[gwnn]

So this happened at the European Junior Pairs.

The format was as follows, the field had been divided first day in two divisions of 35 pairs each. 25 would then qualify in the final from the top division, and 5 from the bottom division. The rest of 40 pairs could then play in the consolation event. Carryovers would apply only for the A final. So we have been playing decent to bad bridge, finding ourselves on 18th out of 35 in the bottom division. Last session (out of 6) we went all out against the field, getting redoubled overtricks, playing 3♥= when field was 2 off in 4♥ (with 25 high) and so on and so forth. That was supposed to be a solid 70% game at the very least, but we got into trouble in a change, which probably meant that we were quite out of contention. I estimated we had about 10% chances for qualification, and then we got to the last change. 2 more boards out of a total of 60. Board one they play 2♠ made 3, earning us 20% or so. The 10% had gone down to at most 1.

So last board

AJxx
Axxx
x
Axxx

2♥-p-?

all red MP's.

I bid 6♥. We were playing against buddies and we had a good laugh when I folded. Only then I realized that this bid was probably thoughtless and irresponsible. After all, we were almost surely not going to qualify and maybe somebody else's qualification was altered because of it. BTW I knew for sure our opps didn't have chances to qualify.

[jtfanclub]

I don't think it matters enough in a matchpoint game to worry about. If your opps get a top (sitting EW), then all EW's lose a point and all NS's gain a point. If they don't compare EW to NS, it doesn't cause any problem, and if they do, it's only a point.

If your opps were in contention, it would be a big deal, of course.

[Codo]

I think this was correct and ethical, no problem at all.

You have the chance of a lucky punch? Use it.

If the buddy gifted you such a contract, well that had been unethical. But so, np.

[helene_t]

The World Champions Pairs in Verona come to mind.

I wouldn't worry about it. Not only because I know you are a nice guy. The thing is, when there is a paranoid as well as a non-paranoid explanation for the choice someone makes, I prefer the non-paranoid one. At least I would like to think I do.

[vang]

did you thought that maybe already partner did something and 4H would be a good contract?

[Rossoneri]

What Roland and jt said.

Nah, you're too nice to be unethical

[MickyB]

did you thought that maybe already partner did something and 2H would be a good contract?

[ASkolnick]

You see, this is where I disagree with many people. You did absolutely nothing unethical or wrong. If your only shot is a 2% chance to make the finals, you are entitled to play for that 2% shot even if it means 98% of the time you are going to fail. As for affecting other pairs, very simple rules:

If one bad call/bad rule/bad board causes the difference between placing and not placing, don't put yourself into that position in the first place.

If a team on the last day of football needs to beat a team by 40 points to have any chance to go to the playoffs, they should:

a) On side kick.
Go for two instead of the extra point every time.

And the team who may lose out by this team doing it or another team getting in. Oh well. Win more games next time.

The opposite of the coin is also If you are already in, don't take any chances. That may mean not competing for a partial since you may go for a number instead and an average minus could get you in.

[jtfanclub]

ASkolnick, on Jul 18 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

You see, this is where I disagree with many people. You did absolutely nothing unethical or wrong. If your only shot is a 2% chance to make the finals, you are entitled to play for that 2% shot even if it means 98% of the time you are going to fail.

I think there are reasonable limits to this, especially in XIMPS. For example, bidding 7NT without looking at your hand because you need a 'huge swing', and then redoubling when it comes back to you. That's just a body slam to everybody playing 'with' you and a huge help to everybody playing against you.

The ACBL, at least, frowns mightily on doing random insane actions based on 'we need to get a big swing'. Certainly I'm not saying this qualifies, and in fact in MPs even if you do just randomly start swinging for the fences before the ball leaves the pitcher's mitt, you aren't doing much harm.

Take Swiss, for example. Third place team playing 2nd, first place team playing 4th. If the fourth place team 'swings for the fences' on the last two boards, they can often turn an 18-12 victory into a 30-0 for the team in first, and there's nothing the guys in 2nd and 3rd can do about it. There has to be some minimum level of bridge to it, unlike in total points where you say "Hey, we need 1050 points to win, guess I'll bid 7".

[skjaeran]

jtfanclub, on Jul 18 2008, 09:24 PM, said:

ASkolnick, on Jul 18 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

You see, this is where I disagree with many people.  You did absolutely nothing unethical or wrong.  If your only shot is a 2% chance to make the finals, you are entitled to play for that 2% shot even if it means 98% of the time you are going to fail.

I think there are reasonable limits to this, especially in XIMPS. For example, bidding 7NT without looking at your hand

That's illegal. Period. Law 7B1(1997):

Quote

Each player counts his cards face down to be sure he has exactly thirteen; after that, and before making a call, he must inspect the face of his cards.

[gwnn]

btw all slam needed were two finesses and 3-3 clubs (or doubleton QT), and of course they were all on. we got a top but to no avail. field was in 2♥+4 or 3♥+3. Game was worth 80% or so.

talk after the round

"AJxx Axxx x Axxx"
"Ah we found that one!"
"Found what?"

[ClaceyJ]

Yes, well, we certainly didn't mind at the table, it did provide the entire England team with some good laughs in the pub afterwards... It did rather sum up the event for us And I guess the fact we edged ahead of you in the B-final proves that karma is real

[brianshark]

Oh, you MADE 6♥? Well done!

A good slam is one that makes.

[ArtK78]

There is absolutely nothing unethical or even remotely wrong in what you did.

As long as you are acting only in your own best interests, you can and should take any bridge action that you believe gives you a better chance of succeeding in the event.

Now, if you were taking this shot in order to help out another pair (your opponents at the table), this would be very wrong.