[hrothgar]

The following hand just cropped up in today's Abalucy tournament.
Its an excellent example of one of the nice benefits of MOSCITO's constructive raise structure.

---

The auction

(P) - 1♦ - (P) - 2♥
(P) - P - (2♠) - X
(P) - P - (3C) - X
(3♠ - P - (P) - X

Systemically, the 1♦ opening promises 4+ hearts, might have a longer minor.
The 2♥ raise shows exactly 3 card trump support and ~ 7-10 HCP

Statistically, after this auction, our side will hold a 7 card trump fit approximately 48% of the time and an 8 card trump fit ~52% of the time. In other words, the Law of Total Tricks doesn't offer much value to the opponents.

Observe what happens when folks get too frisky in the balancing position...

[Free]

Hehe, I knew you'd post this one

[inquiry]

This, this is a good example of this treatment? Give me a break. West should balance back in with a double... and East has easy pass now the defense starts, hypotetidally,

♦K
♦A
♣A , and they are sure to get two ♥s for down one doubled....

Even if West decides to pass, down one undboubled is hardly a victory for you. Down one X you get 4% MP, done 1 undboulbed, you get 16%, and if they somehow allow you to make 2♥? Your score is only 50%. HArdly a panacia...

Let me show you the misho/inquiry 3 card raise... this is from yesterday with like too many kibitizers....

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  1♦    Pass  1♠
 Pass  2♠    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

Like your two ♥ bid, this one faired sort of well. I made an overtrick in my 3-3 fit and won 2 imps. Still, nothing to be proad of....

Ben

[paulhar]

Am I misunderstanding the convention? Since neither opponent has promised diamonds, couldn't East bid 3D over the double (which might be expected based on West's shortness?)

However, I think West dug himself into more trouble by bidding 3C. West can't have a substantial spade holding, having failed to bid nonvul the first time, and yet East made no attempt to rescue. If West trusts his partner, he will sit for 2Sx.

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Jul 21 2004, 03:48 AM, said:

This, this is a good example of this treatment? Give me a break. West should balance back in with a double... and East has easy pass

Double sounds like a damn good way to play in a 5-2 Diamond fit at the three level... Its far too dangerous a call holding 5 Spades and 5=2=2=4 shape.

Double MIGHT work if you held 5=2=4=2 and agreed to play equal level conversion or some such. Even so, its very unclear whether you should be out looking to hit us at the two level.

[MickyB]

As you know, I'm not a big fan of 2♥ denying 4♥ here, I prefer 2♥ on flat hands with 4 card support. You are still getting your penalty on this hand either way. But yes, this does show the advantage of 4 card majors - while they can give you LAW problems it gives your opponents the same problems.

[Cascade]

hrothgar, on Jul 21 2004, 01:08 PM, said:

Even so, its very unclear whether you should be out looking to hit us at the two level.

It is more clear that we should be out hunting if you play aggressive raises than if you play a sound style.

[hrothgar]

Cascade, on Jul 21 2004, 04:22 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Jul 21 2004, 01:08 PM, said:

Even so, its very unclear whether you should be out looking to hit us at the two level.

It is more clear that we should be out hunting if you play aggressive raises than if you play a sound style.

As I noted, our raise style is designed so that we're playing in a 7 card fit 50% of the time and playing an 8+ caqrd fit 50% of the time. In all honesty, its unclear to me what the optimal defensive strategy is...

One thing that is very nice: While the opponent's don't know the extent of our fit, OPENER is well informed about whats going on.

[Free]

Yes! With a 5 card ♥ I should probably run to 3♥ (or bid 3♦ with maximum hand), while with only 4 I can pass without getting into trouble

[the hog]

Interesting. I would never bid 2H with this 4333 hand, and never have playing Moscito with my reg partners. Neither PM nor SB would either, I am sure. I think you would find that most of the Moscito players here agree - this is a 1NT bid.
2H is better suited to some 4432 hand or a hand with some shape, not this square hand.

Afraid Ben is right on this one, much as I hate to admit it, . 2S was not a good bid, x is far better. Pass at imps is better still.

[MickyB]

Ron, I wouldn't want to compare myself with you, PM or SB, but purely based on intuition I agree, that was one of my thoughts when reading through the system file. Another was that I wouldn't want to bid 1♦:1NT, 2♦, 2♥ on 4-2-3-4 shape, a 4333 seemed much more appropriate for this sequence. (Opener has shown 5-4 reds either way and is expected to bid 3♦ now with 5♦4♥).

Free, I don't think you can pull partner's pen X of 2♠ to 3♥ on many hands with 5♥, possibly with 5♥ and 1♠ at the right scoring+vul (at MPs, only when they are NV unless you are a dead min). The big advantage of responder denying 4♥ on this auction is that opener knows *not* to pull on many hands with 5♥.

[the hog]

You are right MickyB.
The problem with bidding 1M - 2M on a "square" hand is that it really depends on whom you play against. I imagine that playing in the States you would probably gain more than you lose. Here I can guarantee you will lose more than you gain as those who "know" won't protect as maniacally as you guys seem to. Here eg you should make 1N, but 2H goes down. so you lose.
1H - 2H needs to carry a bit of "weight" eg
Qxxx
Qxx
xx
Axxx
would be fairly typical. (Note the hiding of the 4 card S suit.)

Ron

[hrothgar]

The_Hog, on Jul 21 2004, 05:36 AM, said:

Interesting. I would never bid 2H with this 4333 hand, and never have playing Moscito with my reg partners. Neither PM nor SB would either, I am sure. I think you would find that most of the Moscito players here agree - this is a 1NT bid.
2H is better suited to some 4432 hand or a hand with some shape, not this square hand.

Afraid Ben is right on this one, much as I hate to admit it, . 2S was not a good bid, x is far better. Pass at imps is better still.

Hmmm

I'll need to talk to Paul about this one. My impression is that he favored a direct raise with most 4-3-3-3 hands. In all honesty, I did consider responding 1NT, however, the AKJ of Spades convincind me to raise. (I was hoping to get to defend 2♠ when I initially raised)

[whereagles]

Hum.. what exactly does moscito have to do with awful hand evaluation by the 2S bidder? If something, this is bad advertisement for moscito's raise methods, since a pass by East leaves you in trouble when 1NT or 2D is a lay-down.

[inquiry]

whereagles, on Jul 21 2004, 08:39 AM, said:

Hum.. what exactly does moscito have to do with awful hand evaluation by the 2S bidder? If something, this is bad advertisement for moscito's raise methods, since a pass by East leaves you in trouble when 1NT or 2D is a lay-down.

Which was my point exactly. 1NT is the place to be NS (well 3♠X is better, but come on...).

Ben

[luis]

I also must confess I wouldn't have bid 2♥ playing Moscito and I do love 3-card raises but as Ron said I usually have a doubleton somewhere when I raise with 3 cards. 1NT seems to be logical I think that the fact that 2♥ worked doesn't merit 2♥ bids on 4333 hands, in this very same hand it could have turned into a bad result if you play 2♥ down 1 with the whole field playing, probably, 1NT.

Why did west remove 2♠x to 3♣ ? That's an absolute nasty bid. You are in 2x doubled in your 5 card suit and remove to play a trick higher in a 4 card suit so when doubled you retreat to the 5 card suit again.
Maybe any bid could have worked against this west player.

[Free]

I have to agree with the others Richard, a raise on 2-level on a 3 card should have a ruffing value (doubleton). Playing at 2-level in a 4-3 fit isn't bad, as long as you can ruff in the 3 card. So I think it's better to bid 1NT with this hand.

[hrothgar]

Seems that the 2♥ bid was not especially popular with anyone but me. (for what its worth, I threw the hand over to Paul. It will be interesting to see what he has to say. However, as I recall, he used to advocate the 3 card raise even with a 4-3-3-3 shape)

One thing that I'd like to point out: Its easy to look at all four hands and say that these hands should be played in 1N or that double is better than 2S (I still disagree about this, BTW). With this said and done MOSCITO isn't designed to reach the "optimal" contract on all hands. MOSCITO is designed to bid to acceptable contracts, force the last guess on the opponents, and make them pay when they guess wrong.

[inquiry]

Well, I certainly don't want to belittle your opponents, who are friends of mine and the 2♠ bidder has a deserved gold star. Having said that, their bidding is horrible, but guess what, 2♠X is no wonderful result for you either. You will beat this one, and +100 is worth less than what you can score for being in NT (at least 120, most scored 150).

As an aside, congratulations to you and free for winning that abalucy event. Good to see you have starting playing moscito there again.

Ben

[whereagles]

hrothgar: You have to be critical of that bidding philosophy. Laying mouse-traps on opponents might be attractive and lucratice, but remember you have two ways of going wrong:

1. Your "acceptable" contract turns out to be far from optimal.
2. Your opponents guess, but guess right, and you're out of contention.

Never the less, something to think about. Especially against opps who are happy bidders.