I hate bridge with a passion

[mr1303]

Well, I've just been knocked out of the Hubert Phillips Bowl (total points scoring tournament). Whilst I normally get knocked out in the first round, this one I'm REALLY angry about, since I should have won it. In fact, these two boards were the reasons why.

 

 

1)

 

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sjxxhxxxdaxxcakxx]133|100|Scoring: Total Points[/hv]

 

Auction goes:

 

1♠ Pass 1NT Pass

2♥ Pass 2♠ Pass

Pass ?

 

2)

 

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sjxxhxxxdaxxcakxx]133|100|Scoring: Total Points[/hv]

 

Auction goes

 

1NT ?

 

You play Asptro, so can overcall 2♦ showing spades and another suit, if you wish to do so.

 

I'll leave it a while for people to comment before I post the full hands

[david_c]

Pass and pass again. I mean, both vul at total points? You couldn't make it more obvious ...

[awm]

The first seems like a clear pass. On the second it can often pay to bid, and I would always bid if playing Woolsey or Lionel (or any method that lets me out at 2♣ when partner prefers clubs). Playing Astro it is less clear but I think I'd still risk a call.

[kfgauss]

The first hand I definitely pass.

 

The second hand is quite a dangerous hand. It's clearly dangerous to bid, but it's also dangerous to pass -- you can easily give up a double part-score swing (I guess these aren't so huge at total points, perhaps) or miss a game. I'm somewhat timid and will pass because I'm red and I can't get out in clubs at the 2-level, but I have no idea what's right. A simulation could be very interesting.

 

Andy

[the hog]

Pass 1, Asptro on 2

[pclayton]

1) Im probably getting stolen from but its too dangerous to act.

 

2) Im not coming in if I cant get clubs into the picture so I pass.

[P_Marlowe]

1) Pass

2) 1 NT was 12-14?

I think I will go with 2D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

1) Dbl. You passed of course (like every sane player), and got a bad result.

2) 2♦. Since I play Apstro I apparently believe in bidding 2♦ with a hand like this.

[Winstonm]

Pass. Pass.

 

Risk/reward ratio too out of line for me to act.

 

Winston

[Chamaco]

Pass and pass.

 

In hand 1, I believe that - if there was any moment to stretch to bid - it was on the first round if bidding (in quick - out quick), where bidding slightly offshape would at least allow to get out at the 2 level, clearly better than waiting "to see how things develop" and then feel under pressure and consequently force the bidding to the 3 level.

[Miron]

3♣ the first one and double the second.

.

.

.

Just kidding, two passes :D

[Finch]

On the first one, pass is so obvious that it must have cost a large swing in some mannner. I guess partner has something like Qxx Kx Qxx QJxxx and somehow they got to the making 3NT in the other room.

 

The second one is why the opponents play weak NT. It's a horrible problem. A partial swing is (usually) irrelevant, but you could go for a huge penalty or get 100 against a vul game, which aren't. I would pass, but I don't feel comfortable about it.

[whereagles]

1. Pass. Opps have exchanged too much information. It's WAY more dangerous to overcall now than 2 rounds before.

 

2. Use gadget. Honors are at the right suits, so gogogo.

[Blofeld]

Agree that pass is completely obvious on the first hand. Now curious as to what went wrong with it.

 

I don't like the second one at all. I think I pass, but I would bid if I could show a 2-suiter but still get out in 2♣. Easy for this to cost either way.

[hatchett]

I would pass on both hands.

The first one is obvious.

 

The second one is very close but the fact I can't show clubs at the two level convinces me to pass. The real horror show on the second board would be a double game swing say 4H and 4S both making .

[han]

I'd also pass on both hands, but on the second hand I'd really wish that I was playing a different gadget.

[luke warm]

I'd also pass on both hands, but on the second hand I'd really wish that I was playing a different gadget.

agree... i play 2♥ showing spades and clubs or clubs only

[pclayton]

I really dont like any system that forces me to bypass 2♣. Even lowly DONT allows this.

 

I'm sure there are some other redeeming features of Astpro, but this aspect I could do without.

[jdeegan]

:lol: Since you asked, I'll chime in with the majority: Pass and Pass - wtp?. If pass and pass turns out to be a big loser, I'll bet part of the 'blame' lies with partner. Bridge is very hard to play well, but it isn't THAT tough a game.

 

The first hand is four triple three with the auction suggesting that partner has three spades and three or four hearts. Yoicks! On the second hand, you have a moderate 4-3-1-5 hand with 10 HCP with a balanced hand with two kings more than you have on you right and an unlimited hand on your left. And, you are vulnerable. What are you thinking??

[1eyedjack]

I'd also pass on both hands, but on the second hand I'd really wish that I was playing a different gadget.

What gadget would you have preferred Hannie, just out of interest?

 

There are not many that allow you to show clubs and play in them at the 2 level.

 

You could give up the penalty double of 1NT but remember this is weak 1N. Increasingly players are indeed giving up that meaning of double even v weak 1N, and typically use the double to show Spades and another. That MIGHT get you to play in 2C on this occasion, although whether partner would choose to bid 2C when it is right to play there is perhaps not certain.

 

Personally as a weak 1N player I feel more, not less, comfortable opening 1N against such defences, but that is a partial opinion I know.

 

Anyway, I pass on both, and I normally play Asptro defence but I don't reckon this hand quite cuts it. Nor am I particularly bothered about passing. Perhaps I should be, reading the comments of others.

[mr1303]

Well, on the first, the player holding those cards found a balancing double. Found partner with a 6 count, which turned out to be worth nothing. 3♦ X went down 6 for -1400, a horrific result.

 

2♠ would have made up one. These were the full hands:

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s98hjxxdkj9xxcq10x&w=sjxxhxxxdaxxcakxx&e=skxxhkxxd10xxxcxxx&s=saq10xxhaq10xdqcjxx]399|300|Scoring: Total Points[/hv]

 

On the second hand, partner went for -1100. The bidding went:

 

1NT 2♦ dbl Pass

Pass 2♠ dbl all pass

 

Partner's pass showed a mild desire to play in diamonds, but it was -1100 no matter where you played.

[1eyedjack]

There are 14 Diamonds and only 12 Clubs

[hatchett]

There are 14 Diamonds and only 12 Clubs

 

That's probably why it went so many off.

[mr1303]

Whooops, duly edited.

[Finch]

I hope you don't object to a bit of advice on playing total points scoring, ready for next year's Hubert Phillips. I might have won more matches in this format than all the regular posters to BBO forums combined, as it's not a popular format outside that one event!

 

The main thing to realise is that although people typically think of it as 'like IMPs just a bit more so', the tactics are quite a long way different from teams-of-4 IMPs.

There is no such thing as 'protecting the part-score': you just don't bother because the downside (large penalty) is so high. IMO, the first of your team's doubles (on the 3343) was wrong at all forms of scoring, but at total points I think it is clearly, obviously and gratuitously wrong and got what it deserved, with no "imo" to preface it.

 

To understand the difference from IMPs scoring, compare a part-score swing (-110 in both rooms, say) to other more expensive things:

 

i) Go off in a vul 4M made in the other room.

At IMPs that is exactly twice as bad (12 imps rather than 2x6 imps)

At total points that is over 3 times as bad (-720 rather than 3.3 lots of -220)

 

ii) Go off in a vul 6M made in the other room

At IMPS that's still not quite 3 times as bad as a partial swing (17 imps rather than 3x6)

At total points it's a disaster: -1530 needs 7 partial swings to recover it.

 

iii) Go for 800 against a vul game, when they are making at the 4-level but not the 5 level.

At IMPS that is 5 out, against a possible 12 in if they bid to 5-level and go off

At total points that is 180 points out against a possible 720 (4 times as much) in

 

iv) Go for 800 "protecting" a partscore.

At IMPs that is 12 out again for a possible 5-6 imps in: not good, but not a disaster.

At total points that is about 650 out for a possible 200-250 points in. Don't do it. Don't even think about going for 1100 on a part-score board, either.

 

In summary:

- forget about partscores and overtricks

- don't miss, go off in, or let through vulnerable games or slams

- avoid going for large penalties against nothing

- pay out lots of insurance by bidding on in high level competition: "one off against one off" is better bridge at aggregate than at any other form of scoring, if there was even a tiny chance that either contract was making.