[kenrexford]

This all is also a good reason why delicate game tries are nonsense. Stuff like three-way relay-based game tries to show long suits, short suits, help suits, etc. In fact, I'd say that the majority of my calls and those of my partner that are ostensibly game-or-slam tries are usually slam tries.

I'd also add that the blasting game method gets you more phantom sacs, and you occasionally blast out a partscore battle. I mean, 1♥-P-2♥-P-4♥ sometimes works better than 1♥-P-2♥-P-2♠-2NT-3♥-4♣.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Apr 7 2010, 01:45 PM, said:

blackshoe, on Apr 7 2010, 01:28 PM, said:

jdonn said:

The fact that if you stop in 3 it could go down is a reason to bid more games, not fewer.

Okay. I'm a li'l slow . Can you explain why this is so?

Logic: If you were already down in 3 you didn't lose much by bidding another and going down one more.

Sample calculation: Holding a certain hand on an auction you are already in 3♠ and can calculate the following trick distribution:
8: 30%
9: 35%
10: 35%
Say you are vul and the other table will be in 3♠. Pass gets you 0 imps. Bidding 4 gets you
-3: 30%
-6: 35%
+10: 35%
The expected value is +0.5 imps for bidding game (a more significant gain than you would think!), even though 35% is less than the generally quoted percentage needed to bid game vul at imps. And that's with 3 going down 30% of the time which is a lot! That's because that percentage is based on 'making or down 1', so the possibility of going down 2 (or more) actually reduces the percentage chance needed to make game before it's worth bidding.

Counterintuitive and very much worth knowing.

I agree with all this, but there is one very important factor left out of josh's analysis: the double.

If you are -1 in 3 and bid 4: well, the reason you were -1 in 3 was probably a foul lie of the cards (assuming you are a reasonably competent bidder).

That in turn means that there is a significant risk that the opps will double you in 4, while they wouldn't dream of doubling you in 3. So on some hands, the imp odds have to take into consideration that you are -500 in game and only -100 in a partial...a big swing.

Perhaps paradoxically, this argues in favour of bashing...and strongly so.

Give me QJ109 in trump and the opps have a slow, gametry auction to game, and I may well double....they bid as if they need a 3-2 break and maybe something else...I know they're not getting it.

Make the auction 1-2-4, otoh, and for all I know the bad trump break is what holds them to only 10 tricks.....declarer could have a hand on which he was even thinking of a slam try. It becomes much higher risk to double, especially if declarer is the type to throw the occasional redouble back at me.

I still think that there is room for some gametries in major suit auctions, but I have largely stopped playing them over strong 1N openings.

[junyi_zhu]

bluecalm, on Apr 7 2010, 12:09 PM, said:

I have this argument with my friend:

Me (after reaching 20% game) : "Well, if I know we have 23hcp and 9trumps I am in game basically ALWAYS".

Friend : "Come back to me after 10k hands and then we will talk"

Me : "C'mon, I saw enough hands of world class players and they just bash games every time there are some hcp and some shape, show me one hand where world class pair stopped below game with 9trumps and 23hcp"

Friend : "It only seems like that; in reality they have expert evaluation and they see things you don't see, this is why they reach so many thin games there is underlying reason for those bids which seems to be just bashes"

Me: "I don't believe in this stuff; I think on most hands wc players just bash on the basis that there will be some play and they hate missing games; I realize books are written for masses and players don't give much away but for example in Meckstroth's book he seems like a guy who just want to bid games and try to make it; he doesn't care much about nitty stuff and trying to stop on 3 level. The whole precision is build around the idea that 15+8 = game every time and 11+good 12 = game every time (2/1gf); it doesn't seem like those players are much into stopping below games"

Well, who is right ? Are top players just bashers or super sophisticated hand evaluators ?

When you have 23 HCP and 9 card trumps, you usually have a few doubletons or singletons, which allow you ruff for the extra tricks. So really, I don't see why you should stay out of game with normal 23 HCP and 9 card trumps. Of course, if you don't have controls, you want to bid few suit games with marginal values. Overall, there is hand evaluation in this topic and from pure bridge logic, many 23 HCP hands with 9 card fit should bid game. Still, that doesn't mean invitation is useless, cause you may invite with 7-8 HCP and some shortness, which still requires partner to hold some sort of extra or lucky high cards or card plays.

[bluecalm]

A hand which caused the discussion was this one :

♠T762 ♥KQT83 ♦96 ♣Q8

1♣ (16+) - 1♦ (0-7)
1♠ (may be 4 if longer minor, F1)

And here I made a game forcing raise in ♠.

Stopping below game wasn't (and still isn't) an option for me...

[Little Kid]

Your partner is unlimited here though, so it may have other implications such as for slam bidding. If you are simply overbidding your hand then your partner may get too high in search of slam? Maybe he will place you with 5♠s and an unbalanced hand or so? If my partner can have 16 hcps and 4♠s (and long ♦s?) here I wouldn't be game-forcing on this particular hand. Then again I don't declare as well as the strong players that do bash a lot

[Fluffy]

I score a lot of +140s in 3M I often get outraged by losing 6 or 10 on those deals . I think I should bid more agresively.

But using judgement or letting partner use more judgement was never a bad idea. 23 HCP might not be enough when you have ♣Qx or ♦Jxx or some bad holding around.

for example in the hand you just gave you have ♣Q8, your shape is horrible, you are missing 8 keycards (♠AKQ, ♥A, ♦AK, ♣AK) some missdefence might let you through, but you can be pretty sure that if partner is minum game will be far from cold.

[Cyberyeti]

bluecalm, on Apr 8 2010, 05:17 AM, said:

A hand which caused the discussion was this one :

♠T762 ♥KQT83 ♦96 ♣Q8

1♣ (16+) - 1♦ (0-7)
1♠ (may be 4 if longer minor, F1)

And here I made a game forcing raise in ♠.

Stopping below game wasn't (and still isn't) an option for me...

This is a horrible hand for the bid, you don't even have a known 9 card fit and your shortage in the minors makes it not unlikely partner has the 4-5 hand.

You really want to be in game opposite Kxxx, AJ, KQJxx, KJ ? and that's an 18 count.

[bluecalm]

Quote

You really want to be in game opposite Kxxx, AJ, KQJxx, KJ ? and that's an 18 count.

Obviously not but I think there are a lot of minimum hands which partner will pass with opposite which I want to be in game.

Quote

some missdefence might let you through, but you can be pretty sure that if partner is minum game will be far from cold.

Well, game being far from cold doesn't worry me too much
My judgment is of course nowhere close world class right now but i have a feeling there is no way any world class player would bid 3♠ (good 5-7hcp, 4+♠ but non forcing) here.
Is my impression wrong ?

[ArtK78]

In my opinion this is a perfect 3♠ bid.

The hand has its good points - the KQTxx of hearts.

The hand has its bad points - Qx of clubs.

Otherwise, the 3♠ bid shows exactly what you have. Why not bid it?

Now, if you moved one card from diamonds into clubs, so that your hand was:

Txxx KQTxx x Qxx

Then you could force to game.

I would even say that if your black Q was in spades and not clubs you have a better game force.

By the way, what does 3♥ show over partner's 1♠ bid. If ever there was a good hand for a fit-showing jump, this is the hand. It is likely that game will have good play or be cold if your KQTxx of hearts is working. If partner is short in hearts game may be poor or zero.

[Tomi2]

I think this hand is worth an ivite to 3♠ because most factors, that will pd make NOT bid game as:
-4spades only
-bad spades
-not enough aces
...


will make game go down, so this is one of those situations, where pd can make an usefull judgement and we don't need to throw the imps for bidding unmakable games


but in general I agree to the main consens, that you should bash more often.
say you have: Kxx xx xxx KQxxx and invite after 1nt, how will partner know, that 15 with Axx in in clubs is woth more than 17 with xx only? so he will not judge well and we strand in "bad" 2nt too often

[jjbrr]

bluecalm, on Apr 8 2010, 04:17 AM, said:

A hand which caused the discussion was this one :

♠T762 ♥KQT83 ♦96 ♣Q8

1♣ (16+) - 1♦ (0-7)
1♠ (may be 4 if longer minor, F1)

And here I made a game forcing raise in ♠.

Stopping below game wasn't (and still isn't) an option for me...

fit jumps please.

[awm]

The ninth trump is a big card when bidding pushy games.

I think the example hand is a clear game force opposite 16+ with five spades, but opposite what could be four spades only I'd prefer to make a strong invite. Fit jump if available is great, although certainly there is a case for natural invitational jumps in this sequence.

[gnasher]

I'm not sure about these fit jumps. Fit jumps are great in competitive auctions, but I don't much like telling the player on lead what he's going to see in dummy. Is the idea to improve your game-bidding, or is it mainly about slams?

[cherdanno]

I think you lose the argument, no matter whether you are right. Talking about 23 hcp and 9 trumps, when all you know about are 8 trumps, is an immediate technical KO loss.

[jdonn]

The other thing with this hand is, even if partner has 5 spades, I really doubt 3♠ will be too high. If game goes down it will probably be due to top tricks that won't go away even if they lead the wrong suit (yeah partner could have AKx of clubs or something but probably not). The main part of the argument was you might as well go for game if you have to get to 3♠ to invite since that might be too high already.

[bluecalm]

Quote

I think you lose the argument, no matter whether you are right. Talking about 23 hcp and 9 trumps, when all you know about are 8 trumps, is an immediate technical KO loss.

The thing is partner will/should pass with 16pc balanced hand with 5card major, because my average hand for 3♠ will look like that :

Qxxx xx Kxxx Jxx

He will not want to play in game opposite something like that with balanced minimum and I really want to be in game every time he has this.