[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Jul 11 2004, 09:57 PM, said:

I don't think it's clear to jump to game on that 4414 hand. After all, you're opposite a passed pard who failed to open 2H and rates to have club shortness (thus making it likely he streched to bid 3H).

But ok, suppose pard bids 4 with

AT9x <--- swapped jack to 9
KQxx
x
xxxx

I go 1 down in 4H but they're cold for 11 tricks in clubs, so...

Also, with Qxx ATxxx Axxx x, pard could perhaps have doubled.

If you bid 4H opposite the posted hand, do not expect to play them undoubled
(BTW, there are 10 tricks in clubs not eleven with the diamond ruff).

But the point is that bidding 3H means play partner for the perfect hand, a common mistake to be avoided.

Sometimes passing will lead to a poor matchpoints result (like in the case you just presented= 4HX-1 = -100 vs 3C+1 = - 130), but it is much better to recriminate on a single hand out of many, but having followed the agreements with pard than the opposite.
Most other times your discipline will earn you a good result, and keep harmony with partner: your pard will know more precisely what to expect when you do bid; if your bid may range from 7 to 9 loser, your pard will be stuck all the time.
Discipline is the key to take good decision when you are at a high level and do not have the room to explore further the potential of the hands.

In the long run, sticking to precise agreements and deviating only in really close situations (this one not being one of them) earns the well-deserved unconditional trust and respect of partner.

Sorry to seem insisting, it's not a personal thing but I do believe this should be clear in a beginner-intermediate forum.

[luke warm]

whereagles, on Jul 11 2004, 10:01 PM, said:

Quote

If a pard bids with this hand, I will never say "I'd bid this way too". Probably I would not get upset, but I'd spend at least one hour of our next post mortem to explain to him- very nicely - why bidding anything with that hand is hopelessly wrong.

I don't think it's a good idea to convince pard his decision was "hopelessly wrong", when he tried to do his best in a difficult situation. If something, I'd tell him he was "a bit over-optimistic". Later his own judgement would assimilate the learnings.

Besides, if dummy comes up with

AJTx
KQxx
x
xxxx

3H is far from hopeless

i agree with this, and i'd like to add that IF i told partner anything at all it'd be in private... never ever at the table, in front of the ops

and chamaco, i'm not disagreeing with you about the necessity for partnership understandings, only with the 'i won't forgive' part... it sounds very much like you're saying you've never made a bidding mistake, one that (at the table, at that time) you felt (judged) to be correct... not one, maybe, you'd repeat, but one that "felt right" at the time

to me it's not quite logical to say a decision was 'hopelessly wrong' if, in fact, it was correct (that time)... maybe say something like, "it did work out that time, but it tends to undermine p'ship trust... it might be better to bid according to our agreements in the future, for both of us, so that we can always trust one another's bids"

[the hog]

Chamaco, on Jul 12 2004, 01:04 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jul 11 2004, 02:50 PM, said:

3H may be undisciplined and horrible for partnership trust and all that, but you know what? I have the feeling it's the winning bid. I prefer to play the hand now and apologize later, than being drowned with remorse for failing to bid 3H when it was the good move.

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something. If it went

(1C) pass (3C) pass
pass ??

wouldn't you balance 3H now? Why not doing the same here?

No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.
I do not like to bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

But I would be more tempted at MP than the hand we are discussing.
The situation is VERY different: in this case (1C-p-3C) we know they have a fit and we have more reasons to fight. After the 3C opening preempt and all pass we have no idea if they have a fit or not.



Besides, I prefer to lose one board than one partner.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something.

Put down this way, this is a wrong concept.
At MP you compete violently for the partscore if you are sure opps have a fit, and especuially at the 2 level.
The old adage "the 3 level belongs to the opponents" often holds true.
Besides, the point is to compete when you think it is right: here, even in those cases where 3H makes, yout pard will raise to 4 because he will think your hand is stronger.

It is lunacy to expect partner pass our balancing if he holds an opening hand: he is supposed to bid game if he holds an opening hand that was not strong enough to bid over 3C.

If he does not hold that hand, and he is weaker, RHO will double because he has 14/15 + hcp in misfit with pard.
Bidding 3H is against odds: you may hit a lucky hand once every 20 hand like these, but you lose 19 out of 20 hands and break ptship trust.

Discipline may make you lose one board once in a while at MP, but will win many other boards and will be respectful of parttner.

This is a very important concept here in a Beginner-intermediate forum.

I wouldn't bid on this hand either Mauro over (1C) P (3C). The problem is not so much that 3H may be the right spot, rather it is that you are unlikely to be able to play 3H. Partner is far more likely to bid 3NT or 4H IF 3H had been right because he will not expect this rubbish in your hand.

When 3H is not right, you are going down a lot. The downside of operating with 3H on this hand is far too great.
One final point - to hope partner turns up with KQxx of H is akin to hoping you will win the lottery. You do have 6H after all. Hx is somewhat more reasonable.

[Chamaco]

luke warm, on Jul 12 2004, 12:11 AM, said:

it sounds very much like you're saying you've never made a bidding mistake, one that (at the table, at that time) you felt (judged) to be correct... not one, maybe, you'd repeat, but one that "felt right" at the time

No no I am not saying that.
If it sounds like that, then I have chosen the wrong words, sorry for that.

What I am saying is that I believe that biding is a very very very poor choice here, not a matter of judgment and that when this happens, I want my partner to know it (not yelling at him, telling it very nicely, if he is a listening partner).

I will repeat it for the last time, and Ron has posted the same concept as well: if your pard passes 3H here he will be broke and wwe'll go for a number; if he has something useful he'll raise to 4H and we'll go down.
On average you are bound to minus more than their club partscore more often than not, AND quite often we'll be severely penalized.
This should be made very clear in an intermediate- beginners forum and should be very clear to any experienced bridge player.

Bidding here shows one of 2 things:

- having no clue of this bidding sequence: in this case i will be very nice to explain this to my partner; I am always ready to explain the reason of a very poor chice to a partner who tried to do his best;

- if the bidder is a good bridge player, it just means he plays only with his own cards and does not intend bridge as a partnership game, not thinking of what partner will do, no respect of partnership. The sequence is obvious. A good player knows that it is impossible to stop in 3H if pard has a decent hand.
I expect him to apologize even if the bid turns out well, if he does that, no problem at all.


Bidding here is like passing a 4NT ace ask by pard, or reversing with 11 hcp because it breaks a basic agreement. What would you do if your pard passes your 4NT ace ask ? You would probably explain to him very nicely that he has no clue of what he did . If he insist that it is the right thing and that he is a good bridge player the discussion may become interesting .
I would do the same.

Finally:
I always make mistakes, but I do apologize when I do them, Luke.
But in my experience, the kind of players who like these bids never apologize.
Unfortunately, the kind of people who do this bid usualy grossly overestimate not only the value of their hands but also the quality of their own play and bids ).
They lack humbleness: if you tell them (aways nicely and with a smile) to go and study the books on these bidding sequences (there are books quite fine on this) they'll just say that they do not need books, that's theory but real bridge is something else: the typical attitude of people who do not want confrontation.
Most of the time they'll be arrogant instead of apologizing, even if your observations on their bad bids are told very nicely and with a smile. They will be arogant because they will not accept that you teach them nicely what is the right bid because that woul mean to accept the evidence that they bid like a real beginner.
But that is the plain truth: they bid like a beginner.
Many of them put "expert" on profile, perhaps mistaking this term with "experienced".

But maybe you are luckier than me in your occasional partnerships.

(PS- to avoid any misunderstanding: I do not believe it is the case of helene_t. The simple fact she posted the hand shows that she is willing to verify te correctness of a choice she made)

[helene_t]

The good news is that p had a good 6-card spades. The bad news is that he first bid 3NT (I dono why) and then doubled them in 4♣ (he rightly assumed I would have more defensive values). Defending 3♣ would be some 25%, this was a 0%.

[whereagles]

Hum.. exactly what me feeling was telling me: "Selling out to 3C is bound to give me a bad score"

You got a bad score anyway, but at least a risk was taken to improve your chances. And if pard had bid 3S...

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Jul 12 2004, 08:20 AM, said:

Hum.. exactly what me feeling was telling me: "Selling out to 3C is bound to give me a bad score"

You got a bad score anyway, but at least a risk was taken to improve your chances. And if pard had bid 3S...

yes but there is no way to stop in 3H even when it i the right spot . That's the whole point.

And as i told, better risk the occasional 25% at MP but keep agreements correct.

Besides, we do not know the hand of pard (6 good spades).
It is likely the 25% scorec comes by not opening weak 2 this hand or not overcalling by pard.
This is where the postmortem shd focus, not on balancing with this hand.

[EarlPurple]

If I did bid 3♥ here it is clearly a competitive bid and not an invitation for partner to go on and bid more. If I am not allowed to compete part-score because my partner will punish me by raising, then it is me who is playing with the wrong partner. I obviously do not have an opening bid because I didn't open the first time.

By the way, I would expect for that sequence a hand with 7 hearts and most of the values outside the suit, thus not a good pre-empt in front of partner.

This hand may justify passing then balancing into 3♥:

♠A9
♥J976532
♦KJx
♣x

Ok, you might decide sometimes to open 2♥ or 3♥ with that hand. I'd probably open 2♥ on it, but passing them coming in later is not unreasonable.

[Chamaco]

EarlPurple, on Jul 12 2004, 09:56 AM, said:

This hand may justify passing then balancing into 3♥:

♠A9
♥J976532
♦KJx
♣x

Ok, you might decide sometimes to open 2♥ or 3♥ with that hand. I'd probably open 2♥ on it, but passing them coming in later is not unreasonable.

Earl, the hand you posted is a 7 loser hand, way stronger than the original hand. I agree on balancing 3H with the hand you posted.

I would expect a good partner to reopen with such a hand.

The original posted hand is a 9 loser hand, it differs by 2 tricks, and it is not a small difference as you obviously know.

I am not arguing with balancing with disributional values, I argue with the distributional strength of the original hand, abnormally weak even for balancing.

[whereagles]

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something

Of course, if I knew this particular pard was bound to take 3H too seriously, I'd certainly pass. Bidding 3H does require an experienced partner in front, who knows better than burying me for over-competing

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Jul 12 2004, 01:31 PM, said:

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something

Of course, if I knew this particular pard was bound to take 3H too seriously, I'd certainly pass. Bidding 3H does require an experienced partner in front, who knows better than burying me for over-competing

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:
♠A9
♥J976532
♦KJx
♣x

Is it taking too seriously?
This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards.
Regardless of the experience of your pard

the hand posted by helene_t is 2 tricks weaker than this one

[luis]

Pass, I think that bidding may win in 10% of the cases, in the other 90% either pd or RHO will bid something that we may not like at all.
Maybe RHO is "fishing" and that combined with a "heavy" 3♣ opening bid might indicate that they have game and didn't bid it. Looking at my hand I think they can make 3N or my pd is sleeping.

[whereagles]

Chamaco, on Jul 12 2004, 02:52 PM, said:

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:
♠A9
♥J976532
♦KJx
♣x

Is it taking too seriously? This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards. Regardless of the experience of your pard

Probably it is, yes. With that hand I might just manage to scrap up a 1H opener The trouble with "book standards" is they deal mostly with clear-cut situations, and disregarding scoring methods and table presence.

Of course, I expect 3H to carry us overboard in many cases... BUT... (and this is the whole point)... since I'm booked for a near-zero if I sell out to 3C, I might as well "try" something.

Technically, 3H is probably a wrong bid. It definitely is at imps, but at matchpoints things are different, and it might be just what you need to go from bottom to top (as was the case).

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Jul 12 2004, 02:39 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Jul 12 2004, 02:52 PM, said:

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:
♠A9
♥J976532
♦KJx
♣x

Is it taking too seriously? This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards. Regardless of the experience of your pard

Probably it is, yes. With that hand I might just manage to scrap up a 1H opener The trouble with "book standards" is they deal mostly with clear-cut situations, and disregarding scoring methods and table presence.

Of course, I expect 3H to carry us overboard in many cases... BUT... (and this is the whole point)... since I'm booked for a near-zero if I sell out to 3C, I might as well "try" something.

Technically, 3H is probably a wrong bid. It definitely is at imps, but at matchpoints things are different, and it might be just what you need to go from bottom to top (as was the case).

In book standards they refer to both IMPS and MP scoring.
A 9-loser hand is below std even for MP.
An 8 loser hand may be a MP stretch (a 1 trick stretch).
A 2 trick stretch is definitely a poor bid even at MP and even when it works, if the percentage of success is below 30%.

[whereagles]

Well, I agree with all you say... BUT my instinct told me "bid 3H", and 'he' was right

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Jul 12 2004, 04:25 PM, said:

Well, I agree with all you say... BUT my instinct told me "bid 3H", and 'he' was right

LOLL alright, when such kind of arguments start to come up, it reminds me of the last debate I had with my ex-girlfriend
And I had promised not to fall for this debates anymore

[Cave_Draco]

Interesting...

Quote

Nobody cares anymore about side 4-card majors when preempting. I don't think pard is entitled to draw that inference unless your agreements specifically forbid the side spades.

And

Quote

The good news is that p had a good 6-card spades

So, I have the freedom to bid 3♥ and partner will know that I probably have ♠ support,
The old-fashioned rule about not bidding a Weak Two with 4-cards in the other major... I think I will stick with that rule... mostly,


I agree with Chamaco on many of his posts, in my experience there are few things that confuse a beginner more than an undisciplined partner.
However,

Quote

But that is the plain truth: they bid like a beginner.

Give me a beginner, everytime!


Finally, with respect to MP...

Quote

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something

To score 50% over two hands? 25% + 75% OR 0% + 100%?
Sometimes it is best just to take your lumps!

Dragon Rule of MP scoring: It takes two tops to overcome a bottom.

[jtfanclub]

I'm an intermediate, so don't take what I say seriously.

I had the same thing come up, except it was P (2D) P (P). Switch the diamonds and clubs on the original hand, and it's close enough not to matter.

My rationalization was "Unless somebody dropped an ace on the floor, partner has to have a trap pass". So I bid 2H, and my partner bid 3NT. My heart sank into the floor, but sure enough, partner had 18hcp with 5 diamonds AQT or somesuch, and we made it.

I think the real question is, what did your partner's pass show? Your partner almost certainly has a balanced opening count...would he be more likely to double with 13 hcp or 16? In my case, I knew my partner would double with a 12-15 count, so he had to have either 16+ or 11-, and with my hand it couldn't be the 11-. With a different partner I play with, I would have passed.

In short, with a regular partnership, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer. It just depends upon how likely your partner is to trap pass. With a new partner, I pass without hesitation- 3H may be the right bid but if it goes wrong partner will never trust me again.

P.S. I have GOT to see this hand with 6 spades that passed the 3C bid. I mean, if he bid 3NT he's got to have 16 hcp or so, so why in the world did he pass?

[Chamaco]

Quote

I had the same thing come up, except it was P (2D) P (P).  Switch the diamonds and clubs on the original hand, and it's close enough not to matter.

At the 2 level, it's totally another matter, especially at MP it is almost mandatory to compete strongly for te partscore to avoid lettimng them play at the 2 level.
Besides, if you compete at the 2 level, you are *much much much* less likely to be doubled
The same does not hold at the 3 level.
The obvious risk here is that RHO has 14/15 hcp stacked in misfit and has nowhere to go.

Quote

I think the real question is, what did your partner's pass show?

This is a good question.
But the main question is what will be par'd choice if you reopen.
E.g. if he has a minimum opener (say 13-14 hcp) and 3-4 card support, should he bid game over your reopening at the 3 level ?
In standard bridge, yes, even if you are a passed hand, even at matchpoints.

The corollary of this is that if you reopen with 9-loser, your pard will have to guess every time if passing misses a good game or if bidding on misses a good partscore.
If instead you are disciplined, you accept the occasional bad results, you avoid the much more common disasters, and above all you jeep the trust of your partner, much more important than avoiding one 25% board.

Quote

P.S.  I have GOT to see this hand with 6 spades that passed the 3C bid.  I mean, if he bid 3NT he's got to have 16 hcp or so, so why in the world did he pass?

YESS!!! me too !

[EarlPurple]

jtfanclub, on Jul 13 2004, 11:22 AM, said:

My rationalization was "Unless somebody dropped an ace on the floor, partner has to have a trap pass". So I bid 2H, and my partner bid 3NT. My heart sank into the floor, but sure enough, partner had 18hcp with 5 diamonds AQT or somesuch, and we made it.

Trap-passing over a pre-empt on a hand like that is overrated. How often will partner reopen with a double?

The best chance for a good penalty comes when you have trump length but little outside. Now you can hope that partner will reopen with a double and you will pass. Not only that but partner's values will lie over pre-empter's partner (the one more likely to hold the side suits), and your partner will be on lead more often to lead through declarer's hand.

With 18 points your best bet is probably to bid 2NT and hope partner can raise you. If the opps are vulnerable you might settle for an undoubled penalty.