[Bbradley62]

helene_t, on Mar 11 2010, 06:46 PM, said:

Bbradley62, on Mar 11 2010, 11:48 PM, said:

I think there's an important piece of information missing from the original question:  how high do we play negative doubles? If we are only playing negative doubles through 2♠, then there is no need to protect the possibility that partner holds a penalty double.

Of course dbl would be negative. What that precisely means is another question but p certainly could have a trap pass.

Except that we aren't short in clubs. So we don't need to worry about p having a trap pass.

Clubs have nothing to do with my comment. If we are playing negative doubles through only 2♠, then partner's pass shows that he does not have a penalty double of 3♦, so I pass. If we are playing negative doubles through 3♠, then I might want to protect against the possibility that he has a penalty double, so I might want to make a re-opening double.

[the hog]

Bbradley62, on Mar 12 2010, 10:12 AM, said:

helene_t, on Mar 11 2010, 06:46 PM, said:

Bbradley62, on Mar 11 2010, 11:48 PM, said:

I think there's an important piece of information missing from the original question:  how high do we play negative doubles? If we are only playing negative doubles through 2♠, then there is no need to protect the possibility that partner holds a penalty double.

Of course dbl would be negative. What that precisely means is another question but p certainly could have a trap pass.

Except that we aren't short in clubs. So we don't need to worry about p having a trap pass.

Clubs have nothing to do with my comment. If we are playing negative doubles through only 2♠, then partner's pass shows that he does not have a penalty double of 3♦, so I pass. If we are playing negative doubles through 3♠, then I might want to protect against the possibility that he has a penalty double, so I might want to make a re-opening double.

I think she meant short in Ds.

[Cyberyeti]

jdonn, on Mar 11 2010, 06:34 PM, said:

Pict, on Mar 11 2010, 06:22 PM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 11 2010, 02:49 PM, said:

Pooltuna what are you saying, that if an action could POSSIBLY SOMEHOW IF PARTNER HAS ONE PARTICULAR UNLIKELY HAND not work as well as another then it can't be obviously correct? If not then I have no idea what your point is at all. And if that is your point it's a completely absurd point.

Another unemotional contribution I guess.

No more at all than his post that I was replying to...

It's not garbage to just state your opinion or rate options. (In fact I would have thought that was all that was needed for a decision that is so basic.) Garbage is stating nonsense like "but what if they overcalled on AJxxxx and their partner has a void?" or "the average holding for partner's pass over 3♦ is 11." How can someone mount a serious argument to nonsense like that?

Well how many points do you think opps have for a favourable WJO opposite a passed hand ? could be more, could be less.

[Codo]

As always the opinions are strong and the facts are missing.


When we hold 14 HCPs, RHO passes and LHO preempts w/r, how many HCPS do partner holds on average? Maybe not 11, but more often 9+ then less I would guess.

When they premept to the 3. level but not more, how many diamonds do partner hold? I guess at least 3, maybe 4, 5 is not really likely, nor is 0,1 or 2.

What will partner bid with an average 2335 or similar and 7-11 HCPS? Pass if he has no or a marginal stopper.

So you may judge that pass is the winning descission, but personal attacks against poeple who have a different opinion are childish.

[gwnn]

Codo let me give you a simple fact: there are no facts in bridge. The only "facts" are simulations ("according to my dealer program partner has an average of 9.3 hcp with sigma=1.47") or results of recent tournaments ("my aunt Brenda always reopens and my cousin Joe is very conservative and Joe averages 3% over aunt Brenda in the club") but both of them are highly contested.

Some people think they are being compassionate and they never want partner to be sad to be passed out after making a penalty pass, others want the reopening double to promise something (and not just their compassion) thus making partner's life a little easier when they did not in fact make a penalty pass.

Even pooltuna, who is apparently one of the last surviving people in this thread who show traces of charity in their heart, agrees that partner is unlikely to hold a trump stack after this auction. Then jdonn asked him whether we need to cater to every "possible" hand of partner's when we make a decision or are we allowed to think in terms of percentages.

[Codo]

Csaba,

you are right, there are no facts besides the actual given hand and maybe some real good simulations or databases. And even these are debatable.

So I guess any given opinion is of value even (or most likely) if we do not share it.

Tuna tried to give his reasons, why he prefers to double. I do not share his reasoning at all. But at least, he tried to state some reasons. This is more then most others did.

But we had these discussions before, some people like to give just their opinion and they have any right to do so and some act different.

But there should be no way to insult others. In my opinion this is childish.

[Cyberyeti]

The simulations are only as good as the data that goes into them.

For example in the US do people never WJO on Q10xxxx and out ? I know plenty who do over here, particularly at this vulnerability and once partner has passed.

Also I take a pretty extreme view even for the UK on opening bids, and will open all 11s and most 10s with a small singleton diamond, but I suspect many in the UK will open some hands that would be passed in the US.

Both of these will affect the parameters in the simulation, and hence partner's average hand strength.

Style is also important and partnership agreements. We as a partnership agree to reopen pretty much automatically with a singleton or doubleton in the suit bid where a trap pass is a possibility, regardless of whether we have any extras. This solves problems on some hands and causes them on others, but at least we know what we're doing, and we prefer this to having to take dubious action opposite for fear that partner will pass.

There are no facts in this situation, it's all style and opinion.