Miscellaneous desk
< May 25	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 27 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 26[edit]

Pirate costume[edit]

Does the stereotypical pirate costume have any historical basis? Not so much the eye patch and peg leg (because I'm sure lots of real pirates lost eyes and feet in skirmishes, etc.), but I'm more talking about the pirate hat and pirate costume and all the ruffly shirts. Did pirates really dress like that? If not, where does that style of clothing come from?--Jerk of Thrones (talk) 10:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blackbeard#Blackbeard has a description of Edward Teach (Blackbeard) given by various figures who encountered or reported on him, describing

...a "tall spare man with a very black beard which he wore very long". It is the first recorded account of Teach's appearance and is the source of his cognomen, Blackbeard. Later descriptions mention that his thick black beard was braided into pigtails, sometimes tied in with small coloured ribbons....Teach was tall, with broad shoulders. He wore knee-length boots and dark clothing, topped with a wide hat and sometimes a long coat of brightly coloured silk or velvet. Johnson also described Teach in times of battle as wearing "a sling over his shoulders, with three brace of pistols, hanging in holsters like bandoliers; and stuck lighted matches under his hat", the latter apparently to emphasise the fearsome appearance he wished to present to his enemies.

Thanks! those are some amusing illustrations, and they do look very much like the pirate Halloween costumes of today.--Jerk of Thrones (talk) 22:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are some engravings in the article as well, though all seem to date to a period at least a few years after his death. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:37, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the tricorn hat, knee-length coat and breeches, as shown in the engravings, were almost universal wear for males in the early 18th century. See 1700–50 in Western fashion#Men's fashion Alansplodge (talk) 16:27, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also Pirates in popular culture.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:30, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd imagine you couldn't get a real picture of general pirate wear from reading what the most famous pirate wore, anymore than you can with famous landlubbers. Just a guess, but I'd imagine the 99% of pirates wore whatever was cheap and sufficient. Probably more than a few looked utterly repugnant. Google gave me this, if you'd like. Apparently I'm wrong about the cheap bit, which makes sense, now that I think about it. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there's the story of the lone child who, dressed as a pirate, went trick-or-treating one Halloween. "Oh, what a wonderful costume!" said his elderly neighbour. "But where are your buccaneers?" she asked. "Under my buckin' hat!" he replied. μηδείς (talk) 01:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are several web images available for Pittsburgh Pirates and the markedly less popular East Carolina Pirates ;-). ^{Market St.⧏}_{⧐ Diamond Way} 00:01, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spaceport America[edit]

I was just wondering: why doesn't Spaceport America have an IATA or ICAO code? I'm aware that it will primarily be used for space flights, but the Shuttle Landing Facility, while it does not have an IATA code, it does have an ICAO code. Edwards Air Force Base has an IATA and an ICAO code despite being an airbase, while many airfields and airbases I've seen that don't have an IATA code have an ICAO code. I'm aware that the IATA code is mainly used for passenger-related stuff while the ICAO code is mainly used for airport operations, and that Spaceport America is still new and hasn't really started operations yet, but why doesn't it have at least an ICAO code? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:50, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suppose the simple answer is that as yet no 'international' flights are planed so the spaceport needs neither. If it goes on to support sub-orbital passenger flights to say Spain – then it will probably need to come within the ICAO. --Aspro (talk) 17:39, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the Shuttle Landing Facility is not an international airport (airport of entry or AOE) and there are multiple airports around the world that are not AOE but have ICAO codes. Also there are AOE's that don't have ICAO codes. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:57, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did say 'simple.' The SLF however, has an infrastructure (i.e., air traffic control for international scheduled passenger flights etc.,) that permits it to have an ICAO code which SPA does not. The SPA is solely for internal flights and things that go up.... and then come back down to the same place – hopefully in just one or two pieces.Aspro (talk) 13:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice too, it also has a weather station [1] which is another reason it can have an ICAO code. [2] shows that it has NOTAM – D services as well etc. Again more reasons. So it looks like that it is not the airstrip per se but the supporting infrastructure that has the code. The OP was just asking about SPA which has non of these things. It is does not have any contribution to international flight. Aspro (talk) 14:08, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate Bridge bidding question[edit]

What are the likely "correct bids" in the following situation using "standard American" systems? (I think there may be more than one "right" answer based on the Wikipedia convention articles)

You are south - west opens 1c, north passes, east bids 1d You hold: S AK 10 9, H AQ 10 8 2, D 10 2, C 10 2 I trust this is a sufficiently miscellaneous question. Thanks. Collect (talk) 18:06, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's anything wrong with your question, but wouldn't comments on a specific hand be better addressed to a Bridge forum? (That is, it's doubtful we have a reference that will answer such a question.) Perhaps bridge players here can recommend such a forum? I myself am a pinochlist. μηδείς (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I frequent this saloon. Cheers. Collect (talk) 23:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like an obvious "one heart" bid. I believe there is a convention in which a one heart opening has a special meaning, but I haven't encountered it. There may also be some convention or other where a 1NT bid could be used to indicate balance in both suits that have not been bid. But I think the great majority of American players would respond with 1H here. Looie496 (talk) 22:43, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michaels is now "yellow card" ... but would it be applicable here, and then in diamonds or in clubs? Long shot is unusual notrump - for the unbid suits. Collect (talk) 23:04, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Double. You have the equivalent of an opening bid (which is too many points for an overcall), and would like your partner to mention a major. --DaHorsesMouth (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I come from an Auction Bridge tradition, but I concur that a 1H bid seems reasonable here. Your two opponents have each bid a weak open in your two weakest suits, and your partner passed. 1H gives your partner lots of opportunities to communicate with you, because you've still got 1S and 1NT left, and depending on what the others bid, will tell you a lot, and you can win a 1H bid outright quite easily. 1S is tempting, but a) if your partner is stronger in hearts, you force him up to 2H, and b) I only count 5 sure tricks in spades (AK Spades, A Hearts, two cuts, that queen of hearts is sketchy and possibly cut by someone else) while you've got at least 6 sure tricks on a heart bid (AQ hearts, 2 cuts, AK Spades). However, the scoring and thus bidding is a bit different in Auction Bridge, so YMMV. --Jayron32 18:40, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By "auction" bridge, you mean rubber bridge, or maybe Chicago? Duplicate has an auction too.... The downside of 1H at rubber bridge or Chicago is that your hearts suit is kinda weak to play 1Hx. I only count four sure-ish tricks (two spades, the trump ace, and one long trump, because if an opponent had five hearts he'd likely have bid them). So you could be off 800 points with bad but not freakishly bad luck, and you could probably have beat a slam going the other way. In duplicate, especially matchpoints, that's not much of a consideration. --Trovatore (talk) 23:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

True, but if my partner has either the King or Jack of Hearts, we'd be fine. If I win the bid, he's laying out as the dummy, which gives me all the information I need: if he has neither I'm not in terrible shape because my opponents can't force me off all of my hearts. I'm only losing the King, and I'll probably be able to ditch the 2 on it; worst case I'll lose the ten to it; unless it goes J-Q-K, and then ten is boss. That still leaves the queen and/or ten as a winner and two other hearts as cutters. My only risk is losing on over cuts, which is a distinct possibility. I'm still winning AK of spades and counting on the partner for one trick. If he's got nothing, we're probably not stopping anything anyways, and I'd rather go down shooting... --Jayron32 06:13, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Over cuts" equals finesses? I wouldn't count on two spades as one might get ruffed in the short opponent's hand. Anyway I agree it's not really a huge risk — in contemporary bidding systems it's hard to double a one-bid for penalties, and if it does happen, at matchpoints it's just one bottom, so so what? But I'm not sure what the upside is. A 1H bid or a double has almost no obstructive value, and unless you find partner with a freakish fit you're never going to make game. You might as well try to set the opponents. Defense is more fun anyway. --Trovatore (talk) 08:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops — I see we have an article on auction bridge. It does also occur to me that a double has a similar problem. You might not want to defend 1D redoubled (not an easy contract for the opponents to reach, but the time you count on that, they probably will :-) ). It's not game, but redoubled vulnerable overtricks are 400 apiece. Honestly, if I'm red-on-white, I think I just shut up, whether at rubber bridge or at duplicate. No plausible bid has any significant nuisance value to the opponents; it'll probably just help them play the hand. --Trovatore (talk) 01:37, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also go with Double. But I've never played Bridge with an American and have no idea what would be standard there. If your partner has little to offer, which is quite likely, and your opponents win the auction, which is even more likely, you've given little information to declarer as to where the missing points are. While they can, of course, guess, using the same information, a 1H bid from you strongly tips them the wink about the length and strength of your suit, while Double could mean you have the points, but perhaps as a [tactically weak] doubleton. --Dweller (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]