BBO Discussion Forums: SA-Ita board 27: An expensive non-double - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

SA-Ita board 27: An expensive non-double

#1 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,397
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Odense, Denmark
  • Interests:History, languages

Posted 2007-October-08, 04:11

Scoring: IMP

SA Played 3H (undoubled) in EW down 3, and 3N making in NS


The number of doubled contracts played by SA was quite high I think. Makes sense. Desperate Italians double everything that might go down, and bid stretchy games against which SA take insurance and get doubled. Or something like that. Just my impression after having looked at a few boards.

But the Italians' failure to double this 3H may have costed them the match. +150 was minus six IMPs while +500 would have been +4 IMPs, and assuming that they will bid and make (undoubled) 6♠ on board 32, they lose the match by 6.7 IMPs.

Anybody knows what happened?
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#2 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2007-October-08, 04:19

I think this was a bit of a system failure. As far as I know F-N's third seat 2-level openers are apparently very wide-ranging, could be a standard weak 2 or one of their normal 9-13 openers as here.
Anyway, they bid a grand off cashing AK the board before that. (Their whole sessions was quite unsuccessful, to say the least.)
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#3 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 2007-October-08, 04:31

After winning the RR butler that was kind of disappointing, I don't understand enough about "Turbo" and their slam bidding to know why they didn't avoid 7♥ or even 6♥. Anyway, we'll have a new winner now.

My odds:

USA1 40%
Netherlands 30%
Norway 25%
South-Africa 5%

USA1 are ahead because they have the in theory easier SF draw, but we saw how "easy" they were for Italy. Still I don't expect SA to beat TWO more world class teams.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
My Bridge Systems Page

BC Kultcamp Rieneck
0

#4 User is offline   matmat 

  • ded
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,459
  • Joined: 2005-August-11
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2007-October-08, 04:51

Gerben42, on Oct 8 2007, 05:31 AM, said:

USA1 are ahead because they have the in theory easier SF draw, but we saw how "easy" they were for Italy. Still I don't expect SA to beat TWO more world class teams.

that seems rather condescending toward the south africans, who, I believe, have beaten all of the top 4 teams in the round robin and now beat italy... i'm not saying they will breeze by usa1, but I think maybe, at this point, they deserve a little respect and not to be cast off as a "non-wc" team?
0

#5 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 2007-October-08, 05:13

I didn't say that, I just don't think they will win two more upsets. The other three teams all have players who have "been there" before, either in the Bowl or the Olympiad.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
My Bridge Systems Page

BC Kultcamp Rieneck
0

#6 User is offline   mrdct 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,448
  • Joined: 2003-October-27
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moama, NSW

Posted 2007-October-08, 07:47

If South Africa get past USA1, I think you would probaly need to make them favourites against the winner of Norway-Netherlands; so only one more "upset" is possible.

Trivial question: in the era since the Bermuda Bowl has had a qualifying phase followed by the winners of the qualifying choosing their opponent, how many times has the winner of the qualifying lost their initial KO match?
Disclaimer: The above post may be a half-baked sarcastic rant intended to stimulate discussion and it does not necessarily coincide with my own views on this topic.
I ♦ bidding the suit below the suit I'm actually showing not to be described as a "transfer" for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the concept of a transfer
0

#7 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 2007-October-08, 08:03

I have no idea, just in 1991 two teams bent over backwards to play Iceland, who won the whole thing then.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
My Bridge Systems Page

BC Kultcamp Rieneck
0

#8 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2007-October-08, 12:43

earlier they had opened 2S in third seat on Axxxx and Jxxx.
0
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