[Hanoi5]

---

Teams. North-South play 2NT 20-21 HCP balanced but South decided to undervalue the hand based on KQ tight and Jxx, also no tens. North responded to the opening bid but then got scared, having only 5 and 'knowing' partner had 19 tops. Spades were 3-3, ♦KT on-side, ♥KQxx off-side, clubs 4-4. Should the game be reached? Who made a mistake? Should it be made on a club lead from ATxx?

[mikeh]

I don't like the downgrade. I understand it, and I used to think that way at the table, but I don't think it's winning bridge.

I blame S. North really has no reason to push to game....his A10 is a nice combination but the rest of the hand offers no upside.

Of course, NS could easily have been 'right' on this hand, since game requires some luck, but somehow, in the long run, luck appears to favour the bold.

[JLOGIC]

Stop downgrading asap. You saw only the negatives and not the positives such as AQJx and AKxx being good holdings. North was completely normal.

[nigel_k]

No blame. This is a bad game non-vul and a marginal one vul. With good judgment from both North and South you stayed out of it. Well done.

Never downgrading is equivalent to always opening 2NT with an average 19, because that's what this is worth. Certainly doing that can gain sometimes, but it only pays off long-term if partner's judgment and opponents defence are both poor.

[Cyberyeti]

nigel_k, on 2011-September-06, 17:47, said:

No blame. This is a bad game non-vul and a marginal one vul. With good judgment from both North and South you stayed out of it. Well done.

Never downgrading is equivalent to always opening 2NT with an average 19, because that's what this is worth. Certainly doing that can gain sometimes, but it only pays off long-term if partner's judgment and opponents defence are both poor.

This is worth a more than the average 19, whether it's a full 20 is arguable, I think it is. xx,KQxxx,xxx,xxx gives you decent play for game, as does Qxxx, K10xxx, x, xxx. Your honour holdings are quite nice, partner has not a great 5 count with no shape and game has reasonable play (it would have a lot more if partner had 9♥ instead of one of the other 9s) even though I wouldn't particularly want to be in it with this exact dummy.

I think on the sort of hands that partner will raise a 2N to 3 but not raise 1x-1y-2N to 3, you will make game at least as often as not, so I'd open 2N. Fortunately I don't have a problem on this hand as I play good 19-21 and would certainly rate this as a good 19 if I didn't rate it a 20.

[Fluffy]

You have to downgrade something, otherwise you are only upgrading and in fact is like oyu played a different range just that you downgrade normal hands.

But downgrade only the really ugly ones, QJ tight, 4333, Stiff honnors etc.

KQ tight is bad, but not enough, KQ tight 2 times perhaps its enough but then you would have a 5 card suit to compensate.

[VM1973]

I could maybe understand downgrading the hand based on KQ tight, but what does Jxx have to do with downgrades?

Anyway I've been reviewing http://bridge.thomas...luesfor3nt.html and it seems like one of the better evaluators (for NT sake) is to count an extra 0.25 for aces. Holding 2 aces should offset the lack of 10s.

If you run it through that evaluator it works out to 26 which is apparently 0.25 short of a 50-50 shot at game... not that you could necessarily be that precise at the table.

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

[nigel_k]

KQ tight and Jxx are both bad. Having no intermediates is bad, probably a half point downgrade by itself. Two aces is not a plus because that is average for a 19-20 HCP hand. The only good thing is the ♦J being supported by other honours. Kaplan/Rubens calls it 18.9 which is about right.

Cyberyeti makes a good point about the risk of missing four of a major, but I'm not worried about missing a good 3NT non vul.

[shevek]

Confess I would downgrade & open 1D.

Vulnerability is an interesting issue. I don't think it should affect the decision on notrump openings.
Responder should be the one on the push seat.

[MrAce]

Hanoi5, on 2011-September-06, 15:26, said:

---

Teams. North-South play 2NT 20-21 HCP balanced but South decided to undervalue the hand based on KQ tight and Jxx, also no tens. North responded to the opening bid but then got scared, having only 5 and 'knowing' partner had 19 tops. Spades were 3-3, ♦KT on-side, ♥KQxx off-side, clubs 4-4. Should the game be reached? Who made a mistake? Should it be made on a club lead from ATxx?

I would open 2NT.

But if the data you gave is accurate, you can not make 3 NT, what was the lead ? Because 4-4 ♣ + 3-3 ♦ and K is on is not enough to make 3 NT.

You said east has KQxx♥ + 4♣ + Kxx ♦ then he must have only 2♠, did they not lead ♣ ? Or did they create you 2nd entry for 2 times ♦ finesse ? Defense can slip if East has the ♣ A since he will take it and play ♣ back, but if W has the ♣ A and lead a small ♣, u can never make this.

[Free]

That's what can happen when you don't like your KQ and your partner doesn't like his Jxx in the same suit.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-September-07, 19:28, said:

I would open 2NT.

But if the data you gave is accurate, you can not make 3 NT, what was the lead ? Because 4-4 ♣ + 3-3 ♦ and K is on is not enough to make 3 NT.

You said east has KQxx♥ + 4♣ + Kxx ♦ then he must have only 2♠, did they not lead ♣ ? Or did they create you 2nd entry for 2 times ♦ finesse ? Defense can slip if East has the ♣ A since he will take it and play ♣ back, but if W has the ♣ A and lead a small ♣, u can never make this.

He said SPADES 3-3 and ♦K10 onside, if this is K10 tight, you can scramble home with 3 spades, 3 diamonds only leading them once from dummy, a heart and 2 clubs.

[jdeegan]

Awww sh*t. Your hand is a slightly below average 20 pointer. You have half the aces, half the kings, and a powerful AQJx combo to offset your KQ tight. Open 2NT. Pard has a lackluster 5 count, but he will probably bid 3NT out of hunger and fear. You have only seven top tricks, but your side is a favorite for nine in the end. Your tiny mistake made you a slight underdog on this particular hand. Even so, it could have worked out in your favor with a little luck.

[mikestar13]

JLOGIC, on 2011-September-06, 16:08, said:

Stop downgrading asap. You saw only the negatives and not the positives such as AQJx and AKxx being good holdings. North was completely normal.

This is right on the money. I find nothing wrong with the concept of downgrading, but the upgrades on this hand for the holdings Justin cites at least cancel these downgrades. Downgrading can be part of hand evaluation skills, but only if used with good sense, offsetting potential downgrades and potential upgrades.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-September-08, 02:21, said:

He said SPADES 3-3 and ♦K10 onside, if this is K10 tight, you can scramble home with 3 spades, 3 diamonds only leading them once from dummy, a heart and 2 clubs.

Yes sorry, for some reason my eyes must have skipped spades and read it as 3-3 ♦KT onside.