[hanp]

Patton (mix between IMPs and MPs).

AKxxxx
J98x
-
KQ10

None vulnerable,

(p) - 1S - (4D) - p
(p) - ??

AQ10xx
x
Kxxx
Qxx

White against red

(p) - 1S - (2H) - p
(p) - ??

On both hands RHO (different players) hesitated noticably before passing. Do you reopen?

[the hog]

Yes, I re open on both.

[CSGibson]

I would reopen on both without the hesitation for sure.

[mohitz]

IMO, Re open on second one is pretty clear. On the first not so sure but I will probably re-open.

[Free]

The_Hog, on May 18 2010, 07:24 AM, said:

Yes, I re open on both.

agree

[helene_t]

On the second one it would be absurd not to reopen.

As for the first one, righty might have hesitated because he had support for partner's suit, which would make reopening more attractive. Or because he has a strong misfitting hand which makes reopening less attractive. At the bottom line I don't think it matters much.

So reopen on both.

[andy_h]

Yes to both.

[Hanoi5]

X on both.

[Fluffy]

yeah reopen.

[pooltuna]

hanp, on May 18 2010, 01:20 AM, said:

Patton (mix between IMPs and MPs).

AKxxxx
J98x
-
KQ10

None vulnerable,

(p) - 1S - (4D) - p
(p) - ??

AQ10xx
x
Kxxx
Qxx

White against red

(p) - 1S - (2H) - p
(p) - ??

On both hands RHO (different players) hesitated noticably before passing. Do you reopen?

I'll have to TANK on the scoring method. Otherwise "Damn the torpedos!! Full speed ahead" (oops wrong senior Military officer) --i.e. Double

The second I fear is a WTP Double.

[hanp]

helene_t, on May 18 2010, 04:35 AM, said:

As for the first one, righty might have hesitated because he had support for partner's suit, which would make reopening more attractive. Or because he has a strong misfitting hand which makes reopening less attractive. At the bottom line I don't think it matters much.

I was thinking about this as well, but noticed that on both hands RHO was a passed hand.

I doubled on the first one and partner bid 4S on xxx Kxxxx KJ xxx. This was doubled and thanks to the horrible breaks it went for 300. That was not such a bad score though as the opponents would likely make 5D. (partner needs to lead a club to beat it.)

On the second one I doubled. Partner passed with J QJxx xxx Axxxx. The cards were all wrong and the opponents scored 670. Again this was not such a bad score because many pairs were 870 and there even was one 1070.

There have been many hands recently where I thought I might have a "read" on the opponents, and following up on those reads would have been good but I didn't and made what I thought were the "normal" calls. Any thoughts on this?

[655321]

hanp, on May 18 2010, 11:21 AM, said:

Partner passed with J QJxx xxx Axxxx.

You said the scoring was a mix between MP and IMPs, I really don't like this pass at MP and I hate it at IMPs.

hanp, on May 18 2010, 11:21 AM, said:

There have been many hands recently where I thought I might have a "read" on the opponents, and following up on those reads would have been good but I didn't and made what I thought were the "normal" calls. Any thoughts on this?

Personally I am clueless when it comes to reading opponents, so I don't even try, but if you can do it, why not back yourself?

[mikeh]

655321, on May 18 2010, 10:47 AM, said:

hanp, on May 18 2010, 11:21 AM, said:

Partner passed with J QJxx xxx Axxxx.

(snipped)

hanp, on May 18 2010, 11:21 AM, said:

There have been many hands recently where I thought I might have a "read" on the opponents, and following up on those reads would have been good but I didn't and made what I thought were the "normal" calls. Any thoughts on this?

Personally I am clueless when it comes to reading opponents, so I don't even try, but if you can do it, why not back yourself?

I agree.....I have found that virtually every time I took a conservative action, because of an opp's hesitation, they never hold what I thought they held....in fact, they never really have a problem at all. Now, this is true only of average to poor players: good players will usually have their hesitations But, of course, they will tend to hesitate infrequently.

So I have decided that I'll just do what the cards, not the table action, tell me to do, and I'll share your bad results.

[Jlall]

Doubling on the second one is horrible after a hesitation. What are you trying to achieve?

The first one is different, they might just have been thinking of raising to 5D because they have a fit/some values, and you could still be on for a game if partner has a good fit. If they happen to have a takeout X of diamonds themselves, maybe they are still going down a lot on the bad split. So I would still double probably.

[whereagles]

obvious doubles on both, as far as I am concerned

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on May 18 2010, 12:00 PM, said:

Doubling on the second one is horrible after a hesitation. What are you trying to achieve?

[snip]

I thought I was protecting partner and I try not to put too much into opponent's hesitations especially online

[Jlall]

I don't understand why we are sticking our heads in the sand.

One problem with 2 level overcalls is that the range is so wide that sometimes you miss a game. If our RHO has say a doubleton heart and an 8-9 count and a doubleton or singleton heart he has to guess whether to raise and be at the 3 level opposite not much or pass and miss a game when partner has the (infrequent) top of his range. Most people pass with a hand like that.

On the other hand, the "problem" with negative doubles is that we generally have to reopen with short hearts even with a minimum, despite the fact mentioned above (the opps may have missed a game already in this auction more than others and will find it after we reopen), because our partner may have a great hand with long hearts. Basically when we have 11 we don't know who has the extras, LHO, RHO, or partner, but RHO is the least likely to have them since he has the narrowest range of hands for passing when he has values. Partner probably has the widest range.

However when RHO hesitates before passing, we now KNOW he has values. We are unlikely to get a large penalty, and they might make when partner has to pass on a weakish hand, and we have no chance to be making a game. It might be our hand for a partial, but we might just be in deep sh** and about to go for a number also since we have no values and possibly no fit. And again, if anyone has a game it's them not us.

There is absolutely no risk to assume the usual risks of reopening with a double on a minimum hand when the usual rewards are not there at all, especially now that the risks have gone way up.

[Jlall]

pooltuna, on May 18 2010, 12:08 PM, said:

Jlall, on May 18 2010, 12:00 PM, said:

Doubling on the second one is horrible after a hesitation. What are you trying to achieve?

[snip]

I thought I was protecting partner and I try not to put too much into opponent's hesitations especially online

Why would you assume that a patton tournament was played online? Also I doubt Han would say they hesitated noticably if he was not sure about it.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on May 18 2010, 12:14 PM, said:

pooltuna, on May 18 2010, 12:08 PM, said:

Jlall, on May 18 2010, 12:00 PM, said:

Doubling on the second one is horrible after a hesitation. What are you trying to achieve?

[snip]

I thought I was protecting partner and I try not to put too much into opponent's hesitations especially online

Why would you assume that a patton tournament was played online? Also I doubt Han would say they hesitated noticably if he was not sure about it.

As I said earlier I try not to put much into opponent's hesitations but if you choose to read them as you know you do so at your own risk. We are not dead immediately after I X and I am positioned properly to win the post mortem whereas you may find yourself wiping egg off your chin