[Sambolino]

Quote

Seems to me that in little old lady bridge (where you need 2/3 or 3/5 of the top honors to open 2 of a major) that hand is a typical 4♥ opener, yes?

I was wondering what the original poster meant by 'solid suit'. Now I know, I think.

now that's malicious and ignorant.

while 4h may not be everyone's choice it's a practical bid and may cause problems for the opposition. it's harder to play against random preempts. also it's a sound tactic to bid a game and reveal as little as possible info.

[pclayton]

Sambolino, on May 21 2007, 08:58 AM, said:

Quote

Seems to me that in little old lady bridge (where you need 2/3 or 3/5 of the top honors to open 2 of a major) that hand is a typical 4♥ opener, yes?

I was wondering what the original poster meant by 'solid suit'. Now I know, I think.

now that's malicious and ignorant.

while 4h may not be everyone's choice it's a practical bid and may cause problems for the opposition. it's harder to play against random preempts. also it's a sound tactic to bid a game and reveal as little as possible info.

Maybe, but this opening 4♥ call is part of the reason why 5♦ suffers so bad. It should not be included as a typical 4♥ call for a simulation.

The parameters I would set are any 8 card suit with at least two of the top 3 or any 7-4 pattern with the same suit.

Perhaps one outside A or K should be allowed, but I wouldn't allow any hand with two aces. x, AQxxxxxx, Kx, xx would be an absolute max, and x, KQxxxxx, xxxx, x would be a min I think.

[jtfanclub]

Sambolino, on May 21 2007, 11:58 AM, said:

now that's malicious and ignorant.

Well, I apologize if I have offended you. Perhaps I should have called it a rubber bridge style, not LOL bridge. I certainly didn't mean to offend anybody who was little, old, or a lady, let alone all 3!

Quote

while 4h may not be everyone's choice it's a practical bid and may cause problems for the opposition. it's harder to play against random preempts. also it's a sound tactic to bid a game and reveal as little as possible info.

No comment.

[bid_em_up]

5D is nothing but a WAG*, imo.

Have those of you endorsing a direct 5D bid forgotten that you also have a partner?

Nobody has even mentioned the fact that bidding 5D directly might easily get raised to 6 by partner, since he will likely be expecting more from you as well, for a real disaster when 5D was making.

If declarer actually holds his 3-8 count, as suggested, I would expect partner to balance the majority of the time when it is right to do so. Bidding directly to me is a clear violation of partnership discipline. Unless of course, you and your partner have agreed to play these sorts of direct bids (as mikeh suggests/implies he has).

And Mikeh, as a side note, do you or should you alert the 5D call? I think most people would expect you to be holding a much better hand for it. You and your partner are both aware of the fact that you may not have a better hand, aren't the opponents entitled to that information as well? I'm just curious how/if you explain this.

What about the times when 4S or 5C are the only making games? How do you explain this to your teammates? Granted, these hands may be few and far between, but they do exist. Partner can easily be 5-3-0-5, can he not? You may even be cold for 6 of a black suit on this holding but can't reach it because of the 5D bid.

It was also noted that this is board #2 of a 14 board match. I am not certain I would be willing to risk disaster this early in the match.

jmoo.

*WAG = Wild Ass Guess.

[bid_em_up]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 02:08 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on May 21 2007, 02:00 PM, said:

And Mikeh, as a side note, do you or should you alert the 5D call?  I think most people would expect you to be holding a much better hand for it. You and your partner are both aware of the fact that you may not have a better hand, aren't the opponents entitled to that information as well?  I'm just curious how/if you explain this.

oh how these forums have deteriorated.

?

Sorry Justin, if you are attempting to insult me, I simply am not smart enough to understand it.

How is asking a serious question considered to be "deterioration"? I am frequently frustrated when a bid such as the 5D call is made with no alert.. I certainly expect more for the 5D call, although possibly mistakenly.

So I seriously wish to know, if an explanation is given.

If you have a problem with that, I will put it in language you can understand:

Tough *****.

[mikeh]

bid_em_up, on May 21 2007, 02:00 PM, said:

5D is nothing but a WAG*, imo. 

Have those of you endorsing a direct 5D bid forgotten that you also have a partner?

Nobody has even mentioned the fact that bidding 5D directly might easily get raised to 6 by partner, since he will likely be expecting more from you as well, for a real disaster when 5D was making. 

If declarer actually holds his 3-8 count, as suggested, I would expect partner to balance the majority of the time when it is right to do so.  Bidding directly to me is a clear violation of partnership discipline.  Unless of course, you and your partner have agreed to play these sorts of direct bids (as mikeh suggests/implies he has).

And Mikeh, as a side note, do you or should you alert the 5D call?  I think most people would expect you to be holding a much better hand for it. You and your partner are both aware of the fact that you may not have a better hand, aren't the opponents entitled to that information as well?  I'm just curious how/if you explain this.

What about the times when 4S or 5C are the only making games? How do you explain this to your teammates? Granted, these hands may be few and far between, but they do exist.  Partner can easily be 5-3-0-5, can he not? You may even be cold for 6 of a black suit on this holding but can't reach it because of the 5D bid.

It was also noted that this is board #2 of a 14 board match.  I am not certain I would be willing to risk disaster this early in the match.

jmoo.

*WAG = Wild Ass Guess.

You raised a number of interesting points, altho I do wonder why the side question directed to me alone of all of the 5♦ bidders

1. I am a strong advocate of involving partner: it is hobby horse I tend to ride a great deal in these fora.

2. However, and this is true for how I respond to partner and how my regular partners respond to me: we recognize pressure situations and we further recognize that, over preempts, we stretch (within reason) to bid with shortness in the opps' suit. Thus I would expect partner to hold back.. if he bids slam, I'd expect to have a play.

An example would be Kxx Jxxx Kx AQxx.... a hand where you are defending 4♥ and I am making slam if the ♠A is onside, as it rates to be... or are you seriously suggestion that partner reopen??????

3. As for alerting... why the f**k should I do that??? My bid is natural, and, as can be seen from the strong support it received so far, it is within the range that opps should expect...

4. As for a black suit game... let me think... we hold this hand and partner reopens a black suit.... and we PASS???????????

Iff we can make a black suit game, we cannot stop there... unless we had the misfortune to suffer a transient ischemic event or seizure when it became our turn to bid.

5. As for disaster.. I think you'd agree that missing a cold game or slam to defend 4♥ would qualify (to your teammates, at least) as a disaster.

I have written several times that my game became much stronger, I became a much tougher opponent, when I stopped concentrating on disaster avoidance (in the sense of passing here out of fear) and began bidding as if the glass were half-full rather than half-empty. Indeed, I know I am playing badly when I start to relapse, as I do all too often

[bid_em_up]

mikeh, on May 21 2007, 02:17 PM, said:

altho I do wonder why the side question directed to me alone of all of the 5♦ bidders

1. I am a strong advocate of involving partner: it is hobby horse I tend to ride a great deal in these fora.

3. As for alerting... why the f**k should I do that??? My bid is natural, and, as can be seen from the strong support it received so far, it is within the range that opps should expect...

It was addressed specifically to you, because of all the posters who advocated 5D, you are the only one who stated that:

1) you used to play it more conservatively.
2) that you have since incorporated it into your partnership bidding that it not be considered a sound bid (as it was before).
3) Therefore, does your partner have information that your opponents do not?

This is the crux of what I am trying to find out. Or is it considered the norm to bid with "any possible reason to do so" these days? I did not say it needed to be alerted, I was simply asking a question.

Quote

4. As for a black suit game... let me think... we hold this hand and partner reopens a black suit.... and we PASS???????????

If we can make a black suit game, we cannot stop there... unless we had the misfortune to suffer a transient ischemic event or seizure when it became our turn to bid.

Mike, the problem really isn't when partner bids 4S or 5C so much as when he cannot bid either of these over 5D.

Quote

5. As for disaster.. I think you'd agree that missing a cold game or slam to defend 4♥ would qualify (to your teammates, at least) as a disaster.

Sure. And 5D (to me, at least) says this is where we need to play. If the cold game was 4S or 5C, then what? The bottom line is 5 of a black suit is reasonably safe, right? So if partner reopens with 4N, then pulls 5D to 5S, we could infer the 5-5 black suit hand (two places to play). If he reopens with a double, then bids 5S over 5D, we can raise to six with no real worries.

Quote

I have written several times that my game became much stronger, I became a much tougher opponent, when I stopped concentrating on disaster avoidance (in the sense of passing here out of fear) and began bidding as if the glass were half-full rather than half-empty. Indeed, I know I am playing badly when I start to relapse, as I do all too often

It isn't passing out of fear. It is passing because 5D is a bad call, imo.

[han]

I have never seen mikeh write f**k. Refreshing.

[bid_em_up]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 02:17 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on May 21 2007, 02:15 PM, said:

If you have a problem with that, I will put it in language you can understand:

Tough *****.

lol.

5D is a bid that shows diamonds and a possibility to make 5D, a possibility that it's a good save, just a guess that 5D is our best contract. I can't think of a bid that is less alertable. If you think 5D needs to be alerted you should get a clue. I think posts like yours are completely asinine and take away from discussion of bridge hands. I assumed since you are actually a decent bridge player that your post was essentially trolling, but if you are really just so naive that you think 5D should be alertable I apologize.

Since when do you save vul vs. not?

Sure it shows diamonds, but I think that you should actually have some expectation of making 5D to bid it, in this position. Here, I don't think you can actually have that expectation. If it is your partnership tendency or agreement to make "unsound" calls such as this, again, are the opponents entitled to this information or not?

You may not feel that they are, so be it. I was just curious whether they were or not.

But it was simply a question, and certainly no reason for you to start with your arrogant bullshit. Not everyone can be as lucky as you being born into a bridge playing family with a family member who is an expert in their own right, or to be able to work for one of the best players of all time (you do still work for Hamman, don't you?) or as naturally gifted at the game as you appear to be or have access to the top players in the game to bounce questions off of. Not everyone comes by it naturally, some of us have actually had to work hard, both at the game and at real jobs with little vacation time, raising kids, marriages, school, etc. that prevent us from attending the elite events or attend tournaments frequently. Try to remember that sometimes before making stupid statements regarding other peoples questions.

Sorry, but you pissed me off.

[mikeh]

bid_em_up, on May 21 2007, 02:55 PM, said:

It was addressed specifically to you, because of all the posters who advocated 5D, you are the only one who stated that:

1) you used to play it more conservatively.
2) that you have since incorporated it into your partnership bidding that it not be considered a sound bid (as it was before).
3) Therefore, does your partner have information that your opponents do not?

This is the crux of what I am trying to find out.  Or is it considered the norm to bid with "any possible reason to do so" these days? I did not say it needed to be alerted, I was simply asking a question.

Ok, I misunderstood you (as did Justin, for one). But you misunderstood me as well, perhaps because I was not intending to write a treatise on my change in bidding philosophy.

I would always have considered biddng 5♦ with this hand, even in my conservative days. But I probably (read: almost surely) would have talked myself out of it for all the reasons you set out. It is, for me at least, always easy to consider all the negatives about bidding in these situations.

Nowadays, at least when I'm playing well, I tend to bid with this hand-type under pressure. This would be a rock-bottom but clear bid for me. I might well hold a better hand than this, and would always want to... but I consider this dangerous bid mandatory... I would be disappointed and surprised if any of my regular partners were to pass in this situation.

As to knowing partnership style and disclosing it... there are limits to everything and the suggestion that partner should announce to the opps (how is he to do that if not by an alert?...surely you do not suggest a pre-alert at the start of the match...????) is absurd. I am willing to bet that you 'know' things about your partner's tendencies that you do not alert.... nor should you. Now, if an opp were to ask me (were my partner to have made the 5♦ call) about our agreements (explicit or implicit via experience) and I were familiar with this partner in these meta-situations, I would answer that we tend to err on the side of aggression rather than conservatism..... but that doesn't mean that he wouldn't be looking at Ax x AKJxxxx Kxx for example.... I'd bid 5♦ with that hand as well.... as I suspect you would.

[mikeh]

Hannie, on May 21 2007, 03:07 PM, said:

I have never seen mikeh write f**k. Refreshing.

My spell-checker is self-censoring, and I don't know how to spell the real 4 letter word.......

[mikeh]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 03:46 PM, said:

Quote

Not everyone comes by it naturally, some of us have actually had to work hard,

Yes woe is you, I'm sure you had to walk a mile to the bridge club and back in the snow. Meanwhile I never had to work at all and was born endplaying people, advancing to squeezes at 2 months old. Good point.

Walk a mile to the bridge club in the snow?? LUXURY!!!!

When I was a boy, we didn't have bridge clubs.... we didn't even have playng cards. We'd have to cut up the hand diagrams in old newspapers and shuffle the tiny pieces of paper around.... try sorting 13 tiny, smudged, torn bits of paper... we didn't even have sisscors to cut them up neatly!

And to heck with walking...why, most days the blizzard was so strong that we had to hunker in our caves, trying to make out our hand in the flickering light of our smoky fire... and our parents were always trying to use the old bridge columns as fuel!

Try telling the youth of today about the bad old days.... they just don't give us old guys the respect we deserve!

[han]

I'm not as stone age as you Mike, but I agree. People like Justin who never have to work for bridge but just make the winning bids intuitively shouldn't be allowed to post here.

[bid_em_up]

Really Justin, you just continue to prove my point.

The only stupid question is the one that goes unasked.

And while you're at it, maybe you should go back and read and UNDERSTAND what I originally wrote, which was:

"Do you or should you alert the 5D call?".

Notice I did not say that it should or should not be alerted, or what my opinion on it is. But since your partner has information that the opponents do not have, is it your obligation to alert it? Or is it the opponents obligation to inquire about your overcall tendencies? And if they do inquire, what are your obligations in disclosure? These, to me at least, are perfectly reasonable questions from someone who does not have the opportunities to play at the same level as you do. That does not mean I don't belong in this forum, as you seem to be attempting to imply.

I have better things to do than to "troll" BBO forums with questions such as this. If I asked it, I wanted a reasonable answer, and not flames or smart-aleck comments such as the ones you have provided.

Btw, there was another reason why my original question was directed to Mikeh. It is because he is one of the few posters who will actually take the time to answer questions such as this, which helps others who are not at playing at the top levels to understand, instead of giving glib answers or jabs at a poster like you have done here. You may think it is funny or cute to reply in a manner like this.

I happen to find it offensive.

I also think you are mistaken about 5D being unanimous in a Master Solvers bidding panel. If it was 100%, then it should be renamed to Master Minders instead.

But you are entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to mine.

[bid_em_up]

Jlall, on May 21 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

Quote

I also think you are mistaken about 5D being unanimous in a Master Solvers bidding panel.  If it was 100%, then it should be renamed to Master Minders instead. 

But you are entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to mine.

Yes but some opinions are wrong. That is the point of a message board where you discuss things, to figure out which opinion is right, or more right.

You know, originally I was going to write,

"But you are entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong it may be, just as I am entitled to mine."

But then I thought better of it and tried to let it go with a simple statement. But that couldn't satisfy you.

Just because you think you are right and I am wrong, does not make it so. In this case, I am as equally certain that I am correct in 5D is a bad bid as you are that it is the correct bid. So we will just have to agree to disagree.