PhantomSac

yeah this obviously. And I say that as someone who hates over moderating and would much rather have almost none. Eagles don't take it personally, he has been on this forum from the very beginning and has always been bitter and hateful. This includes towards many of the forum regulars, including (perhaps especially) me. If it is bothersome just put him in ignore you won't miss much. Otherwise I recommend just not responding to his posts, anyone who spends this long on a forum only to out everyone down must enjoy it when people get upset with them.

Doubling will probably be horrible if partner bids 5D but I'd still do it. I'm quite happy if he passes, bids 4S, bids 4N, or bids 5C. I think him passing or bidding 4S will happen far more often than him bidding 5D even given our actual hand, if he happens to bid 4N or 5C that's just gravy. I think whether you passed or Xed you cannot call yourself bad at bridge though, they both have huge potential to blow up in your face.

Playing the jack to the ace will really impress your teammates when you find a way to lose three tricks in the suit. That said I suppose it is optimal against opponents who always cover with kqx, that is pretty lol though especially if the jt9xx is in dummy. I am going to guess that you are simply misplaying the suit frequently

How do you figure this hand to be worth 7 tricks?

So in your opinion players on BBO would overcall 1H while players "anywhere else" would not?

It doesn't even have to be as complicated as all that, sometimes your partner just has a holding that makes your jack worth something. Like an honor. I mean in the hand given, we have 2 out of 4 suits where partner having Jxx would be of a lot of value (AT8x opp Jxx is way better than AT8x opp xxx obv, and Jxx opp AQT is a lot better than xxx opp AQT). The 2 suits we didn't have a holding where a jack would be worthwhile....we had the jack of that suit. A Jxx is not great. It is not as good as Qxx, but it is better than xxx. If I had to estimate, I would say it is worth about 1 point, while a queen is worth 2 and a king is worth 3 and an ace is worth 4. If you don't count Jxx then I guess you don't agree with point count. If you are saying yeah a jack is worth 1 in point count, but a stray jack should be downgraded, I totally agree, it is worth fractionally less than 1. However we must also upgrade holdings like AQT and AT8x which are significantly better than AQx and Axxx, and even those are worth more than the traditional point count indicates since aces and quick tricks are undervalued. So Jxx is not great, but aces and quicktricks and nice spot cards working with them are worth more. Passing 12 counts with some positive features seems silly. I especially don't understnad "I would open 1N if I could but I would not open 1C." If you would open 1N since you systemically open 12-14 balanced with 1N, then why not open 1C which systemically could be 12-14 balanced with clubs >= to diamonds?

Should do, but it's always been a Belichick thing to run up the score/"play hard for the entire game." As he is the greatest coach ever I will blindly believe that the benefits of this outweigh the small chance of injury, since it's impossible to quantify the gain. Unlike in game playcalling/timeout usage/4th down decisions, it is a lot harder to understand the gains of these kinds of things on a team and their discipline.

How is jxx essentially worthless? A jack is worth more than a small card

I'd bid 4H

Haha, well their main/best receiver is a TE, and another of their best receivers is a RB so I think they'll be doing some passing even though that's pretty funny :P

Haha I was actually thinking of linking that but couldn't remember where I read it. Oh well everyone will always attribute certain things to made up narratives. The narrative on this will probably be how clutch Wilson is even though he played terribly and shat the bed and then reverted to his normal play at the end, which people will see as "clutch."

Very little I'd imagine, given that Seattle won. Probably if it moved it is because they will definitely be facing Seattle so they are less likely to win than when they had a shot to be playing GB. The market is not going to move against a team when the best team in the league gives up 5 turnovers and wins.

Green Bay completes 2 passes over the middle. NO TIMEOUT CALLED. NOT ONE LOL. Clock runs. Rodgers runs out of bounds with 35 seconds left, still has 3 timeouts left. Why not call them earlier?

Another LOL @ McCarthy not calling timeout when seattle completed a pass. With 3 timeouts. Luckily Lynch scored instantly so it didn't matter but still shows another one of his great skills, clock management in the endgame.

lol if they lose after getting 5 turnovers, while managing to score 19 points.

I was talking about what he could say to pump up his team so they don't "lose momentum" and mentally crumble after failing to get a 4th and 1. You said he might have kicked a field goal because he feared his team would lose momentum. No, I don't think that he should say "yo we have a shitty defense and a sweet offense and we are big underdogs in the game." Even if that is true. That is not a good way to coach your team and build momentum lol. In this case it is so clear to go for it that those factors don't even matter. It is almost impossible to construct a scenario where it would be wrong to go for it on 4th and goal at the 1 in the beginning of the game.

It's not at all close. Just open all 12 counts you won't be very far off. If you are thinking of passing with 12 including 2.5 quick tricks and 2 tens you are way off. You are even white at MP.

What is your major suit structure? Otherwise the answers you get will be "Obv I bid 3S showing a mini splinter somewhere" or "obv I bid 2N limit+" or "Obv I bid 3N which shows a good 1-4, promising at least one ace outside" or "I would bid 3D bergen which I play can include a light splinter that plans on bidding game, partner can ask with 3S." Usually I hate answers like that but the answer to this seems purely based on what system you play.

I would not have thought 4C non forcing was at all controversial?

Seriously? They had "only" gotten 40 yards on those 2 drives? They started them at the seattle 19 and the seattle 23. They could not have gotten more yards without scoring touchdowns. Shouldn't putting the most points possible on the board be the goal? Do you prefer to play 100 % partscores when playing total points so you can put points on the board and not risk a 60 % game? Points on the board, momentum, trust your defense, these are all silly things that have been said since the beginning of the time, it does not make them any more useful.

Why? Almost all NFL coaches go for this now. Even Troy freaking Aikman said he should go for it. If his team is such babies that they will crumble after missing it and having them pinned at the 1, maybe he should coach them better so they are prepared for that. He can even say "This shows how much I trust my offense to get a yard! And also how much I trust my defense, because they are gonna get a safety or at least a 3 and out and we will have the ball back in great position." Perhaps the whole "momentum" thing is made up, and just an excuse for bad coaches who make demonstrably bad decisions over and over.

Best run game, best defense. Shockingly they pass less than anyone else.

If you can demonstrate mathematically that it is the wrong decision (or if that has been done by many people many times), it should not matter who it was. Do you really think there is an argument for his first 2 field goals?

I admit I don't know how much the wind matters, I have never looked into it, but I do know Belichick once took the wind in OT vs I think denver last year (the best offense at the time?) BB is a smart dude, choosing to give them the ball in OT when he might not get it back and they are the best offense in the league means that the wind must really matter a ton in some circumstances. The wind was supposedly pretty bad out there and that alone probably swings the decision, but the bot being so far off from the ML at the time also probably swings it over to going for it, the bot is way overestimating GBs chance of winning at that time which obviously leads it to be more conservative. Those 2 combined, it seems like based on what we know MM made a pretty costly decision. But this is a derail from the real point. FOURTH AND GOAL. AT THE ONE. TWICE. It is unthinkable. I hope GB loses.

Let's put it another way, if you have a team that has Aaron Rodgers and Jordy/Cobb, you are going to put up a lot of points no matter how often you kick stupid field goals and punt stupidly and run the ball way too often. That's fine, but that does not mean you cannot criticize McCarthy. His in game decisions are limiting how many games they win because he minimizes how many points his team scores. He is not throwing the ball, he is not catching the ball, the only way during the game he can impact how many points his team scores is with his in game decisions, and he does things like kick field goals on 4th and goal at the 1 which is so obviously wrong. These decisions should be based on MATH. Sometimes there are factors to consider, but 4th and goal at the 1 in the beginning of the game is not one of them.