Help
Winstonm, on Feb 15 2007, 11:40 PM, said:
There will be X number of hands where we bid and go set.
There will be X number of hands where they bid 3 and make
There will be X number of hands where they will bid game and make.
There will be X number of hands where they double our bid and we lose a larger amount.
There will be X number of hands where they bid 3 and make
There will be X number of hands where they will bid game and make.
There will be X number of hands where they double our bid and we lose a larger amount.
If you suppose that our bidding will have no impact on the play then you can just ignore the cases where they bid and make 3, or they bid game. These cases mean our bid vs pass decision was irrelevant. Our bid is also virtually irrelevant if we go down 1 or 2 in 3C when they were making 2H, it is only relevant if 2H is going down as well.
For simplicity the main relevance lies in number of times we go make when 2H was making, and number of times we push them to 3H going down when 2H was making vs the times we go for a number or go set in 3C when 2H was going set. (Yes I am ignoring the times when we gain an extra undertrick and the times when we go -200 vs 110 or 140).
It is my opinion that the former happens far more often than the latter. Going set in 3C when they go set in 2H is extremely unlikely, going for a number is more likely but doesn't happen all that often. Real life opps tend to bid 3H too much, what can I say?
As far as our bidding having some effect on the play we are far more likely to get the right lead now, and we will probably protect our HQ. Both of these are nice plus sides of bidding.
Hopefully you do not take my disagreement as picking on you, I thought that was the whole point of a forum. I could easily be wrong, all of these types of decisions come down to our own limited sample base and our own biases in the way we think.