Help
r/w MPs, but please state what you would do at other vuls too
(1N) p (2S) p
(2N) p (3C) ?
ATxx AKTx Q9x Ax
1N was 14-16, 2S was range or clubs
Page 1 of 1
compete?
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 2010-August-03
Posted 2018-September-08, 18:27
Videos of the worst bridge player ever playing bridge:
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
#2
- Group: Members
- Posts: 20
- Joined: 2018-April-21
Posted 2018-September-08, 20:48
Red vs white I lead the king of hearts without any further thought and consider this automatic.
White vs red I may consider a double for take out but still lead the king of hearts.
White vs red I may consider a double for take out but still lead the king of hearts.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,125
- Joined: 2013-January-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, Chess, Film, Literature, Herbal Medicine, Nutrition
Posted 2018-September-08, 20:53
No at any vulnerability. Most of the other points in the pack are right over you, and partner could have a collection of tramtickets in a similarly balanced hand. Make the small ♣ a ♦ and i'll feel a bit more confident about competing, though still apprehensive.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,300
- Joined: 2014-April-08
- Gender:Male
- Location:Norway
- Interests:partscores
Posted 2018-September-09, 01:53
X at all vuls.
This is MPs, so this kind of argument never works. Maybe X is -EV, at least when vul, but Pass isn't "safe".
The_Badger, on 2018-September-08, 20:53, said:
No at any vulnerability. Most of the other points in the pack are right over you, and partner could have a collection of tramtickets in a similarly balanced hand.
This is MPs, so this kind of argument never works. Maybe X is -EV, at least when vul, but Pass isn't "safe".
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,660
- Joined: 2011-February-12
Posted 2018-September-09, 08:13
pass
3c looks like a strong candidate for down 1 at least. That means we have to score 9+ tricks in order to do better. This is hardly impossible but is it 50% or better? If partner has a balanced hand those 9 tricks will be difficult to find unless partner is near the top of their possible (though unlikely) 9 hcp. There is also the fact that partner has heard the bidding and if they have 8-9 hcp balanced they have to be wondering why you have not bid so far and they will arrive at the conclusion that you
have nothing you can say because you have a strong balanced hand. If partner is unbalanced they will also figure out that you are strong and balanced and will much more readily balance. My point is pass seems better because there seems to be no need to gamble right now. Partner will figure out your hand anyway so let them decide how to proceed. Passing now has an additional benefit of not getting us too high when partner feels like jumping because of your x.
3c looks like a strong candidate for down 1 at least. That means we have to score 9+ tricks in order to do better. This is hardly impossible but is it 50% or better? If partner has a balanced hand those 9 tricks will be difficult to find unless partner is near the top of their possible (though unlikely) 9 hcp. There is also the fact that partner has heard the bidding and if they have 8-9 hcp balanced they have to be wondering why you have not bid so far and they will arrive at the conclusion that you
have nothing you can say because you have a strong balanced hand. If partner is unbalanced they will also figure out that you are strong and balanced and will much more readily balance. My point is pass seems better because there seems to be no need to gamble right now. Partner will figure out your hand anyway so let them decide how to proceed. Passing now has an additional benefit of not getting us too high when partner feels like jumping because of your x.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,831
- Joined: 2011-June-08
- Gender:Male
- Location:UK Near London
- Interests:Crystal Palace
Posted 2018-September-09, 09:30
I think this is a very simple double
"definitely that's what I like to play when I'm playing standard - I want to be able to bid diamonds because bidding good suits is important in bridge" - Meckstroth's opinion on weak 2 diamond
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,114
- Joined: 2013-December-23
- Gender:Male
Posted 2018-September-09, 17:11
Double, any vulnerability or form of scoring. Faint heart rarely wins the bridge game. I had to laugh at the comment that fears a jump advance from partner. Really? If partner jumps to a major suit game I expect an easy make.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,366
- Joined: 2013-August-03
- Gender:Female
- Location:Variable private
- Interests:Cricket,Photography,Paediatrics and Community Medicine.
Posted 2018-September-10, 09:18
Sorry but I would have doubled the 2S bid, since I consider myself to be an aggressive bidder, with all the controls and both majors.
#9
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 2010-August-03
Posted 2018-September-10, 10:25
I doubled as well. Of course partner has the nut low (4423 yarb or something like that) and you go for 500, with 800 available to the opps, not that it matters of course.
Wasn't sure if this was just bad luck or a bad decision. Even at the table I was thinking possibly there should be no balanced hands in range for double here, but no idea.
Wasn't sure if this was just bad luck or a bad decision. Even at the table I was thinking possibly there should be no balanced hands in range for double here, but no idea.
Videos of the worst bridge player ever playing bridge:
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,366
- Joined: 2013-August-03
- Gender:Female
- Location:Variable private
- Interests:Cricket,Photography,Paediatrics and Community Medicine.
Posted 2018-September-10, 10:51
kuhchung, on 2018-September-10, 10:25, said:
I doubled as well. Of course partner has the nut low (4423 yarb or something like that) and you go for 500, with 800 available to the opps, not that it matters of course.
Wasn't sure if this was just bad luck or a bad decision. Even at the table I was thinking possibly there should be no balanced hands in range for double here, but no idea.
Wasn't sure if this was just bad luck or a bad decision. Even at the table I was thinking possibly there should be no balanced hands in range for double here, but no idea.
Having already doubled the 2S bid ,I shall pass the 3C bid.
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,030
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2018-September-10, 12:19
There are times to be aggressive and times to accept that it is wisest to go quietly. Here, it is imo overwhelmingly correct to pass throughout.
One could play that a double of 2S is takeout of clubs but, imo, such is lunacy. It pretty much guarantees a zero anytime opener has 4 spades and responder the invitational hand, since it is trivial to play redouble as showing spades....responder can always pull with just clubs. As someone who uses range-ask, my experience is that responder will hold the invitational hand far more often than a hand that wants to get out in 3C, especially at mps. So I think it is both logical and 'standard' (to the extent that there is a standard when the opps use a common but non-standard device) to use the double to show long, decent, spades. Indeed that is surely its best use, allowing partner to compete should he hold a fitting hand and meanwhile exploiting a weakness in their methods to get the best lead against notrump.
So one has to pass 2S and then one has a decision over 3C.
Here are some thoughts:
a) RHO need not be 'weak'. He need only have a hand wherein he thinks that 3C will play better, most of the time, than 2N. He could easily hold a 7 count, or slightly more, especially if he has a small singleton somewhere.....while that suggests we have a fit, it is entirely possible that it means that opener is stacked in our fit (edit: for some reason I thought 1N was 12-14, so originally said that east could have a 9 count. I think that most 9 counts with long clubs would either blast 3N or pass 2N: so I have corrected this to a 7 count, but of course I am correspondingly increasing my notional minimum of West, and leaving partner's expectation unchanged)
b) -200 is going to be close to a zero. If they can double us, close doesn't enter into it...we are getting a zero
c) They may have guessed wrong....maybe they belong in 1 or 2N, and -110 (or +50) will be a good score for us
d) they have exchanged significant information. While opener can't usually say much if we double, because responder could be very weak, responder has no such qualms. He can freely double with moderate defence.
e) as against all that, we need to find a hand opposite ours that offers good play for 9 tricks. Maybe we only need 8, if they don't double and if they can make their contract. What are the odds? Almost surely the second best hand at the table sits behind us, and the opening lead is going through our hand. We hold precisely the worst number of clubs. Had we 3, we could expect a doubleton (or stiff!)in partner. Had we 1, we'd increase the chances of a fit and have ruffing values, and one less loser.
I am a fan of aggressive mp bidding, but one has to realize that holding a good hand is not the only factor to consider.
While I am more of an imp player than a mp player, I've played enough of the latter (with some reasonable success) to know that the key to winning (especially in a tough field or a multi-session event) is avoiding disasters.
Ask virtually anyone who has won in a tough field or a multi-session event about their game, and they are far more likely to tell you about the gifts they got from the field than about any brilliancies on their part. MP events are more often lost than they are won, and bidding over 3C is an attempt to win the event. It is a high-risk, low percentage gamble. It is far more likely to lose the event that to help one win it.
Passing seems boring to many, but the pass card is, without doubt, the most under-utilized bidding card in the game. A lot of advancing players would improve their game if they learned to listen to the auction, when that auction makes passing the percentage action.
One could play that a double of 2S is takeout of clubs but, imo, such is lunacy. It pretty much guarantees a zero anytime opener has 4 spades and responder the invitational hand, since it is trivial to play redouble as showing spades....responder can always pull with just clubs. As someone who uses range-ask, my experience is that responder will hold the invitational hand far more often than a hand that wants to get out in 3C, especially at mps. So I think it is both logical and 'standard' (to the extent that there is a standard when the opps use a common but non-standard device) to use the double to show long, decent, spades. Indeed that is surely its best use, allowing partner to compete should he hold a fitting hand and meanwhile exploiting a weakness in their methods to get the best lead against notrump.
So one has to pass 2S and then one has a decision over 3C.
Here are some thoughts:
a) RHO need not be 'weak'. He need only have a hand wherein he thinks that 3C will play better, most of the time, than 2N. He could easily hold a 7 count, or slightly more, especially if he has a small singleton somewhere.....while that suggests we have a fit, it is entirely possible that it means that opener is stacked in our fit (edit: for some reason I thought 1N was 12-14, so originally said that east could have a 9 count. I think that most 9 counts with long clubs would either blast 3N or pass 2N: so I have corrected this to a 7 count, but of course I am correspondingly increasing my notional minimum of West, and leaving partner's expectation unchanged)
b) -200 is going to be close to a zero. If they can double us, close doesn't enter into it...we are getting a zero
c) They may have guessed wrong....maybe they belong in 1 or 2N, and -110 (or +50) will be a good score for us
d) they have exchanged significant information. While opener can't usually say much if we double, because responder could be very weak, responder has no such qualms. He can freely double with moderate defence.
e) as against all that, we need to find a hand opposite ours that offers good play for 9 tricks. Maybe we only need 8, if they don't double and if they can make their contract. What are the odds? Almost surely the second best hand at the table sits behind us, and the opening lead is going through our hand. We hold precisely the worst number of clubs. Had we 3, we could expect a doubleton (or stiff!)in partner. Had we 1, we'd increase the chances of a fit and have ruffing values, and one less loser.
I am a fan of aggressive mp bidding, but one has to realize that holding a good hand is not the only factor to consider.
While I am more of an imp player than a mp player, I've played enough of the latter (with some reasonable success) to know that the key to winning (especially in a tough field or a multi-session event) is avoiding disasters.
Ask virtually anyone who has won in a tough field or a multi-session event about their game, and they are far more likely to tell you about the gifts they got from the field than about any brilliancies on their part. MP events are more often lost than they are won, and bidding over 3C is an attempt to win the event. It is a high-risk, low percentage gamble. It is far more likely to lose the event that to help one win it.
Passing seems boring to many, but the pass card is, without doubt, the most under-utilized bidding card in the game. A lot of advancing players would improve their game if they learned to listen to the auction, when that auction makes passing the percentage action.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#12
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 737
- Joined: 2015-November-14
Posted 2018-September-10, 12:19
kuhchung, on 2018-September-08, 18:27, said:
r/w MPs, but please state what you would do at other vuls too
(1N) p (2S) p
(2N) p (3C) ?
ATxx AKTx Q9x Ax
1N was 14-16, 2S was range or clubs
(1N) p (2S) p
(2N) p (3C) ?
ATxx AKTx Q9x Ax
1N was 14-16, 2S was range or clubs
Vulnerable, you need a lot more shape than you have in order to compete. The risk of -1X or -2 as against a part score just doesn't make bidding attractive.
Even white against red, I would hesitate to bid here. That's because there are three ways to lose. You could get Xed and go set two if partner has nothing. If partner has a trick, you could go off one when the opponents were off in 3C. Or if partner has most of the missing stuff, you will likely make a part-socre, only to find that the opponents were going to be -2 in 3C for +200.
Only white vs white would I X in MPs.
Cheers,
Mike
#13
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 737
- Joined: 2015-November-14
Posted 2018-September-10, 12:21
msjennifer, on 2018-September-10, 09:18, said:
Sorry but I would have doubled the 2S bid, since I consider myself to be an aggressive bidder, with all the controls and both majors.
I suspect most folks would play a X of 2S as spades, rather than as takeout of clubs.
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,300
- Joined: 2014-April-08
- Gender:Male
- Location:Norway
- Interests:partscores
Posted 2018-September-10, 16:45
Here
are 100 deals based on the following simplistic Dealer code:
Note that North always has a 4423 yarborough.
Spoiler
are 100 deals based on the following simplistic Dealer code:
predeal south SAT32, HAKT2, DQ92, CA2 west1Nthen2N = hcp(west)>13 and hcp(west)<16 and shape(west, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5332) east2Sthen3C = hcp(east)<8 and clubs(east)>5 condition west1Nthen2N and east2Sthen3C produce 100 action printoneline
Note that North always has a 4423 yarborough.
#15
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 729
- Joined: 2010-August-03
Posted 2018-September-10, 17:16
Thanks for the sim nullve! Can you go a step further and figure out how we're doing on those hands? I am not smart enough for things like this.
Videos of the worst bridge player ever playing bridge:
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
https://www.youtube....hungPlaysBridge
#16
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,030
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2018-September-10, 17:33
kuhchung, on 2018-September-10, 17:16, said:
Thanks for the sim nullve! Can you go a step further and figure out how we're doing on those hands? I am not smart enough for things like this.
There are limits to the utility of simulations in these sorts of situations.
There is always the problem that simulations assume double-dummy play and defence, and thus are inherently unrealistic. Much of that evens out unless the hands are weird, and weird hands even out when the sample size is large enough (I am profoundly ignorant of how large a sample must be to negate that issue).
More importantly, how one fares on these hands depends on bidding decisions, and no DD play analyzer can tell you how people would bid as opposed to how they 'should' bid if they could know the exact layout.
Thus I am sure that on some hands partner would pull when passing works best, double-dummy. I am even more sure that on some hands some opps might not double us when they really should (and not just because they have a dd beat).
I think dd analysis, to the extent that it is useful (I don't think it is ever really useful, since I don't know anyone who plays or defends dd), it is on purely constructive hands, with no opposition bidding, and even there it requires very careful selection of the criteria, and often a subjective assessment of 'would he really bid that with that holding?' etc.
The fact that a dd analysis might show that, as an example, doubling was a net winner, or loser, compared to pass is irrelevant if, in the real world, partner would/should do the opposite of what the dd analysis suggests.
Moreover, it doesn't help tell us what partner should do opposite whatever a generic double looks like...whatever it looks like, it won't be precisely this hand with precisely these cards. So what works for partner opposite this hand may not work at all opposite another 'double'.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#17
- VIP Member
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,971
- Joined: 2009-November-14
- Gender:Male
- Location:Houston, TX
Posted 2018-September-18, 23:35
I would not mind pass but I personally would have doubled 3♣. Particularly in single session MP events.
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#18
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,366
- Joined: 2012-March-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Illinois
- Interests:Bridge, Golf, Soccer
Posted 2018-September-19, 01:20
I'd pass this hand also.
You're looking at 17 HCP. Give opener an absolute minimum 14 count, then it leaves a maximum 9 points to be split between the two remaining hands. And it could be less. There's no reason to believe that those points are anything else than split about evenly. You don't have a long suit to provide more trick taking power and help if you compete.
So do you want to compete at the 3 level with maybe 21 HCP, no reason to believe you have more than an 8 card fit, and with the bulk of outstanding points positioned behind you?
I don't, so I'll pass and take my average minus if that's what happens. But I won't be surprised if the board turns out better than that. I'd also be content knowing that I avoided a more likely potential landmine resulting in a bottom than hitting partner with a perfect hand for a top. Part of winning matchpoint strategy is to pick the right fights to engage in. Competing here has too small a target for success.
You're looking at 17 HCP. Give opener an absolute minimum 14 count, then it leaves a maximum 9 points to be split between the two remaining hands. And it could be less. There's no reason to believe that those points are anything else than split about evenly. You don't have a long suit to provide more trick taking power and help if you compete.
So do you want to compete at the 3 level with maybe 21 HCP, no reason to believe you have more than an 8 card fit, and with the bulk of outstanding points positioned behind you?
I don't, so I'll pass and take my average minus if that's what happens. But I won't be surprised if the board turns out better than that. I'd also be content knowing that I avoided a more likely potential landmine resulting in a bottom than hitting partner with a perfect hand for a top. Part of winning matchpoint strategy is to pick the right fights to engage in. Competing here has too small a target for success.
Page 1 of 1