BBO Discussion Forums: Invitational? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Invitational?

#1 User is offline   Gerben42 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,577
  • Joined: 2005-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Erlangen, Germany
  • Interests:Astronomy, Mathematics
    Nuclear power

Posted 2015-May-17, 13:30



Regional pairs tournament in Germany. 3 was not alerted, however a weak jump to 3 would be alertable. EW (expert pair) claim they would have doubled 5 if they had known that South can be weak.

Normally a clear case. However NS are an intermediate pair who think ODR is probably some rock band. South explains: "I have 5 HCP, 2 points for the 9th trump, 2 points for the 10th trump and two doubletons for 1 point each, that's 11 in total, so that's an invitation".

If NS really think the south hand is equivalent to e.g. Axx Kxx Axxx xxx (more in line with what EW were expecting), is this still an adjustment?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
My Bridge Systems Page

BC Kultcamp Rieneck
0

#2 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,087
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2015-May-17, 13:44

Would a mixed raise, say 7-9 HCPs if 4432, be alertable?
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#3 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2015-May-17, 14:08

 helene_t, on 2015-May-17, 13:44, said:

Would a mixed raise, say 7-9 HCPs if 4432, be alertable?

Yes.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#4 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-May-17, 14:23

 Gerben42, on 2015-May-17, 13:30, said:

If NS really think the south hand is equivalent to e.g. Axx Kxx Axxx xxx (more in line with what EW were expecting), is this still an adjustment?


It does not matter much what they think. If the non-alertable meaning is "a high-card raise to 3", well, this is not what they have.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#5 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2015-May-17, 14:33

 Vampyr, on 2015-May-17, 14:23, said:

It does not matter much what they think. If the non-alertable meaning is "a high-card raise to 3", well, this is not what they have.

The regulations say the bid must be alerted if it is of less than invitational strength. They do not define what constitutes invitational strength.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#6 User is offline   StevenG 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 626
  • Joined: 2009-July-10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bedford, England

Posted 2015-May-17, 14:48

Their agreement seems to be the a raise to 3 is invitational. Therefore there was no reason to alert.
2

#7 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-May-17, 16:16

 mgoetze, on 2015-May-17, 14:33, said:

The regulations say the bid must be alerted if it is of less than invitational strength. They do not define what constitutes invitational strength.


Well, it sounds like the trouble is with the regulations. Pairs are seemingly allowed to define invitational strength however they want.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#8 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-May-17, 17:37

 Vampyr, on 2015-May-17, 16:16, said:

Well, it sounds like the trouble is with the regulations. Pairs are seemingly allowed to define invitational strength however they want.

Not a problem at all. I wouldn't want to regulate someone's judgement. If South thinks his hand his worth a game invite to 4S, it doesn't matter how silly that is. The agreement is that he was inviting game; next case?
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#9 User is offline   akwoo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,312
  • Joined: 2010-November-21

Posted 2015-May-17, 18:54

I'm not sure I buy the EW claim that they would've doubled 5. Certainly they would've doubled 5 if 3 was definitely weak. But doubling 5 when 3 could either be a normal invite or a distributional 'invite' like this one is a good deal more dubious. A score of 5-1 is probably already pretty good, so I would think you need a 70% chance of setting to actually double.

1) Was director called when dummy came down, or after the hand?

2) How well did 5-1 score?

As to whether MI occurred, it depends on whether there was an implicit agreement or not. Does North think South would normally invite on that hand?
0

#10 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-May-18, 02:28

 aguahombre, on 2015-May-17, 17:37, said:

Not a problem at all. I wouldn't want to regulate someone's judgement. If South thinks his hand his worth a game invite to 4S, it doesn't matter how silly that is. The agreement is that he was inviting game; next case?


Yes, this is fine. The question in the OP, though, is whether the bid is alertable.

I think that the regulators intended it to be, but were not specific enough in writing the regulation. They have left it up to each pair to define "invitational".
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#11 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-May-18, 05:03

 Vampyr, on 2015-May-18, 02:28, said:

Yes, this is fine. The question in the OP, though, is whether the bid is alertable.

I think that the regulators intended it to be, but were not specific enough in writing the regulation. They have left it up to each pair to define "invitational".

"Alert"
"Please explain"
"Partner's raise is inviting game, but his judgement about what hands should invite game is poor."

Come on --- if they knew enough to alert that, they would know enough not to invite game with that hand.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
1

#12 User is offline   scarletv 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 320
  • Joined: 2009-April-27
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Germany, Bavaria

Posted 2015-May-18, 07:47

 akwoo, on 2015-May-17, 18:54, said:

2) How well did 5-1 score?
4-1 39 %
5-2 68 %
5X -2 96 %
0

#13 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,415
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-May-18, 09:48

South's judgement is really not an issue here. All that matters is what the NS agreement is. If they play that 3 is invitational, then it's not alertable.

I suppose if South has a habit of "upgrading" hands like this to invitational strength, that could create an implicit agreement that needs to be disclosed. But if they're weak players, I'm not sure you can expect them to pick up on trends like this.

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users