IMp, bid vulnerable games
#1
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:21
Thanks
jb
"100% certain that many excellent players would disagree. This is far more about style/judgment than right vs. wrong." Fred
#2
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:27
-P.J. Painter.
#3
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:30
kenrexford, on Nov 25 2009, 11:27 AM, said:
that works.
#4
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:42
Seriously:
- Bid vul games to the hilt;
- Try to get a plus score when its an obvious part score
- Bid the safer game, not the higher scoring game.
Others can add on.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#5
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:44
jillybean, on Nov 25 2009, 01:21 PM, said:
Thanks
jb
bid V games with 40% expectation of making ...i.e. 3-2 trump break and a finesse
be more conservative with NV game bidding since you need 50% expectation. Be very aware of how exposed you are when you are V vs NV. This translates into very good 2 level minor suit overcalls and very sound preemptive bids...i.e. you open 2♠ you better be able to take 6 tricks in your hand ...i.e.
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#6
Posted 2009-November-25, 12:45
George Carlin
#7
Posted 2009-November-25, 13:29
#8
Posted 2009-November-25, 20:22
Stephen Tu, on Nov 25 2009, 02:29 PM, said:
this is a good one. also, i just continue to bid until opps stop or x
#9
Posted 2009-November-25, 23:31
2) Don't double partials
3) Generally opt to sell out at the 3 level in competitive auctions rather than take the push when it's close
4) Make game
5) Beat game
#10
Posted 2009-November-26, 18:00
"100% certain that many excellent players would disagree. This is far more about style/judgment than right vs. wrong." Fred
#11
Posted 2009-December-08, 04:11
Best to agree that one player can look at the vul, the other just bids normally.
You sometimes get this
1NT (15-17) - 2NT - 3NT
where 2NT was bid on a bad 8 count "because we're vulnerable", accepted by opener on a bad 16 or good 15 count "because we're vulnerable".
In this case, responder can push the boat out if he wishes but opener should bid straight down the middle.
#12
Posted 2009-December-08, 04:43
shevek, on Dec 8 2009, 12:11 PM, said:
where 2NT was bid on a bad 8 count "because we're vulnerable", accepted by opener on a bad 16 or good 15 count "because we're vulnerable".
And I have passed 1NT with bad 10 count.
It is more like that hand which is good should bid aggressively and if both are good then both should bid aggressively. This way you can find the making 23 hcp games while staying out of bad 25 hcp games.
#13
Posted 2009-December-08, 06:34
gwnn, on Nov 25 2009, 07:45 PM, said:
Absolutely.
At matchpoints you generally bid games that have 50% chance or more. At IMPs, you need slightly less when nonvulnerable and more substantially less (38% or such) when vulnerable. This is not a huge difference.
You can stretch a little when accepting partner's invites when vulnerable, but if partner also stretches to invite when vulnerable (say after a 1NT opening, responder stretches to invite with a bad 8-count and and opener stretches to accept with a bad 16-count) then you will end up in too many games that have a lot less than 38% chance.
Here is a suggestion of how to avoid that: agree with partner that invites are not influenced by the scoring and vulnerability. However when deciding whether to accept, of course you are free to take whatever factors you want (also state of the match, abilities of the opponents etc) into account.
#14
Posted 2009-December-08, 08:46
What you gain if both tables take 12 tricks and you bid slam and they did not is exactly what you lose if you take only 11 tricks under the same conditions.

Help
