[JLOGIC]

The biggest problem forcing pass people have imo is the argument

"well, it must be right to double them or save, ergo we should be in a forcing pass"

This is a tempting argument, but even on hands where we are not going for 800 and they might not make, it's not true. The problem with this argument is bridge is not a perfect information game, and it's not like we know that they are 100 % to go down or 100 % to make when we're bidding. A simple counterargument is a situation where they are 50 % to make, 50 % to go down, and we go down 500 when they make and 300 when they don't. In this case 50 % of the time we win 8, and 50 % of the time we lose 12 when we save. Conversely if we double we lose 5 half the time and gain 3 half the time. So we lose 2 imps by saving, 1 imp by doubling, ergo our best decision would be to pass. This, despite the fact that our save is always good if they're making, and doubling is always good if theyre down.

In real life this is a common scenario imo, we know our save would be good but we think we have a reasonable shot of beating them, however we are not confident enough in that to be doubling. In this case, we just pass it out and try and beat the contract. Forcing pass on these kind of hands costs significant imps. IRL bridge is a probabilistic game, and is not as black and white as the forcing pass advocates would have you believe.

[Zelandakh]

I think FP was seen as a panacea for a large portion of difficult high level decisions and therefore included as often as possible by many. I suspect that Justin's generation will correct this back to a point where FP is a useful tool but not for every situation. I would also guess that at intermediate level, forcing passes generally cost more IMPs/MPs than they gain. Even when you are on the same page it is not that unusual that you are in practise making a decsion between, say, -590 and -500. It is not that I dislike FPs; it is only that you need to be careful about situations where they apply. I am hopeful that the new generation will provide updated FP rules that are simple enough for the masses but nonetheless more effective than the ones usually used now. Justin, do you have your favourite FP rules in some simplified form that could be posted on BBF and perhaps usable by I/A players?

[kreivi68]

Zelandakh, on 2012-September-24, 01:53, said:

I think FP was seen as a panacea for a large portion of difficult high level decisions and therefore included as often as possible by many. I suspect that Justin's generation will correct this back to a point where FP is a useful tool but not for every situation. I would also guess that at intermediate level, forcing passes generally cost more IMPs/MPs than they gain. Even when you are on the same page it is not that unusual that you are in practise making a decsion between, say, -590 and -500. It is not that I dislike FPs; it is only that you need to be careful about situations where they apply. I am hopeful that the new generation will provide updated FP rules that are simple enough for the masses but nonetheless more effective than the ones usually used now. Justin, do you have your favourite FP rules in some simplified form that could be posted on BBF and perhaps usable by I/A players?

Hi Zel & rest. For your knowledge: Andrew Robson and Oliver Segal had something to say about FP
in their book Partnership Bidding at Bridge (1993). They also set clear rules. See pages 45-49:

http://www.bridgewit...ingAtBridge.ZIP

Yours, T.

[Zelandakh]

Hi kreivi and welcome to BBF. Robson and Segal is one of the most quoted references on these forums. I think you will find that anyone who has been around here for more than a few months (and is interested) will be familiar with the methods proposed.

[MrAce]

Zelandakh, on 2012-September-25, 01:40, said:

Hi kreivi and welcome to BBF. Robson and Segal is one of the most quoted references on these forums. I think you will find that anyone who has been around here for more than a few months (and is interested) will be familiar with the methods proposed.

I promise to read it if you send me the book Zel

[JLOGIC]

lol ive never read it, all i know is that every bid is FIT

[blackshoe]

The book is available online, as a pdf. And no, every bid is not a fit bid, although many are. R & S suggested they might write a follow-on book on uncontested auctions. I got the impression fit bids would figure prominently there as well.