, boards are duplicate along two tables so the board/location factor is evened out. The remaining factor affecting the result are the choice of bidding system / method by each team, the bidding judgement at the table, the first lead, the subsequent play, and last but not least some accident. Do you mean If all things being equal then it should be a perfect draw?
– BGM
Aug 16 at 10:42












@BGM yes that's what I had in mind
– Chris Sanders
Aug 16 at 11:00




@BGM yes that's what I had in mind
– Chris Sanders
Aug 16 at 11:00















active

oldest

votes











Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);








 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2884519%2fis-bridge-a-fair-game-references-heuristics%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest






















active

oldest

votes













active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes










 

draft saved


draft discarded


























 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2884519%2fis-bridge-a-fair-game-references-heuristics%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest
































































-

這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

圖片
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite My aim is to smooth the terrain in a video game. Therefore I contrived an algorithm that makes use of Bézier curves of different orders. But this algorithm is defined in a two dimensional space for now. To shift it into the third dimension I need to somehow combine the Bézier curves. Given two curves in each two dimensions, how can I combine them to build a surface? I thought about something like a curve of a curve. Or maybe I could multiply them somehow. How can I combine them to cause the wanted behavior? Is there a common approach? In the image you can see the input, on the left, and the output, on the right, of the algorithm that works in a two dimensional space. For the real application there is a three dimensional input. The algorithm relays only on the adjacent tiles. Given these it will define the control points of the mentioned Bézier cur...
閱讀完整內容

Mutual Information Always Non-negative

圖片
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 10 down vote favorite 6 What is the simplest proof that mutual information is always non-negative? i.e., $I(X;Y)ge0$ probability-theory share | cite | improve this question edited Jun 17 '12 at 15:38 Cameron Buie 83.6k 7 71 154 asked Jun 17 '12 at 15:30 Omri 359 3 13 3 Convexity of the function $tmapsto tlog t$. – Did Jun 17 '12 at 15:33 In addition, the convexity properties require the coefficients in the linear combination sum 1. Then, as p(x,y) is a probability distribution, it fullfits such condition. – Francisco Javier Delgado Ceped Aug 10 at 18:44 add a comment  |  up vote 10 down vote favorite 6 What is the simplest proof that mutual information is always non-negative? i.e., $I(X;Y)ge0$ probability-theory share | cite | improve this question edited Jun 17 ...
閱讀完整內容

Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

圖片
up vote 0 down vote favorite My code workes perfectly for other queries, but for one query I am infinitely getting the same tweet. I can't understand what the problem is. API call: query='Allergic asthma OR Nonallergic asthma OR Occupational asthma OR EIB OR Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction OR Nocturnal asthma OR Cough-variant asthma' new_tweets = api.search(q=searchQuery, count=100, since_id=since_id, lang='en',tweet_mode='extended') if not new_tweets: print("No more tweets found") break for tweet in new_tweets: if True: print(jsonpickle.encode(tweet._json, unpicklable=False)) my_file = open('searchTweets.txt','a') my_file.write(jsonpickle.encode(tweet._json, unpicklable=False)+'n') my_file.close() else: continue Output in file: https://pastebin.com/JmRCsTeE These are the JSONs of the same Tweet. Other queries that work: Breast cancer OR Prostate cancer OR Colon cancer OR Lung cancer Type 2 dia...
閱讀完整內容