« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit  (Read 3057 times)

wackojack

  • IACAdmins
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« on: February 20, 2020, 11:53:56 AM »
F2F match
You have at game all:
 !S AK85
 !H 1064
 !D A82
 !C 872
You are playing 5542 SA 15-17 NT  not 2/1

Partner opens 1 !D and RHO overcalls 2  !C, and I double. LHO raises to 3 !C which is passed round to me. So: 
1  !D - (2 !C) - dbl - (3 !C)
pass -(pass)  ?

My thinking: 
Partner either has a balanced 12-14 with 4 or 5 diamonds possibly with a 4 card major or unbalanced with diamonds and likely no 4 card major.  Options:
pass?  With 3 quick tricks in defence in my hand could we could net +200?  OTOH Too strong to give up on game?
2NT?  This would surely be a natural invite to  3N.  OTOH you are relying on partner to have a club stop.
3  !D? Partner definitely has at least 4 diamonds and likely perhaps has 5.  OTOH a 4-3 fit may not play well with no ruffing value in my hand. 

So any suggestions? I will reveal developments later. 

Logged

jcreech

  • IACAdmins
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 692
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2020, 02:02:42 PM »
I am inclined to double.  Partner needs to know that you have at least competitive values with no clear direction to take.  This is the essence of a cooperative double.  If partner is similarly situated in terms of direction, then a penalty pass would be warranted.  I am not expecting partner to bid without a stiff club, a sixth diamond or both majors.
Logged
A stairway to nowhere is better than no stairway at all.  -Kehlog Albran

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2020, 12:36:52 PM »
My first thought was double but now I think I pass. I certainly might have less strength than I have so far shown so passing seems odd, but maybe it's right.

"The five level belongs to the opponents" is usually attributed to Ed Manfield. The same thought can apply to the three level. And we could bring in LOTT, preferably in its original form rather than the Cohen re-formulation. Suppose partner is 3=4=5=1, so we have an eight card diamond fit and they have a nine card club fit. LOTT says that the number of tricks we can make in diamonds plus the number of tricks that they can make in clubs is 8+9=17. So, if we can make 3 !D, they are off one in 3 !C. If they can make 3 !C, we are off one in 3 !D.  Now the statistical justification for LOTT is that on average it comes out right, sometimes over-estimating, sometimes underestimating. Sometimes it is right on, but far from always. And it also uses double dummy analysis. And it assumes we know the total lengths of our suit and the opponent's suit. Not something you want to bet your life on, but something to consider in close calls.

A further problem is this: If partner indeed is 3=4=5=1, and with minimal values (explaining his pass over 3 !C) then if I double he is, I think, going to bid 3 !H not 3 !D. His thinking will be "Well, I of course  would have bid 2 !H in response to the double but after the 3 !C on my right I passed with my minimum. Now that partner has doubled again, I guess he is prepared for me to bid whichever major it is that I have."

I suppose if partner has minimal values, say a 12 count, with 3=3=5=2 shape he will bid 3 !D over a double.  Maybe we make it, maybe not. LOTT now predicts only 16 total tricks, suggesting that if we can take nine tricks then we can set them two in 3 !C.

I suspect we get a small plus if I pass. If I go on, either with X or with 3 !D, we might get a slightly larger plus, we might also get a minus.

So I pass. If we miss a game, I take the blame.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2020, 12:41:25 PM by kenberg »
Logged
Ken

Masse24

  • IACAdmins
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 752
  • Karma: +13/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #3 on: February 21, 2020, 03:42:43 PM »
Quote from: jcreech on February 20, 2020, 02:02:42 PM
I am inclined to double.  Partner needs to know that you have at least competitive values with no clear direction to take. 

This.
Logged
“Kindness is the only service that will stand the storm of life and not wash out. It will wear well and will be remembered long after the prism of politeness or the complexion of courtesy has faded away.” Abraham Lincoln

wackojack

  • IACAdmins
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #4 on: February 21, 2020, 04:13:31 PM »
Well you spotted my deliberate omission which I meant to include and then somehow it got left out.  I confess that I bid 3  !D at the table which immediately I was not happy with and if undoes were available I would have changed it to double.  (Undoes of course should only be made after a mechanical error)  After my 3  !D bid, all was not over.  Partner next bid 3  !S.  Passed to you.  Your bid. 
 
1  !D - (2 !C) - dbl - (3 !C)
pass -(pass)  - 3 !D - (pass)
3  !S - (pass) -  ?
Logged

Masse24

  • IACAdmins
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 752
  • Karma: +13/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #5 on: February 21, 2020, 08:34:03 PM »
I'm bidding game -- 4 !S

Although partner likely has a minimum for his bidding (he did not bid over 3 !C but is making noise now), his strength is where I need it: !H and !D. Plus he has shortage in !C.

I imagine something like: !S Jxxx - !H AQx - !D KQxxx - !C x

Good enough to take a shot at ten tricks.
Logged
“Kindness is the only service that will stand the storm of life and not wash out. It will wear well and will be remembered long after the prism of politeness or the complexion of courtesy has faded away.” Abraham Lincoln

jcreech

  • IACAdmins
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 692
  • Karma: +5/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #6 on: February 21, 2020, 10:16:09 PM »
I sent the first problem to Bridge Winners, and we have a virtual tie after 31 votes (at least after considering sampling error):
  9 votes for 3 !D
 10 votes for double
 12 votes for pass

Now for the new problem:  I agree with Todd and bid 4 !S.  I also think there is a stiff club hiding over there, but am not as certain as Todd that there are four.  Nonetheless, I am willing to play this hand in the 4-3 with the ruffs coming in the short hand.  Sonny Moyse rides again.
Logged
A stairway to nowhere is better than no stairway at all.  -Kehlog Albran

Masse24

  • IACAdmins
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 752
  • Karma: +13/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2020, 11:17:59 PM »
Quote from: jcreech on February 21, 2020, 10:16:09 PM

Now for the new problem:  I agree with Todd and bid 4 !S.  I also think there is a stiff club hiding over there, but am not as certain as Todd that there are four.  Nonetheless, I am willing to play this hand in the 4-3 with the ruffs coming in the short hand.  Sonny Moyse rides again.

That occurred to me as well, Jim, that partner had only three spades. But in that case, partner would be something like 3=3=6=1, and would leave it in 3 !D. Probably. Maybe? Also, with that hand, wouldn't he often rebid 3 !D over 3 !C? Hard to know, though, without seeing partner's hand.
Logged
“Kindness is the only service that will stand the storm of life and not wash out. It will wear well and will be remembered long after the prism of politeness or the complexion of courtesy has faded away.” Abraham Lincoln

Curls77

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #8 on: February 21, 2020, 11:36:03 PM »
I'd expect 3343 shape with bad dimes, min opener. maybe 3352 with ! S QJX. And I'd pass 3S bid in blink, chicken me :D
Logged

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2020, 12:48:22 PM »
The negative double after 1 !D - (2 !C)  has some tricky aspects to it. I am pretty sure that Washington Standard requires either both majors or one major and diamonds.

My point is that I ask myself "Why would partner pass 3 !C but then pull my 3 !D to 3 !S?".   If we accept the WS idea of a negative double, then it would seem partner is thinking something like "Ok, I see you have diamonds, so very possibly you have only one major. If your only major is spades we can play spades, if your only major is hearts then my hand is good enough to play 4 !D, please correct".  If that is what his 3 !S means then I might well figure, since I do fit spades, that if his hand is good enough to play 4 !D then it is probably also good enough to play 4 !S". 

This is assuming a lot abut our agreements and partner's thoughts based on our hypothetical agreement.   But the auction, passing 3 !C and then pulling 3 !D to 3 !S is odd. I suppose it could be spade  values and a try for 3NT if I have hearts covered and a club stop.

On the ASBAF principle (All Strange Bids Are Forcing)  I guess I am to bid something and 4 !S seems right. I would not place a heavy bet on the assumption that pard and I are on the same page here.  It is comforting to think that if partner is showing spade values to suggest NT, then, since I have the AK, he mist have something like QJx or maybe QTx. In which case, 4 !S might be ok. Depends on how many clubs and hearts they can take off the top. When they are done, we might well have ten tricks. Note I said "might". OK, I will upgrade to "probably"
« Last Edit: February 22, 2020, 12:59:25 PM by kenberg »
Logged
Ken

wackojack

  • IACAdmins
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2020, 09:36:18 PM »
This was the deal:
                !S AK85
                !H 1064
                !D A82
                !C 872
  !S Q42                                !S 93
  !H Q873                              !H952
  !D 3                                    !D QJ1095
  !C AQJ43                             !C K109
                 !S J1076
                 !H AKJ
                 !D K764
                 !C 65
1  !D - (2 !C) - dbl - (3 !C)
pass -(pass)  - 3 !D - (pass)
3  !S - (pass) -  ?

I pushed on to 4  !S which went 1 off.  Notice that 3  !C would have been 2 off.  I think that the fault was mine in bidding 3  !D. (I am surprised that 3  !D had so many votes with the experts)  I should realise that partner with a balanced 12-14 cannot bid after opps raise to 3  !C  and could have a 4 card major.  So I must double when the bidding comes round to me and not bid 3  !D.  Then partner with her 4333 12 count will bid 3  !S and I will pass. 
1  !D - (2 !C) - dbl - (3 !C)
pass -(pass)  - dbl - (pass)
3  !S - (pass) - pass - (pass)

Looking at all 4 hands we see that West made a very cheeky 2  !C overcall and when it was raised to 3  !C we could have axed it for 500.  However, I don't think either of us could have envisaged that.  If I double twice for take out my partner could reasonably think that I have a singleton club.  Applying LTT we have 8 card and they a 9 card fit = 17. (As Ken said)   If we can make 9 tricks in spades then opps can make 8 tricks in clubs.  That margin for error is too fine.   

btw Congrats to Sanya for voting to pass 3  !S
Logged

kenberg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Karma: +13/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Bidding judgement stretched to the limit
« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2020, 02:16:26 AM »
I mentioned LOTT. This is a case where LOTT is accurate. There is an 8 card spade fit and an 8 card club fit, 8+8=16. There are 9 tricks in spades, 7 tricks in clubs, 9+7=16.

LOTT is often good for looking back on a hand. in the live auction?  Nobody is quite sure just how big a fit that they have, let alone how big a fit the opponents have.

I chose my pass of 3 !C partly because LOTT did appear to suggest it, also partly because if partner has a four card major it could be hearts just as easily as it could be spades. Landing on a dime in 3 !S is a bit tricky here. Of course N could double 3 !C and S could pass for penalties for the optimal score. but that does not seem likely to me. I think S will pull to his four card major and since  this happens to be spades, not hearts, we are in a good contract if now N can just bring himself to pass. Maybe so.

It's a hand loaded with choices. Fun to think about.
Logged
Ken
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »