Help
Gave the problem to a friend of mine - a strong player.
Easy 4♥ for him.
To game or not to game...
#21
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,727
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2008-March-06, 13:11
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#22
- 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-March-06, 13:22
Looks like a pass of 3♥ for me. My regular partners are aggressive players. They would open most hands that make game reasonable and, failing that, they would probably jump to 4♥ on most of the rest of them. So the 3♥ bid may have been a stretch.
I don't want to hang partner. And, quite frankly, despite all of the controls this hand is not as good as it might appear to be. It is a 7 loser hand. It is unlikely that pard will have a hand that can cover 4 of my losers given that he is a passed hand and he did not jump to 4♥.
I don't want to hang partner. And, quite frankly, despite all of the controls this hand is not as good as it might appear to be. It is a 7 loser hand. It is unlikely that pard will have a hand that can cover 4 of my losers given that he is a passed hand and he did not jump to 4♥.
#23
- Group: FD TEAM
- Posts: 2,735
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Nashville, TN
- Interests:Motorsports, cricket, disc golf, and of course - bridge. :-)
Posted 2008-March-06, 13:45
As nuts as I am about getting to game, I'm swiftly passing in tempo. Pard is not going to have coverage.
"Champions aren't made in gyms, champions are made from something they have deep inside them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have to have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill. " - M. Ali
#24
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,625
- Joined: 2006-October-04
- Location:Denmark
Posted 2008-March-06, 22:01
The more I think about this the more I get convinced that pass is right.
Michael Askgaard
#25
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,962
- Joined: 2007-September-14
- Location:Australia
- Interests:The Universe, Traveling, Squash, and Scandinavia.
Posted 2008-March-07, 01:57
I'm going to pass
- Andy -
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#26 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-March-08, 03:22
I thought this was an auto 4H but I also liked pclaytons arguments about the xxx spades. I think I put partner on a stronger range than most of you (I would expect something like 9 or 10 points if pard only has 4 hearts, and something like 8ish points with 5 hearts in general). I now think its close, but I would still bid game (in a lot of constructions the spot cards end up mattering; when it's that close for a game I like not to go low).
#27
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2008-March-08, 03:25
I was pard, I had 8 count with four hearts which I still think is normal, and I still think raising to game is hanging partner lol. But the real question is what should partner have for 3♥.
Sorry but most of the arguments to bid game which seem to be essentially "bid game now, think later" are not exactly convincing me!
Sorry but most of the arguments to bid game which seem to be essentially "bid game now, think later" are not exactly convincing me!
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#28 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-March-08, 03:30
jdonn, on Mar 8 2008, 04:25 AM, said:
I was pard, I had 8 count with four hearts which I still think is normal, and I still think raising to game is hanging partner lol. But the real question is what should partner have for 3♥.
So you were minimum for your bid, and your pard was minimum for forcing to game. Getting to game with 23+fit after they have preempted, or even 3N with 22/23 is not abnormal at all. It pays to be aggressive in bidding over 3 of a major since sometimesyou are just converting down 1 into down 2, and sometimes partner has a max rather than a min and you can make a game.
If you were to look at this from just a HCP point of view I think 15 with a 4 card fit is an "obvious" game bid and its only from looking more deeply and realizing how bad being 3-2 is in the pointed suits that makes it close. Even if 8 is normal, so is 10 (I don't suppose you're going to jump to game with 10 and just 4 hearts, though you probably would with 5 hearts), and you can't afford to miss a game.
#29
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2008-March-08, 04:39
There's another factor that no one has mentioned: partner will tend to look more favourably on spade honours than on club honours, so if he has stretched to bid 3♥ our hands are less likely to fit well. Against that, if he has been conservative in not bidding 4♥, it may be because his honours are in clubs rather than spades.
I would expect partner to bid 3♥ with as little as Kxx KJxxx xx xxx, where game is awful. With this shape, for game to be reasonable we'd need either ♣KQ (pclayton's example) or one club honour and the ace of spades. Even Axx Kxxxx xx Qxx makes only a mediocre game, and with as much as that he might have bid game himself.
With only four hearts he should have rather more in high cards, but in order to gauge the significance of this we need to know what a responsive double would show. I believe that there are two styles: some people play that the double promises both majors; others that it shows any hand with two four card suits, and therefore includes 3424 and 2434.
Playing the looser style of responsive doubles, when partner has only four hearts he'll have either 3433 or x4x4 with bad clubs. Assuming that the opponents are bidding in American, any hand where partner has three diamonds is quite bad news, because it suggests (I think) that opener has only three diamonds and therefore four hearts. Obviously, four bad clubs opposite would also be undesirable.
If the normal action with 3424 is to bid 3H, I think Axx KJxx xx Qxxx would be a maximum, and again game is poor. As pclayton said, C10 makes a big difference on many hands.
I would expect partner to bid 3♥ with as little as Kxx KJxxx xx xxx, where game is awful. With this shape, for game to be reasonable we'd need either ♣KQ (pclayton's example) or one club honour and the ace of spades. Even Axx Kxxxx xx Qxx makes only a mediocre game, and with as much as that he might have bid game himself.
With only four hearts he should have rather more in high cards, but in order to gauge the significance of this we need to know what a responsive double would show. I believe that there are two styles: some people play that the double promises both majors; others that it shows any hand with two four card suits, and therefore includes 3424 and 2434.
Playing the looser style of responsive doubles, when partner has only four hearts he'll have either 3433 or x4x4 with bad clubs. Assuming that the opponents are bidding in American, any hand where partner has three diamonds is quite bad news, because it suggests (I think) that opener has only three diamonds and therefore four hearts. Obviously, four bad clubs opposite would also be undesirable.
If the normal action with 3424 is to bid 3H, I think Axx KJxx xx Qxxx would be a maximum, and again game is poor. As pclayton said, C10 makes a big difference on many hands.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn