Help
Missed game, anyone to blame?
#1
- Group: Yellows
- Posts: 720
- Joined: 2004-January-06
- Location:CHINA
Posted 2008-February-06, 08:10
Michael Sun
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,934
- Joined: 2005-March-18
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-February-06, 08:13
No.
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,514
- Joined: 2003-February-16
Posted 2008-February-06, 08:19
I may well have bid 4S as responder, however if this t/o dble can be anything like the hand that held a 3-1-5-4 and made a t/o dble of 1S how comfortable does that make the 4S bidder feel?
#4
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,397
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Odense, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2008-February-06, 08:40
E could easily have ♠Qxx and ♥ AQ and the defense might find the heart switch after W cashed a diamond.
I would bid the same although S is close to bidding 4♠.
I would bid the same although S is close to bidding 4♠.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,937
- Joined: 2004-June-05
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:00
I'd bid it, as South. It's IMPs (even if we're not vul) and I'll take my chances.
MPs, I'd bid 3♠.
MPs, I'd bid 3♠.
#6
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:03
P_Marlowe, on Feb 6 2008, 04:13 PM, said:
No.
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Agree.
did a t/o x really use to promise 15 hcp?
i'm glad to be in the 21st century
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#7
- Under bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,797
- Joined: 2004-July-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:22
Definitely agree with 3♠.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,934
- Joined: 2005-March-18
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:39
gwnn, on Feb 6 2008, 11:03 AM, said:
P_Marlowe, on Feb 6 2008, 04:13 PM, said:
No.
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
South may bid it, but it is not matadory.
Again, you need to know partners style,
how weak can a direct t/o be.
Does the t/o promise at least +15, which
used to be standard, or could it be a king
weaker.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Agree.
did a t/o x really use to promise 15 hcp?
i'm glad to be in the 21st century I wont argue about +15, but a direct t/o showed a
sound t/o, what ever that may mean.
If I remember it correctly, this did translate to
at least 15-17 points, points for distribution
included.
With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,684
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:43
In my view, 3♠ is fine. As often happens in these 'who's to blame for missing game', one or both players will hold a maximum... here, S has a maximum for 3♠.
One might argue that so does North, and that this is just one of thaose hands that falls between the cracks, but I think that North has a minimum 4♠ call rather than a maximum pass. It is close, but the 3♠ bid was great news for North.
I don't (consciously) count points in hand evaluation of distributional hands, but if I did, surely I'd place the North hand at about 18 or so, and we should, when in this kind of situation, assume partner has a hand worth 7 or 8, so that gets us to the game range.
As it is, I'd simply look at the AKxx of trump, the potentially enormous AJ10xx in clubs, the ♥10 backing up the K, and the stiff diamond and bid 4♠.
Will I always catch a hand that makes 4♠ good? Of course not.
And it is close enough that it is tough to get upset if someone chose to be pessimistic.
One might argue that so does North, and that this is just one of thaose hands that falls between the cracks, but I think that North has a minimum 4♠ call rather than a maximum pass. It is close, but the 3♠ bid was great news for North.
I don't (consciously) count points in hand evaluation of distributional hands, but if I did, surely I'd place the North hand at about 18 or so, and we should, when in this kind of situation, assume partner has a hand worth 7 or 8, so that gets us to the game range.
As it is, I'd simply look at the AKxx of trump, the potentially enormous AJ10xx in clubs, the ♥10 backing up the K, and the stiff diamond and bid 4♠.
Will I always catch a hand that makes 4♠ good? Of course not.
And it is close enough that it is tough to get upset if someone chose to be pessimistic.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-February-06, 10:46
Takeout doubles of preemptive openings should be sound, even in the 21st century.
I would still bid only 3♠ with the South hand. The fit turns out to be very good. Even with as good a fit as there is on this hand, 4♠ still is not cold. And it doesn't take Qxx of spades and AQ of hearts in the East hand to beat it. There are a number of other possibilities:
Qxx of spades and Axxxxxx of hearts in the East hand (West, with a singleton spade and a singleton HQ, gets a heart ruff).
AQxxxx of hearts in the East hand and the SQ in the West hand (two heart losers and a heart overruff).
AQxxxx of hearts in the East hand and the S10 in the West hand (unless South ruffs the third round of hearts with the J and spades are 2-2).
4-0 spades and diamond taps in the dummy.
So, 4♠ is not the world's best contract.
I would still bid only 3♠ with the South hand. The fit turns out to be very good. Even with as good a fit as there is on this hand, 4♠ still is not cold. And it doesn't take Qxx of spades and AQ of hearts in the East hand to beat it. There are a number of other possibilities:
Qxx of spades and Axxxxxx of hearts in the East hand (West, with a singleton spade and a singleton HQ, gets a heart ruff).
AQxxxx of hearts in the East hand and the SQ in the West hand (two heart losers and a heart overruff).
AQxxxx of hearts in the East hand and the S10 in the West hand (unless South ruffs the third round of hearts with the J and spades are 2-2).
4-0 spades and diamond taps in the dummy.
So, 4♠ is not the world's best contract.
#11 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-06, 11:12
Wow, I would have bid 4S with both of their hands and would have thought that was normal lol. One guy has 5 trumps and xxx diamonds and a 7 count, and the other guy has a totally prime 15 with a stiff diamond and 4 trumps...
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,684
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2008-February-06, 11:13
ArtK78, on Feb 6 2008, 11:46 AM, said:
So, 4♠ is not the world's best contract.
I agree with this comment. I suspect that Art would also agree that it is a game that is, just, a game you want to be in... at imps or mps. Obviously, if we were red at imps, it would be a game we'd be annoyed at missing (unless it failed) but even white, it is worth bidding.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#13 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-06, 11:21
Isn't game like...really good??
edit: ok I read art's post...... if those are the only times he can think of when game goes down (and he is wrong, for instance he says 4-0 spades + dummy taps will beat you but obviously you can just run winners through RHO after you cash 1 spade and lho shows out. You will end up needing a heart onside, and if one is not it just goes back to AQ of hearts, SQ offside. He also does not mention the chances of making because they are not defending perfectly. For instance what if they have the KJ of diamonds and cant lead the DA to begin with to shift to a heart in his scenarios) then game is like 70+%. I mean all of his examples need the AQ of hearts off plus more (except LHO being 1-1 in the majors with stiff Q, lol).
I mean missing a 50 % game is a huge disaster, missing one this good is a catastrophe.
edit: ok I read art's post...... if those are the only times he can think of when game goes down (and he is wrong, for instance he says 4-0 spades + dummy taps will beat you but obviously you can just run winners through RHO after you cash 1 spade and lho shows out. You will end up needing a heart onside, and if one is not it just goes back to AQ of hearts, SQ offside. He also does not mention the chances of making because they are not defending perfectly. For instance what if they have the KJ of diamonds and cant lead the DA to begin with to shift to a heart in his scenarios) then game is like 70+%. I mean all of his examples need the AQ of hearts off plus more (except LHO being 1-1 in the majors with stiff Q, lol).
I mean missing a 50 % game is a huge disaster, missing one this good is a catastrophe.
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-February-06, 12:03
I was just trying to point out that missing this game is not the biggest disaster in the world. My analysis of all of the cases in which games fails may not have been comprehensive (I am not going to spend all day on this problem).
Would I like to be in game on these cards? Sure. Would I be surprised to learn that I did not lose IMPs by missing this game? No. Assuming that the 3♦ preempt was normal, I don't see South stretching for a nonvul game, and I certainly do not see North bidding game over a 3♠ bid by South.
Would I like to be in game on these cards? Sure. Would I be surprised to learn that I did not lose IMPs by missing this game? No. Assuming that the 3♦ preempt was normal, I don't see South stretching for a nonvul game, and I certainly do not see North bidding game over a 3♠ bid by South.
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,727
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2008-February-06, 12:39
I'd most probably have bid 4♠ with the south hand, but it's very close.
Definitely agree with Justin and Mike regarding the north hand - that would be a more or lesss automatic raise to 4♠. There's a bonus for bidding and making game, you know.
Definitely agree with Justin and Mike regarding the north hand - that would be a more or lesss automatic raise to 4♠. There's a bonus for bidding and making game, you know.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#16
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2008-February-06, 14:57
Jlall, on Feb 6 2008, 12:12 PM, said:
Wow, I would have bid 4S with both of their hands and would have thought that was normal lol. One guy has 5 trumps and xxx diamonds and a 7 count, and the other guy has a totally prime 15 with a stiff diamond and 4 trumps...
I think that one of them should bid game, but not both. If South should bid game on this hand then it seems like North's hand isn't good enough to raise when South fails to bid game. If North should bid game then I don't see why South should stretch since North is going to do it with extras anyway.
I am not sure which one "should" be bidding game here because both hands seem borderline to me.
#17
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,502
- Joined: 2007-December-22
Posted 2008-February-06, 15:07
Apollo81, on Feb 6 2008, 03:57 PM, said:
Jlall, on Feb 6 2008, 12:12 PM, said:
Wow, I would have bid 4S with both of their hands and would have thought that was normal lol. One guy has 5 trumps and xxx diamonds and a 7 count, and the other guy has a totally prime 15 with a stiff diamond and 4 trumps...
I think that one of them should bid game, but not both. If South should bid game on this hand then it seems like North's hand isn't good enough to raise when South fails to bid game. If North should bid game then I don't see why South should stretch since North is going to do it with extras anyway.
This seems reasonable to me.
I would bid only 3♠ as South, and raise to 4♠ as North.
That's impossible. No one can give more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
#18
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,208
- Joined: 2007-July-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Michigan
- Interests:Science, Sports
Posted 2008-February-06, 15:52
South's to blame.
No diamond wastage, extra trump.
No diamond wastage, extra trump.
Kevin Fay
#19
- Group: Yellows
- Posts: 6,772
- Joined: 2003-July-22
- Gender:Male
- Location:New Zealand
- Interests:Juggling, Unicycling
Posted 2008-February-06, 17:00
I am closer to bidding game with the north hand but I would certainly think about it with the south cards.
North needs so little for game - ♠Q and ♣K and not much else and you have play. Partner is hardly going to jump to game with this little.
North needs so little for game - ♠Q and ♣K and not much else and you have play. Partner is hardly going to jump to game with this little.
Wayne Burrows
I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon
I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon
#20 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-February-06, 18:14
Apollo81, on Feb 6 2008, 03:57 PM, said:
Jlall, on Feb 6 2008, 12:12 PM, said:
Wow, I would have bid 4S with both of their hands and would have thought that was normal lol. One guy has 5 trumps and xxx diamonds and a 7 count, and the other guy has a totally prime 15 with a stiff diamond and 4 trumps...
I think that one of them should bid game, but not both. If South should bid game on this hand then it seems like North's hand isn't good enough to raise when South fails to bid game. If North should bid game then I don't see why South should stretch since North is going to do it with extras anyway.
I am not sure which one "should" be bidding game here because both hands seem borderline to me.
You still make game with lots of hands that pass 3S as south, and lots of hands that would bid 3S as south when you're north. I wouldn't have even thought of either of these hands to be that close tbh, before I read this post so I don't think it's like "if south is so agressive north doesn't need to be."
Also I think people rarely think about the difference in moving for game once you're in 3S as opposed to when you're in 2S. You have a lot of equity bidding game as a hand like north because you're often already down in 3 opposite the "wrong" hand, so bidding on costs 2 imps. North is the type of hand that makes a lot opposite the perfecta and not much opposite the wrong hand. Of course, you could get doubled opposite the really wrong hand and that should be factored in.
I remember some hand that Hamman ran some analysis on that showed if you will make game 25 % of the time you should bid it, because you were down in 3 already so much when you couldn't make game. People already know this on moving over 2N to 3N hand types that contain a long suit, I think they should be more aware of it for situations over 3M as well.
3♦-dbl-ps-3♠
AP