[bd71]

Scoring: MP

1♦ (1♠) 2♥ (2♠)
P (P) 3♦ (P)
3N (P) 4♦ (P)
5♦ PO

---

Playing in intermediate field (North American Pairs Flight C district finals)
Result: Down 2, 25% board

Who contributed most to the overbidding?

[Jlall]

Well 2H shows about 10+. Occasionally it is stretched for competitive reasons with maybe 6-4 in the reds or so down to about 8. Something like --- AQxxxx Qxxx xxx. But as a general rule it is 10+.

West has 5 points.

[bd71]

West has 5 HCP...but how should the void be valued? Especially after it's revealed that spades is their suit?

[Jlall]

bd71, on Oct 18 2009, 01:06 AM, said:

West has 5 HCP...but how should the void be valued? Especially after it's revealed that spades is their suit?

He can upgrade to a negative double, usually with 5 you would pass.

[EricK]

West's 2♥ is a big overbid, and what caused East to keep driving forward. That being said, I think East's bids were overbids too - his ♠K is wasted, he has no honours in West's suit, he only has 4 of his suit, and his hand is balanced. None of this points to 5♦ (or even 3NT) being makeable when his partner has tried to sign off in 3♦ earlier.

[Mbodell]

bd71, on Oct 17 2009, 09:34 PM, said:

Who contributed most to the overbidding?

I don't think it is close at all.

Easts bids of 3nt and 5♦ may have been a little aggressive, but if West had the hand that his bids was showing, both of those might have worked out fine.

As stated above West has shown 10+ and red cards by bidding 2♥ then 3♦, and the odds of 3♦ making but 3nt not versus the odds of both making might well make 3nt a reasonable gamble.

And once West pulls to 4♦ I'd expect minimum 55 in the reds and a spade void wouldn't be a surprise. Opposite 0553 or 1651 or 0652 or what not 5♦ probably isn't too bad with maybe a ♥ loser and a ♣ loser or 0 ♥ losers and 2♣.

So I'd say blame goes near 100% to West.

As an aside, it seems early for the district qualifications. We are only just over a month from the club qualification period. In my district we haven't even finished all of the unit qualifiers. But I guess each district can be quite different! Good luck if you qualified and consolation if you didn't.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 unless you play NFB, 2H is the first error real error, you have a clear bid
- a neg. X.
#2 3D now showes an inv. strength with 5-4
#3 3NT is clear, one faces 10-12HCP, hearts are stopped, what other bid?
#4 4D is ok, you know you overstated the strength of your hand,
and the strength is due to distribution
#5 5D is ok as well, maybe one can pass 4D, but ...

So can you answer your question by yourself?

And if the player, who is responsible voices any complaints and starts
to argue, I would should him on the spot, if I am his partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[dicklont]

P_Marlowe, on Oct 18 2009, 01:12 PM, said:

And if the player, who is responsible voices any complaints and starts
to argue, I would should him on the spot, if I am his partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

should = shoot?
It sounds the same, but makes more sense.
Notice the irony in "kind regards" now.

[P_Marlowe]

dicklont, on Oct 18 2009, 06:23 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Oct 18 2009, 01:12 PM, said:

And if the player, who is responsible voices any complaints and starts
to argue, I would should him on the spot, if I am his partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

should = shoot?
It sounds the same, but makes more sense.
Notice the irony in "kind regards" now.

Of course "shoot" him ...

They still play with me, because I kill them, while we have a friendly chit chat ...

Not sure which ending nows fits.

[neilkaz]

Off course you got too high and the blame goes 100% to west. He is supposed to have 10 hcp for his 2/1 in comp..OK OK maybe a good 9...but not 5

West can upgrade his hand to the obvious negX and be satisfied but he won't like it if PD thinks he has more HCP and doubles as then he has to pass and hope or run back to ♦.

Easts bids are reasonable assuming he can expect West to hold what he's shown, even though it should be rather clear he's minimum.

100% west who is a clear ace short for his 2♥ bid.

[bd71]

Mbodell, on Oct 18 2009, 05:20 AM, said:

As an aside, it seems early for the district qualifications.  We are only just over a month from the club qualification period.  In my district we haven't even finished all of the unit qualifiers.  But I guess each district can be quite different!  Good luck if you qualified and consolation if you didn't.

I think your district may just play later than others. In the last two years, I have lived/played in two different districts (4 and 14) and both had district finals in early- to mid-October.

As to how we did...59% morning session + 54% afternoon session = ~57% = Not good enough for top 3 and qualifying for national finals. Your consolation is accepted.

[pooltuna]

bd71, on Oct 18 2009, 12:34 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♦ (1♠) 2♥ (2♠)
P (P) 3♦ (P)
3N (P) 4♦ (P)
5♦ PO

---

Playing in intermediate field (North American Pairs Flight C district finals)
Result: Down 2, 25% board

Who contributed most to the overbidding?

Start using -X then you won't have to NFB with such a crappy hand or better yet don't NFB at all

[bd71]

So consensus is clearly that my 2H was the bad bid that started us downhill (in case there was doubt, I am/was West). Point taken, and appropriate apologies will be offered to my partner, with hopes that any of his intentions of "shooting" me will disspate.

What I am missing, however, is how to pinpoint the flaw in my thinking.

I suspect experts use experience and feel in these situations more than crude points counts...but I am no expert and have to rely on such crutches. Given a fit (which we had), I have heard that dummy's void should be valued at as few as 3 points and as many as 5 points. I have used the 5-point guideline for months now, and it hasn't seemed to have burned me yet (I guess until now).

My logic was 5 hcp + 5 for void = 10 = sufficient for 2-level raise. It seems the gap between this logic and the consensus opinion could be based on:

1. the void isn't really worth 5

2. I shouldn't count my full 5 hcp because they may not fit well with partner (especially the KH since partner has effectively denied support there...sadly, I didn't think of this possibility at the table).

3. something else

So back to the experts...is the flaw in my logic based on 1, 2, 3, or a combination?

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Oct 18 2009, 12:36 AM, said:

Well 2H shows about 10+. Occasionally it is stretched for competitive reasons with maybe 6-4 in the reds or so down to about 8. Something like --- AQxxxx Qxxx xxx. But as a general rule it is 10+.

West has 5 points.

perhaps he tried to NFB when he should have -X?

[Jlall]

I would not count anything for your void yet. I mean, by your logic a void is worth 5 with a fit for partner, but in hearts it will be worth 0 (ruffing in your hand doesn't help much when you have the long trumps), and in NT it will be worth 0. You aren't really aiming to get to 5D yet, and you aren't raising diamonds at all.

Also you should only count 5 for a void when you have a very big fit, when you just have an 8 card fit a void is not worth that much. So for diamonds I would just add 3 for the void. But again you aren't raising a minor yet and you need a lot of points to get to 5D anyways, so don't start adding dummy points yet.

[mike777]

In all honesty I think West was confused on how to bid her hand. I do think West tried to do her best.



I think Justin has gone out of his way to really help on this very common problem hand. Thanks

I think the whole discussion about 2h is very very helpful and this is a wonderful post.

[P_Marlowe]

bd71, on Oct 18 2009, 08:52 PM, said:

So consensus is clearly that my 2H was the bad bid that started us downhill (in case there was doubt, I am/was West).  Point taken, and appropriate apologies will be offered to my partner, with hopes that any of his intentions of "shooting" me will disspate.

What I am missing, however, is how to pinpoint the flaw in my thinking. 

I suspect experts use experience and feel in these situations more than crude points counts...but I am no expert and have to rely on such crutches.  Given a fit (which we had), I have heard that dummy's void should be valued at as few as 3 points and as many as 5 points.  I have used the 5-point guideline for months now, and it hasn't seemed to have burned me yet (I guess until now).

My logic was 5 hcp + 5 for void = 10 = sufficient for 2-level raise.  It seems the gap between this logic and the consensus opinion could be based on:

1. the void isn't really worth 5

2. I shouldn't count my full 5 hcp because they may not fit well with partner (especially the KH since partner has effectively denied support there...sadly, I didn't think of this possibility at the table).

3. something else

So back to the experts...is the flaw in my logic based on 1, 2, 3, or a combination?

Hi,

#1 there are different schemas out there, one is a 3-2-1 schema for evaluation of shortages, another is a 5-3-1 schema.
The 3-2-1 schema is fairly konservativ, the 5-3-1 schema is fairly agressive.
You should use those schemas only, if you have discovered a fit, you will have a fit most of the time.
A general advice was to use the 3-2-1 being the hand with the long trumps, the 5-3-1 being the hand with the short trumps, but I personnally
never followed this advice.

#2 you have 5HCP, you have no idea, how good / how badly they are fitting.

#3 If you would just go with raw point count, you are too weak to respond to a 1 level opening, the voild allowes you to upgrade your hand,
so that the hand is worth to make a response.
But that means you basically upgarde the hand to be in the 6-9/10 HCP range, lots of players require a good 10 count for a 2 level response.
If you upgrade the hand to a 2 level response, you are upgrading too much, you upgrade your hand by 2 levels instead of 1 level,
and in the end this is due to the (agreesive) 5-3-1 schema.
Even using this schema you make the 10 only barely.
If you add. distribution points to the evaluation pot, the pot gets bigger instead of 40HCP you will have to deal with 4-5 add. points more in
the pot, i.e. the pot gets inflated, which has the effect that the treshholds for certain bids increase also slightly, since the value of a single point
decreases.

All in all I think, your thinking was ok, but you just went slightly too far.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Phil]

2♥ is an overbid, but I think the poster has the right attitude about things here. I don't think 5♦ is needed, unless they have have an agreement about 4♦ being forcing (should be). Otherwise East bid the hand properly.

NAP Club Qualification ended 8/31/09 in D22 and I believe this is a ACBL-wide requirement. Unit (some districts have waived unit qualifying) and District Qualifying are going on now.