[helene_t]

Why should they ballance? They know you have game (since they trust your partner's 2♣ opening) so they are happy to defend 2♣.

[Free]

sceptic, on Jun 19 2005, 02:31 PM, said:

Quote

because 2♣ after such an auction is usually a VERY poor result for the opponents, so why give them another chance to bid to a better one??

If we assume I am the only person EVER to have passed a 2 club bid, what statistics do you base this statement on (tongue in cheek)

If you believe statistics, then the average person has 1 breast and less than half a penis. Simulations give a much better picture...

Btw, I've also passed lots of 2♣ openings, but only when they're natural and not forcing

[Blofeld]

Now hang on a minute. The problem would be different if playing 2♣ as an absolute game force. But most people don't play it as such these days. So there may not be a game available (there may still be one, as the 2♣ opener is unlimited above, but ...)

Does anyone have the resources to simulate the results of passing 2♣ openings?

[david_c]

Balancing really would be a bad idea IMO. If this is a part-score hand then the opps have probably won the board already by choosing to pass 2♣; whereas if the 2♣ opener really did have game in hand you're giving up a HUGE score.

[david_c]

Blofeld, on Jun 19 2005, 01:37 PM, said:

Now hang on a minute. The problem would be different if playing 2♣ as an absolute game force. But most people don't play it as such these days. So there may not be a game available (there may still be one, as the 2♣ opener is unlimited above, but ...)

... and besides, even if 2♣ is supposed to be 100% game forcing, that doesn't mean that opener knows for sure that game is going to make ...

[MickyB]

helene_t, on Jun 19 2005, 02:32 PM, said:

Why should they ballance? They know you have game (since they trust your partner's 2♣ opening) so they are happy to defend 2♣.

They know that my pard only opens 2♣ when he actually has game in hand? Wish they had told me this

Balancing certainly could work, but I'm unlikely to do it without a shapely hand with spades. The exception would be if I knew LHO well enough to know that he was going to punt game on his random 22 count, in which case I'll balance and then double him in game!

[luke warm]

helene_t, on Jun 19 2005, 06:59 AM, said:

So partner's judgement was, obviously, that it would be a good idea to force you to bid at least once, even with zero HCPs. Suppose your judgement is that it would be a good idea not to do so. Why would you assume your own judgement is better than partner's?

ok helene, good question...here's my answer...imagine YOU are the 2c opener... you look at your hand, add your hcp (we'll assume a balanced hand) and say "hmmm i have 3nt in my hand, maybe we have a slam.. let me go slowly so i can decide which to bid"... so you open 2c..

now your partner reasons, "hmmm my partner thinks we have game for sure and maybe even slam... little does she know i have the perfect hand to indulge my judgment by usurping her captainship... nevermind that she might can take 9 tricks off the top, nevermind that i'm making a decision for the team by counting to zero, if she says anything about it i'll act all hurt and say 'what, you don't want me using my judgment'?"

the partner of the 2c opener can *never* judge the value of the hands because the 2c bid is made on different types... all the partner can do is judge the value of his own hand.. and he hasn't been given a choice, he's been given a command.. BID... the 2c bidder has more information so is in a much better position to judge

if a p'ship doesn't want to play 2c as forcing, that's fine, make it semi-forcing

[TheoKole]

My point was that this partner made a unilateral decision that wasn't his to make AND that he had no idea and no information to make.

There ARE hands that you can have that require you to make a unilateral decision with EXTREME 2 suiters or even an extreme 1 suiter. For example, once I held a 11 card AK suit and 2 small in another.

However even in these situations you at least TRY to get information from partner (or maybe from oppoments bidding) to make the right decision.

If my partner makes a forcing bid, I play as a rule that I ALWAYS try to give him the information he needs. It may be that only 1 bid will give him that information, maybe it will need 2 or 3 bids, my partner knows better than I do, BECAUSE he made a forcing bid. If he needs more information he'll keep on making forcing bids until I give him the information he needs (if this is possible).

At the end of the auction, he decides what the contract will be because he is the Captain, rightly or wrongly, that's the way it is in these situations (at least with my partners). The trust built up in the partnership goes a long way, in much more difficult decisions at high levels.

I find I can't play bridge at any good level, with partners that I can't trust, so if he doesn't trust my judgement, why should I bother. I am very forgiving in any and all mistakes in play or defense, (I've made some doozies myself- so who am I to criticize).

The situation of the original poster and the one I described displayed lack of trust and was not a simple mistake, which is why I took offense.

Cheers

[MickyB]

Just realised I've never discussed with pard what 2♣-P-P-3♣ and 2♣-P-P-2N mean. I wonder if they should be the same by a passed hand...

[MickyB]

Free, on Jun 19 2005, 02:31 PM, said:

Yes, I prefer to play in a partnership where both players can trust each other to exercise judgement and to do the best thing on the hand in question.  But if one player passes the other one's FORCING bid, HE DOESN'T ALLOW HIS PARTNER to exercise that judgement, so you're not playing in such a partnership you're dreaming about...

He isn't able to exercise judgement because his partner has taken a decision that he believes will lead to the best result. This is completely different from not being able to exercise judgement because you are worried that partner won't approve of it.

[luke warm]

Quote

I wouldn't dream of bidding anything else! It would be a massive betrayal of partnership trust to do otherwise.

oh.. you mean like *passing* such a hand? yes, passing a forcing opening is a betrayal of trust, if not in partner then in your system

Quote

"Partner, you just opened a hand which is a game force or close to such. I don't know what you've got, but I am forced to take a guess here. By bidding on I give you another chance to speak, but on the basis of my hand I know that there are many possible hands that you may hold [implied: and I trust you to hold one of them] on which this will take us too high, in which case bidding on will lose. On the other hand, passing will gain when 2♣ makes and bidding takes us too high, and lose when you had a genuine game force. My best guess is to pass."

this is the problem.. no you are *not* "forced to take a guess.." you are (supposedly) forced to bid here... nobody has asked you to take a "best guess"... you've been commanded to bid... how do you know what the partnership has? by adding your zero to ... what?

Quote

While we're at it, one possible advantage to passing 2♣ is that it may sometimes put your LHO under pressure.

the pressure that comes from passing as quickly as possible?

sceptic said:

I would like to add something here, that I never mentioned in my original post, after my pass, why does no one balance?,

that's easy... because they trust your partner more than you do..

[hrothgar]

We've pretty much established that passing the strong/artifical/forcing 2♣ opening is a mistake. Based on this, I think that we can safely conclude that balancing after RHO has passed is also somewhat dubious...

[TheoKole]

My apologies for the misunderstanding,

By "take offense" I meant that I disagree strongly with the decision. I have never yelled or even spoken strongly to even my pick-up partners for any mistakes they make.

If my partner who did this was a beginner or even intermediate, I would have a talk with them (away from the table) about forcing bids and partnership trust. With an advanced or expert player, (who should know better) I would take the bidding as a sign of distrust and would probably refuse politely to play with them in any scoring games.

Just my thoughts,

Cheers

[luke warm]

yeah, i agree.. with a beginning player i'd be more understanding.. it took a long time to break my wife of the habit of bidding 2nt in a stayman sequence, so i know how hard it can be

[Chamaco]

MickyB, on Jun 19 2005, 01:21 PM, said:

Wouldn't you prefer to be in a partnership where you trust each other to exercise judgement and to do the best thing on the hand in question, with no recriminations for doing so?

The point is that responder in front of a 2C opener has no elements that allows him to "exert judgment" on the potential of the combined hands passing, for a very SIMPLE REASON: he knows NOTHING AT ALL of opener's hand.

He is not exerting judgment, he is IMPOSING to pard a contract, by seeing only his card.
Responder, by passing, is playing only with his cards.

This is bad regardless of whether it gives a good or bad score.

And - to me - it looks silly or presumptuous for responder to be willing to take the final guess without knowing anything of opener's hand, especially breaking a partnership agreement.

Now tell me: what makes you think that responder has more elements than opener to place the contract ("exert judgment")?
The fact that responder has 0 hcp and long clubs is not a good enough reason: opener knows that responder hold a yarborough and yet he forced anyways.

[badderzboy]

If I EVER passed the 2♣ or equiv bid deliberately (I'd need 2 more clubs lol) I would hold my hands to my hand and plead vociferously I thought it was 1♣.

My partner after spitting feathers, numerous expletives and probably making 2♣ and not much else on the hand in question might forgive me and ask me to clean my glasses in future...

I do remember passing and ACOL 2♥ (8 playing and people telling me you can't pass that bid!!! ( It made exactly 8 and I had a yarborough... and got a top!).

The moral of the story is don't pass unless you're a damn good liar!!!

Steve

[the hog]

The value of a pass can easily be shown by putting this hand opposite:
♠ J53
♥ T
D T975
♣ T9832

AKQxxxx
Axx
AKQ

With 7S cold you are likely going off in 2C. Great pass! End of story.

[bearmum]

sceptic, on Jun 20 2005, 03:14 AM, said:

I still can't get into my head, why you would take offence at (I think I understand you) my passing the order to bid.

I screwed up, that is all, surely that does not entitle you (if you were my p) to take offence a good p is forgiving p, not someone that screws up even in such a blatantly bad fashion

Sceptic --- forgive me if I have misunderstood you
The first post of the string you asked what we thought of your PASS of your partner's 2♣ (supposingly forcing) bid ??

Now you seem to be saying you made a mistake with the pass -- which is an entirely different question --- and if you apologised immediately to P ( like SORRY P -- I really made a HUGE boo boo ) then hopefully the person with whom you were playing would be forgiving

BUT
As I said early in this string IF partner makes a forcing bid ( whatever that is and in whatever bidding sequence) for the sake of partnership trust I believe it is YOUR responsibility not to pass!!

SO in the example quoted you should not pass because there are lots of hands -- see the one posted by Hog as the extreme -- where 2♣ will not be a good result If partner has made an incorrect forcing bid and you get a bad result -- THEN you can make up your mind if you need to clarify what bids are forcing (if a long term partnership -- or just put him/her on your "do not play with again" list

[Al_U_Card]

Here's my 2 cents.

Notwithstanding that my 2C openings show more quick tricks than losers (I can make game opposite a balanced yarborough (therefore responder's hand has trump support even if it has 12 losers)) or the 2C shows a balanced 22+ hcp and the 2NT rebid can be passed, I would NEVER pass a 2C opener because I could not bear to remove the pleasure of making that bid from my partner, whatever their skill level etc.

Keeping your pard happy about his actions and yours is what it is all about.

Bridge, THE PARTNERship game.

[SoTired]

My 2 cents. All this talk about partnership trust, probabilities, "Never playing with them again", "Every mistake is the same, why this one so bad"

None of that matters, although it all makes sense.

For me, the subject of this thread is correct: "...the idiot passes" and since they said it, I think I can repeat it without a violation.

Only an idiot would pass an artificial, near game-force 2C opener. Would I play with that person again? No, because I don't like to play with idiots. Others who say they would still play with that partner have a higher tolerance than I do.

Would I go through 10 pages of notes trying to convince them that passing 2C is a terrible bid? No, because anyone who would argue that point is beyond reasoning. "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." is very applicable.

Similar to this situation: Your 15-year-old daughter comes crying to you and says, "Yes, he is 38-years-old, out on parole for armed robbery, alcoholic and drug abuser, and beats me up occassionally, but I LOVE HIM! Why won't you listen when I explain his good points and let me marry him?"

"Because you are an idiot, my dear."

Same thing.