[eyhung]

Codo, on Jan 4 2010, 12:54 AM, said:

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact.

My opinion is that this ought to win the award for best self-referential quote of the new year.

[eyhung]

BTW, I hate 1NT and I really hate 2D. Enough has been said already about why 2D is bad, but not 1NT. My general rule of thumb : if the hand is in range but lacks potential for a double-stopper, it probably isn't a 1NT bid over 1M if there's any reasonable alternative. Here we do have one: double.

Why do I want a double stop? The opponents will be leading a 5-card suit with plenty of entries to the suit -- you don't get rich at notrump when the opening lead tends to set up 4 tricks for the defense to your 1. So I do not see why we should charge into notrump while we still have multiple playable strains (diamonds, hearts). In general it's harder to get out of notrump than it is to get in.

[rhm]

eyhung, on Jan 4 2010, 03:44 AM, said:

Codo, on Jan 4 2010, 12:54 AM, said:

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact.

My opinion is that this ought to win the award for best self-referential quote of the new year.

Trouble is that most people think their opinion is fact, rather less that it might be dogmatic

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

Maybe there is a difference between Croatia and BBF-land, but my immediate thought was it was more likely to be a question of age and/or skill level.

I think most players at my local club (England) would not double with this hand because they have learned that a dbl shows a 4-card hearts. Some would avoid 1NT because it shows 16-18. I would attribute this more to skill level, or having been taught bidding theory long ago, than to being English. English BBF posters are more likely to dbl, or maybe bid 1NT, but certainly not bid 2♦.

By the same token, I think most of those players at my Dutch club who would not overcall 2♦ would give as reason that the hand is too strong - not that the suit is too weak or that there is a better alternative. Again, I would expect Dutch BBF posters not to bid 2♦ either, but for the right reason.

[gwnn]

it would be more than shocking to me if anybody in the top 100 players of the world bid 2♦. top 100 according to any reasonable criterion.

[Rev Dino]

jdonn, on Jan 2 2010, 11:32 AM, said:

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

If any knowledge about stochastic process in probability theory...

some facts:

S fit 0,5 %
C fit 22%
D fit 66 %
H fit 22%
double fit 24%
no fit 12%

more-less

9 cards D fit is more probable then 8 cards C or H

opp have S fit 74%

Let me also try to answer on: "it would be more than shocking to me if anybody in the top 100 players of the world bid 2♦. top 100 according to any reasonable criterion. ", gwnn's from yesterday

DD analisys on 4000 boards number of tricks for:

opp:
5,19 7,68 5,64 4,55 6,19 NT, S, H, D, C

you:
6,93 5,00 7,00 8,13 6,49 NT, S, H, D, C

In 20,8 % they have 1S sharp but you at least have:
9 tricks in D in 52% and 9 tricks in any (including D) 67%

In 24,6 % they have 2S sharp but then you have at least:
8 tricks in D in 66% and 8 tricks in any (including D) in 80%

Statistics will tell that D fit probability is 54,4% but that's the difference between statistics and stohastics 66% above mentioned. I generated that first two seats do not have an opening, neither preemptive bids on any level.

And so...and so...and so...giving us that BY FAR the best CHANCE to have a fit and make contract for you is 2/3 D. Second best is 1NT, what is hard to expect to be bided by your partner if you double (what 50% of the members here voted).


Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

Thank you!

[phil_20686]

Rev Dino, on Jan 5 2010, 03:59 AM, said:

And so...and so...and so...giving us that BY FAR the best CHANCE to have a fit and make contract for you is 2/3 D. Second best is 1NT, what is hard to expect to be bided by your partner if you double (what 50% of the members here voted).


Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

Thank you!

Yes, but these statistics do not tell the whole story, as many times a t/o double will still lead to playing in diamonds. Many people will play that

1s x 2s 2n

shows two 4 card suits for example, and then they will always find a 9 card fit if they have one. Also, the statistics will be heavily biased for when you ahve a ten card fit in diamonds which could make a gazillion tricks, but in this case, the t/o double also gets you to diamonds.

Further, one assumes that one is playing imps, in which case the chance is making game in hearts rather than diamonds is heavily weighted, as the chance of ten tricks in hearts is much greater than 11 tricks in diamonds.

Not only this, but you lose ground in the area of sacrifices when tyour 2/1 overcalls can have such a low ODR, partner may well now choose to sacrifice in what he things is a ten card fit when you are beating 4s by several tricks, or, just as bad, will not sacrifice when you have more of a distributional hand in case you ahve this hand and are beating 4s.

Further, making a t/o double maximises the chance of partner finding a penalty double later if the oppoents decided to be a little frisky. [this is a small thing in this example - you have too mcuh extra strength for this to be likely]

My own feeling is that thsi hand is a clear double at imps. I would still double at MP, but i expect it to be close now, as there will be many 5-3 fits and leads that save a trick, however here i am also happy with a heart lead at MP.

[bluecalm]

My way to improve my intuition in such situations is to generate deals with 1S opener and our hand as 2nd to act. Then I just go hand after hand looking at all 4 hands and see how different actions fares. Sometimes it's not clear after many hands. Sometimes it's too difficult to predict what would happen to draw conclusions. Sometimes it's obvious which action is better.
I agree that maybe you will land in worse partscore often after a double. Maybe even 2♦ leads more often to the best partscore (but I think it's not true), so what ? You will have many disasters which costs 10's of imps like not finding 4♥ game or 9+card fit when they preempt while disasters (like missing 5D game) after a double are rare.

I don't believe anybody who tried this exercise can believe in 2♦ overcall anymore.
Of course different people will draw different conclusions because of their style. I play that 2D overcall almost promies 6 card suit. Overcalling on 5card suit is rare. Partner of the overcaller will be very happy to go to 5level with good distribution and 4+support. Opposite this hand he will make phantom sacrifice quite often. Even taking into account all this I am sure that if you just go hand after hand and see on your own eyes how dbl fares comparing to 2D you will just hate it as most people on this forum do.

[jdonn]

Statistics in the hand of someone who doesn't know how to draw conclusions is a dangerous thing. Here are some facts back at you.
- Double does not prevent you from playing in diamonds!
- Overcalling diamonds is the only way to possibly reach a 5 or 6 card fit in any suit.
- Overcalling diamonds is the most likely way to go for a number (well ok that one's not a fact but I'm sure it's true).
- The two most likely strains for game are notrump and hearts, and 2♦ is the worst option to reach them.

Really how can you say it's most likely we have a diamond fit therefore it's right to bid diamonds? There is so much more to it. I would probably dispute more but I don't understand half of what you wrote, sorry.

[eyhung]

Rev Dino, on Jan 5 2010, 01:59 AM, said:

[Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

The game would be quite simple if the goal was to find your longest combined trump fit. Obviously 2♦ is the call that gives you the best chance of finding a fit -- it is your longest suit. But remember, you get a big bonus for games. Overcalling diamonds is unlikely to get you to game when the enemy can open the bidding and you do not have shortness. This is why the potential reward for 2♦ is small but the potential risk (getting doubled in 2♦ or missing game in hearts or notrump) is large. Double has low risk (you are offering partner a choice of 4 strains (notrump, hearts, diamonds, clubs) and has great potential reward because it allows partner to bid game in 2 strains.

[jdonn]

eyhung, on Jan 5 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

Obviously 2♦ is the call that gives you the best chance of finding a fit -- it is your longest suit.

Come on now, you know that is not necessarily true.

[eyhung]

jdonn, on Jan 5 2010, 09:32 AM, said:

eyhung, on Jan 5 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

Obviously 2♦ is the call that gives you the best chance of finding a fit -- it is your longest suit.

Come on now, you know that is not necessarily true.

Ugh, I noticed that mistake and was about to edit it but you reply way too fast. Brain still hasn't woken up, apparently.

[jdonn]

I'm like a hawk. And hey that was 10 minutes! But yes obv you are smarter than that, get your coffee.

[mikeh]

Quote

Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

You are asking the wrong question.

Bridge is NOT about finding your best fit. It is not even finding the safest contract.

It isn't always even about maximizing your scores by taking action that, in the long run, will result in the best outcome!

For example, in a short match against opps you rate to beat, you may settle for a second-best action because the best action also carries with it the highest variance....if it turned out wrong, you may lose so badly on the hand as to ruin your chances of winning, which were, absent disaster, good.

But VP scoring would change that approach as well, since you may want to maximize your vp total out of concern for other teams...not the one you are playing but other, competitive teams winning vps in other matches.

My opinion is that the great majority of real life experts would choose double on this hand because:

1. if we have game, double is more likely to find it than a 2♦ overcall
2. if the hand belongs to the opps, double is more likely to avoid a penalty double than a 2♦ overcall is
3. if we belong in a partscore, diamonds may be the most likely denomination, but EITHER hearts or clubs could be better or the same...by doubling we bring both those suits into the mix, while 2♦, on most partscore hands, will end up committing us to that suit, for good or ill.

(I don't mean to say that these are the only relevant issues, but I suspect that every expert would agree that these are 3 relevant issues...there are lesser issues such as partner going wrong on defend/save hands or being influenced on future hands by seeing what you bid 2♦ on this time...you are increasing the variance of that action....altho the counter is that double is hardly prototypical either).

Note that all of these are expressed in terms of 'more likely'.

No expert would suggest that double will ALWAYS work more effectively than 2♦

The truth is that this is an awkward hand to bid. It is 'wrong' for all 4 plausible calls. Too much to pass safely. Diamonds are wrong for an overcall. Spades and the overall strength are too weak for safety with 1N, and double delivers the wrong shape. This 'nothing quite fits' is a huge part of bridge altho it is rarely discussed in bridge bidding texts, where the tendency is to show hands that 'fit' the suggested action.

Part of becoming an expert is to acquire the judgment that allows a player to consistently pick the action that combines safety with aggression, sensitive to the form of scoring, the state of the match/event and the quality of the opps.

It seems to me, to the extent that I am an expert, that double is significantly the best choice of the 4 plausible actions for all of the reasons set out above.

[zenko]

I find this hand quite interesting for several reasons, I am 100% sure i would not ever bid 2D with it, but I feel this hand belongs to "I know it is not right, but.." category i.e, I think many players who should know better will in the heat of the battle reach for 2D card.

Another interesting angle is once when we decided 2D is not the right call, what is the correct way to approach the selection of an alternative? Dble on the first glance seems the best, but I am not comfortable with it at all, by trying to have as many options open, you really limit your ability to take advantage of any. The bottom line is that after dble it is very likely that your bidding troubles just begun, especially at MPs.

Bidding troubles on this board, that is, I will not even go into how much you will pay for it down the road, once your partner pegs you for a "mushy" doubler.

[Trumpace]

zenko, on Jan 5 2010, 02:08 PM, said:

Bidding troubles on this board, that is, I will not even go into how much you will pay for it down the road, once your partner pegs you for a "mushy" doubler.

Why?

Partner will know you had a clear problem on this hand and chose the option which you thought best. Why would that peg you as a 'mushy' doubler?

[bluecalm]

Quote

once your partner pegs you for a "mushy" doubler.

I don't want to think about what partner will peg me for if I overcall 2♦ with that...

[zenko]

I like to believe that my partners double with less than 4 cards in the other major only if they are very strong, or they have a hand very suitable for playing in 4-3 from my side, and neither of those apply here. What I am saying you either use the bid that describes your hand the closest (1NT), or stay out of it (at least for now) and pass. Doubling and hoping that the partner will say somehow divine that you do not have support for neither of his two 4 cards suits (if he has say 3424, which is quite possible) strikes me as bit too much.

[Little Kid]

Most players seem to prefer Double over 1NT. Although I don't particularly feel very strongly about 1NT or X, I picked 1NT at the time I was reading the post and felt it was better. What you think will or will not happen if you bid 1NT? When will double work better than 1NT? I'm not trying to advocate the 1NT bid, just trying to understand why it is better to double.

These were my thoughts when I saw the problem:

- Strength:1♣ was opened in 3rd seat (possibly not full opener), my honours are very nicely placed though! The Kx, AQ AQ honour cards will probably carry their weight, making game a possibility even opposite a passed hand. The extra 5card ♦ suit adds some further value to the hand.
I didn't feel comfortable I can show my strength safely if I start with a double so we could miss game. With the game bonus in mind, I liked 1NT because I get my overall strength of my chest immediately. In the worst case scenario of it getting doubled, I can still run to 2♦.

- Shape Unfortunately I only have 1♠ stopper as well as ♠ shortage. The likelihood of the opponents raining down a bunch of spades before I can set up ♦s (or another suit) seems quite real, especially with opener having the points to get in to play them. If I bid 1NT and LHO passes, I rate partner to have a (partial) ♠ stopper at least some of the time (JTx/T9xx/Qxx).
Hopefully LHO will save me from some hopeless 1NT contracts by raising to 2♠. The problem is that if he does, I will wish I had doubled to tell partner about my ♠ doubleton. We may well belong in 3♣/3♦/3♥ but with no way of getting there now. For the purpose of getting to the right strain, double seemed to show this hand much more effectively than 1NT.
Although you may end up in 2♣/2♥ contracts after a double when 1NT scores better?

What did I miss that makes double the prevailing choice? Maybe you just need to have played these kind of hands to know double is right or maybe I am just way too optimistic about making game!

[Jlall]

When I read this, I coulda sworn the shape was 2452...was it edited?