Worth bid

[adhoc3]

I was kibtizing a star table in the lobby, I asked a question and there happened a arguement. What's your choice? What if it was rubber game? MP?

[Finch]

It seems obvious to bid.

I might try 4C.

[Trpltrbl]

I am bidding, but I will bid 5♣.

Maximum pressure and since most think they are too good to pass maybe they will bid something they can't make :P

 

GBB :rolleyes:

[Gerben42]

100% for bidding, expect unanimous panel.

 

Added bonus: Opps won't know what they are doing after competition. BTW this 3♣ for me shows either ♣ or ♦ + ♥, which means even more trouble for them.

[Guest Jlall]

I didnt vote because I like a 4C bid here even at this vulnerability.

[adhoc3]

sadly 3c would goes for -1100 and 4c -1400:(

[Trpltrbl]

sadly 3c would goes for -1100 and 4c -1400:(

Hmm, that is a lot considering the fact that you have 7 tricks. But then again most stars are not even worth the the air they breath, so it doesn't surprise me :lol:

 

GBB :lol:

[Chamaco]

I was surprised that strong players bid red vs whit vs a 18-20 balanced hand at IMPS.

 

We know pard is odds on to be broke, and that if we bid, most likely we have no dummy entry to finesse in trumps (provided dummy has any trumps at all)...

 

We *might* make 3C or even 4C, but we are unlikely to make game.

 

So in terms of risk reward, perhaps I understand bidding at MP, but at IMPS ?

Risking -500 or worse to collect (when it's right) 110-150 ?

 

There *might* be a few times where we indeed find game, but I'd rate it to be less likely than the other cases (we are doubled for -200 or worse, and this is is often a phantom).

 

I really can't understand this, it seems to me that at IMPS, at these colors, the risk/reward ratio (some partscore vs going for a digit) is just too high, but I am not claiming to be right, I am just asking to stronger players than myself where is the flaw in my reasoning.

[Guest Jlall]

I was surprised that strong players bid red vs whit vs a 18-20 balanced hand at IMPS.

 

We know pard is odds on to be broke, and that if we bid, most likely we have no dummy entry to finesse in trumps (provided dummy has any trumps at all)...

 

We *might* make 3C or even 4C, but we are unlikely to make game.

 

So in terms of risk reward, perhaps I understand bidding at MP, but at IMPS ?

Risking -500 or worse to collect (when it's right) 110-150 ?

 

There *might* be a few times where we indeed find game, but I'd rate it to be less likely than the other cases (we are doubled for -200 or worse, and this is is often a phantom).

 

I really can't understand this, it seems to me that at IMPS, at these colors, the risk/reward ratio (some partscore vs going for a digit) is just too high, but I am not claiming to be right, I am just asking to stronger players than myself where is the flaw in my reasoning.

If we go for -500 then it is very likely the opps have a game so we have not lost much.

 

By bidding 4C we take away stayman and transfers (and 3N) from them and make it difficult for them to judge what the right game is. How many pairs below top caliber have discussed what 2N 4C X is? If they haven't that makes life even harder. They may play 5D cold for 3N/4H. This is part of the "reward" that comes in. Also, we may find a game ourselves, though that is unlikely we really just need good black suit holdings from partner (another reward).

 

The big downside to 4C comes when partner produces 0 tricks and you go for 800 vs a white game (this is unlikely as even if your 4th spade sets up you can take 8 tricks) or they have no game and you go down 200 or 500 because most of partner's values are in diamonds/hearts (much more likely of a risk).

 

I consider 3C almost risk free, it's almost always -200 worst case scenario, -500 would be really unlucky. Plus they will have a hard time Xing you since their X will be stayman. However, the upside is not as big either. They can play all their systems, but you will win if you hit a club fit with pard and sometimes get to game.

[Gerben42]

I bid 3♣ only because of the vulnerability. How do you go for 1100? Did my ♠AK get ruffed or something?! Hard to believe all this.

 

I seem to have 7 sure tricks so anything more than 500 down seems either extremely bad luck or extremely bad play, or both.

[cherdano]

I bid 3♣ only because of the vulnerability. How do you go for 1100? Did my ♠AK get ruffed or something?! Hard to believe all this.

 

I seem to have 7 sure tricks so anything more than 500 down seems either extremely bad luck or extremely bad play, or both.

Even if it does go for 1100, then opponents are likely to have grand.

 

I would still like to see all 4 hands before believing the 1100, however.

 

Arend

[Winstonm]

The vul led me to bid only 3C - otherwise I'm with Justin and bid 4C. It is hard to imagine going down more than 2 with the great spots in the club suit and this 3C bid is only looking for a fit to drive the opponents to the 5 level where I may go plus. Not only that, but we are missing 8-9 HCP and if those happen to be in partner's hand in the form of the spades Q, the heart Ace and the club Q we have a game so the risk of passing is real as well.

 

Winston

[mikeh]

I passed, then looked at the votes. So I'm in a minority.

 

One problem for me is that I could not bid 3♣ naturally. I could (with some partners) bid 3♠ showing ♣ or the reds: this is the same as a 4♣ bid, to a large extent. And it also has the effect of removing stayman and transfers etc.

 

I would certainly bid at any other vulnerability but this is just too rich for me.

 

Furthermore, I am at a bit of a disadvantage here, compared to the other table. It is likely that the other table heard a 1♦ opening or (even) a 1♣ bid. My opps are playing an unusual range for 2N. So I have a dangerous problem that my counterpart probably is not facing.

 

Finally, why am I so sure that the opps can bid or make a game? I 'know' I am unlikely to make 4♣: I need some help to get to 10 tricks.

 

I do have pretty good defence here: an easy lead, the ♣K behind the strong hand, and a ♦ void which may well mean that their ♦ suit is not as solid as they think it is.

 

I'd like to do a simulation, but do not have the program on this computer: maybe I will do one tonight and post tomorrow... but I'm pretty busy these days. My gut sense (an unreliable tool) tells me that the opps will either miss game, bid the wrong game or just plain go down in some contract (especially if I pass) about 30% of the time.

 

My same fallible gut tells me that a low-level (3♣) interference will offer them a fielder's choice: two ways to win: double us for 500 or bid a game aided in the play by knowing we have an unusual hand. A higher bid will increase the chances of a double: if they do bid their own contract, it will be because they have extra shape themselves, and once again the play will be easier after we bid. All told, the upside of bidding at this heat seems not worth the risk.

[jaapfr]

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=sj532hak92d6542c2&w=sak64h86dckjt9874&e=sthqt754dt9873c63&s=sq987hj3dakqjcaq5]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Bidding went p-p-2nt-?

(reality was 3cl-4d*-p-4ha all pas result 4ha-3.

Played wed 9 nov 11jaszcak table.

(the 4d was alerted as do not know what 2nt is)

The kibs discussion was about the 3cl bid which was called a bit a gambling 3cl bid which was ok but unwise at a rubber table with high stakes. My comment was that 3cl in my opinion was a very acceptable bid at any table high stakes or not and that at least 8 out of 10 top players would not pass.

For me was and is irrelevant whether 3cl would be made or not but that with a hand with 7 tricks i would never pass. (max -500)[/hv]

[Gerben42]

Although rubber is not IMPs I'd make the same bid at Rubber. 3♣ doubled is a game and since we are vulnerable that finishes off the rubber. Although perhaps if they really are like that that you want the rubber to continue against these weak players :lol:

 

As it is, 3♣ can be beaten, but on other hands there are no guarantees. As it was it caused confusion which was well worth the "risk".

[mike777]

4c is that an option?

[luke warm]

my first thought was 4♣ and i'm glad to see a lot of people thought the same... does this mean the old rule of 2 and 3 is back in style?

[Gerben42]

does this mean the old rule of 2 and 3 is back in style?

 

No, but at unfavorable everyone is allowed to be careful ;)

It's more like "rule of 2, 3, 4 and 5r" now....