LHO opens 1♠ and this is passed to you. Unfavorable at IMPs. Partner is fairly conservative at these colors (but not unreasonably so). Do you balance? What's your call?
Balancing at IMPs
#1
Posted 2006-July-31, 12:25
LHO opens 1♠ and this is passed to you. Unfavorable at IMPs. Partner is fairly conservative at these colors (but not unreasonably so). Do you balance? What's your call?
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#2
Posted 2006-July-31, 14:29
Pard is weakish with something like a 1444 or 1255 shape. There might be a partscore for you side, but since finding it involves a bit of guessing, at imps it's probably better to pass.
#3
Posted 2006-July-31, 16:39
#4
Posted 2006-July-31, 18:22
The decision is easier for me if not vul because I like 13-16 1NT overcalls NV, so partner's pass rules out some hands.
DHL
#5
Posted 2006-July-31, 19:05
I voted to bid 2H here and have a very slight preference for it vs passing inspite of putting my head on the chopping block and having a likely offside K of S.
I have 4 card in the opener's suit, so there's a decent chance that PD is short and has some H for me.
I really don't care for 1NT here with a stiff D and 5 playable hearts. Also, if I bid 1NT I alert the opps to what I hold in their suit, making what ever number of spades they may settle in easier to play and potentially keeping them from bidding 1 level too high over what ever level of H we can play.
.. neilkaz ..leaning towards 2H rather than passing.
#6
Posted 2006-July-31, 21:31
-P.J. Painter.
#7
Posted 2006-July-31, 22:39
#8
Posted 2006-July-31, 22:57
#10
Posted 2006-August-01, 08:28
2♥, as Frances says, seems 'normal'.
I don't understand why we cannot have game (while we probably don't, 'cannot' is a huge overbid) and partscore swings are not to be sneezed at. If we're going plus against 1♠ (and I'd bet we are not, against a competent declarer), we rate to go plus in our contract more often than not.
#11
Posted 2006-August-01, 08:43
#12
Posted 2006-August-01, 09:15
#13
Posted 2006-August-01, 11:17
I balanced with 2♥ and played there. LHO found the lead of the spade ace, spade ruff, diamond to ace, spade ruff... and I lost a club and three more trumps for three off. Fortunately there was no double, but -300 does not score well at IMPs. At my teammates table west opened a strong 1♣ and they eventually wound up in 3♦. This can be set on best defense but south did not find a club lead (tough from Axx) and they ended up with 130.
Passing 1♠ will get +50 or -80 depending on the play and defense. 1NT will make easily, but the opponents will probably back into a diamond partial (likely result -110 and win 1 imp for your side).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#14
Posted 2006-August-01, 12:02
The comments I recieved were:
Marc Umeno "Y I balance" (He didn't say with what). Marc still thinks pass is a 4 letter word.
Alex Kolesnik was close to my opinion:
"
I do not balance. 5 reasons:
1) if partner is short in spades, he doesn't have much, since he didn't bid or double
2) if partner isn't short in spades, we will go plus, and are very unlikely to have a game
3) if partner isn't short in spades, they may have a big diamond fit, which they may find if I balance
4) if I bid 2h, partner may take me seriously and put me in game, which is unlikely to make because of the bad spade position (both my king and length are poorly positioned
5) I am very unlikely to lose a lot of imps by passing, but I am much more likely to lose a lot of imps by bidding
"
#15
Posted 2006-August-01, 12:48
Qx KQx xxxx KQJx and I scored +620. At the other table, my hand passed and ended up +50.
I guess that we really can't draw many conclusions from individual hands, can we?
PS I just checked with two good friends, both current Canadian Team champions and one is a Grand Life Master and the other will be in a few years... only has 8000 mps... both unhesitantingly bid 2♥... one commenting that 'we might get taken away, but we have to bid'
#16
Posted 2006-August-01, 12:52
mikeh, on Aug 1 2006, 01:48 PM, said:
Qx KQx xxxx KQJx and I scored +620. At the other table, my hand passed and ended up +50.
I guess that we really can't draw many conclusions from individual hands, can we?
I wonder how many, if any players, would x at unfav vul with that partner hand?
#17
Posted 2006-August-01, 13:10
Pass has a lot more going for it if the vulnerability is reversed.
I think this problem is hardest at equal vulnerability.
I don't like 1NT or DBL regardless of the vulnerability. 2H and Pass are the only options in my view.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
#18
Posted 2006-August-01, 15:46
(1) We might have a game in hearts. For example some hand like:
Axx
Kxxx
Kxxx
xx
This is not a particularly "maximum" hand for partner, who could have up to 14 high. It's not a particularly "perfect fit" in that the diamond king is opposite the singleton. But yet this is well worth bidding game at IMPs (it's cold on a 2-2 heart break and has some chances otherwise especially if the dummy includes ♠9). Partner could easily have a better hand than this (say ♦A instead of king, or ♣K instead of or even in addition to the diamond king). Partner certainly would not bid on this hand over 1♠.
(2) Despite the previous point, this is probably a partscore deal. Opponents almost surely don't have a game and we only have one if partner has a remarkable heart fit. So what are the tradeoffs:
If both 1♠ and 2♥ make, then balancing wins 5 imps.
If both 1♠ and 2♥ are one off, then balancing loses 4 imps.
If one of 1♠ and 2♥ makes and not the other, balancing is either win 2 or lose 1.
So if these situations are about equally likely, then balancing is a win. But it seems to me that most hands contain 15 or more total tricks and so it's probably substantially more likely that at least one of 1♠/2♥ makes than that both go down.
(3) Of course there's a small risk of 2♥ down multiple tricks. But even two down is probably only lose 3 because opponents probably make 1♠ (or something in any case). On the other hand bidding and making game in hearts is a huge win. Which is more likely, 2♥ down two or more, or 4♥ making? I don't think the odds can be substantially in favor of two or more down.
(4) It's actually quite difficult to penalize 2♥ here. RHO has virtually nothing and probably won't want to force to the three-level with a double, and LHO's double is takeout (which RHO with nothing may not want to convert).
Of course my reading of the odds could easily be wrong. They certainly were wrong this time, on this hand.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#19
Posted 2006-August-01, 16:12
As for partner's hand Lawrence feels strongly it is ok to make a direct takeout x with only 3 cards in the other major if you have 13 useful hcp.

Help
