BBO Discussion Forums: Who pre-empted too much - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Who pre-empted too much

#1 User is offline   mr1303 

  • Admirer of Walter the Walrus
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,571
  • Joined: 2003-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
  • Interests:Bridge, surfing, water skiing, cricket, golf. Generally being outside really.

Posted 2010-July-18, 17:50

Scoring: MP


Bidding went (1H) 2S (3D) 3S

P P X all pass

You started off with 7 tricks, and finished with 7 tricks, which scored -500 for not very many matchpoints. Most people were scoring -450.

Who is most at fault here? Or was it just bad luck.
0

#2 User is offline   mikegill 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: 2006-May-26

Posted 2010-July-18, 18:11

I'm sure I would have duplicated both your actions. I think you were very unlucky to get penalty doubled by someone who has at most xx in trumps while your opponents have an 8 fit in both suits they have showed thus far in the auction. My guess is that they even probably had a misunderstanding about the X and got lucky.
0

#3 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-July-18, 18:20

3S is a stupid bid, don't understand how it could be "reasonable."

Normally I'd say you were unlucky, you had 11 trumps with all the honors and bid all the way to 3 and got cracked.

However, north bid when they were in a GF auction and he had Kxx of LHOs major, and QTx of RHOs suit, and 4333, after his partner had only showed 6 spades. What is the point? You are almost definitely screwed if you get cracked and get a heart lead through, if they don't have a heart fit partner has 3 of them, and they're already in a GF auction so it's not like it's hard to double you.

You're never going to play 3S, you're never going to induce partner to bid 4S, so the only reason to raise is to preempt them. Yes you take away some room (not as much as it seems since they have a forcing pass available). However you have enough defense that they aren't going to bid and make slam, so the room you take from them is not doing that much. And when you do get doubled, you know you're just getting a zero every single time.

Sorry but if you want to be a good bridge player "I have 4 trumps, I raise" is not good enough.
0

#4 User is offline   TylerE 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,778
  • Joined: 2006-January-30

Posted 2010-July-18, 19:59

I'd probably have bid 3 with the south hand. If you're gonna preempt, don't faff around. Really preempt them.
0

#5 User is offline   lmilne 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 348
  • Joined: 2009-October-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 2010-July-18, 20:31

2 and pass seem obvious. Don't understand 3 - what is the goal here? To try to get doubled and go for 200?
0

#6 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,772
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2010-July-18, 20:44

lmilne, on Jul 19 2010, 02:31 PM, said:

2 and pass seem obvious. Don't understand 3 - what is the goal here? To try to get doubled and go for 200?

Liam you aim too low.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#7 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-July-19, 01:02

silly stuff deleted
Kind Regards

Roland


Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#8 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-July-19, 01:33

A simplistic way of looking at it, if partner has 6 tricks and we have 1 trick, that's 7 tricks.

Of course we could have 2 tricks, but our red suit holdings are not promising on this auction. Plus sometimes partner has less than 6 tricks (KQJTxx xxx x QTx seems like a reasonable hand).

Now obviously they won't stop and double us every time they have us for 500, and they probably won't even do so most of the time. Still the risk/reward seems very off since the "reward" doesn't seem too high.

And did I mention that it's not even clear the opps have a game? If they don't have a heart fit, we have great defense for both diamonds and NT.
0

#9 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,497
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2010-July-19, 02:07

Good analysis of why 3S by N is problematic.

With Tyler on 3S by S.
If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#10 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-July-19, 03:24

3 by south solves problems, and this is not a particular case, this kind of outcome is usual.

However this random style leads to some other problems itself :)
0

#11 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-July-19, 03:41

more silly stuff deleted
Kind Regards

Roland


Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#12 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-July-19, 04:35

you have the vulnerability wrong Roland
0

#13 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-July-19, 04:55

Fluffy, on Jul 19 2010, 07:35 PM, said:

you have the vulnerability wrong Roland

Call me idiot.... all the time I thought it was all vul.
Kind Regards

Roland


Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#14 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-July-19, 05:34

I think someone in this thread has been posted only to inflate his post ratings. Quite scandalous.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#15 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-July-19, 05:39

gwnn, on Jul 19 2010, 08:34 PM, said:

I think someone in this thread has been posted only to inflate his post ratings. Quite scandalous.

Call the cops. I really hate those guys.
Kind Regards

Roland


Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#16 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-July-19, 05:42

*has been posting

ah my grammar is so bad.

Anyway, why play weak jump shifts Red on White Matchpoints?
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#17 User is offline   the hog 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-March-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Laos
  • Interests:Wagner and Bridge

Posted 2010-July-19, 06:52

mr1303, on Jul 19 2010, 06:50 AM, said:

Scoring: MP


Bidding went (1H) 2S (3D) 3S

P P X all pass

You started off with 7 tricks, and finished with 7 tricks, which scored -500 for not very many matchpoints. Most people were scoring -450.

Who is most at fault here? Or was it just bad luck.

If you started with 7 tricks and finished with 7 tricks aren't the opps close to cold to a 6 level contract?
Lol at the comment that they may not even make a game.
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
0

#18 User is offline   mikegill 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: 2006-May-26

Posted 2010-July-19, 08:14

Can someone construct a layout where (at least on these N/S cards) both opponents have bid reasonably to have doubled us in 3? E is 1624 and W is 1264? Should W really X with that shape given East made a forcing pass? Maybe E is 0634 with defensive values and thought he's give W the chance to double with some spade values? Should he really chance it. On this particular hand their bidding seems to make no sense (and they're cold for slam so whatever).

I know that the south hand doesn't have to be quite so pure, but it probably has to be close for a R/W WJO, particularly over 1. JLOGIC's example would be a bad hand for partner to hold. If he holds KQJTxx xxx Kxx x, though, 3 is fine. Maybe I'm just used to playing opponents who would never stop to double you in your 10+ card fit at the 3-level unless they screwed up. Or maybe this is why I don't even play weak jumps.
0

#19 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-July-19, 08:35

mikegill, on Jul 19 2010, 09:14 AM, said:

If he holds KQJTxx xxx Kxx x, though, 3 is fine.

Are you sure? It would suck to lose a diamond, 2 diamond ruffs, 3 hearts, and a club! After 3D 6-1 diamonds is not that unlikely, and taking into consideration that the opp chose to double you it becomes very likely.
0

#20 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-July-19, 08:38

mikegill, on Jul 19 2010, 09:14 AM, said:

Can someone construct a layout where (at least on these N/S cards) both opponents have bid reasonably to have doubled us in 3? E is 1624 and W is 1264? Should W really X with that shape given East made a forcing pass? Maybe E is 0634 with defensive values and thought he's give W the chance to double with some spade values? Should he really chance it. On this particular hand their bidding seems to make no sense (and they're cold for slam so whatever).

Sometimes they will just say F it and double when they have all the high cards and no known fit yet and no spade stopper. You are red/white, and they have all the HCP and just need to take 6 tricks.

As far as "they're 'cold' for slam so whatever" I hope you can tell yourself that after you get a zero. It's not really whatever even if they can make slam on a hook and some breaks (some breaks depending on which slam they bid) if they're never going to bid it and you have a score that loses to game.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users