fourbyone

[hrothgar]

Here's fairly simple question where I'm not sure of the right answer:

 

You are playing MOSCITO at IMPs

Green

 

Partner passes in first seat

RHO opens 1♠

 

You hold

 

♠ AQ62

♥ AQ94

♦ AKT7

♣ 8

 

Name your poison...

[Free]

Dbl, followed by some NT if possible (and if partner bids ♣). I have 19, don't see a better sollution...

[pclayton]

Yeah I kibbed this. I thought pass was right, in spite of the good result :)

 

Dbl followed by 2N over 2♣ is a 2nd choice because sometimes pard doesn't bid 2♣.

[HeartA]

Dbl, followed by some NT if possible (and if partner bids ♣). I have 19, don't see a better sollution...

Agree.

[kvetcher]

Dbl followed by 2N over 2♣ is a 2nd choice because sometimes pard doesn't bid 2♣.

 

What kind of problem would it be if Pd bid 2♦ or 2♥ ??

[Free]

Dbl followed by 2N over 2♣ is a 2nd choice because sometimes pard doesn't bid 2♣.

 

What kind of problem would it be if Pd bid 2♦ or 2♥ ??

I think it's quite clear what to do if he bids 2♥... 2♦ might be more difficult.

 

Imo you can make this problem even harder if your RHO opens 1♥, some might consider a 1♠ overcall in that case :)

[EricK]

I would like to sign up to the double followed NT brigade.

[the hog]

"I would like to sign up to the double followed NT brigade."

 

Ditto. Don't really see how you can pass here, Phil.

[jikl]

I will join the XNT brigade.

 

Sean

[mr1303]

Is there some significance to the playing of MOSCITO in this situation? I haven't played it for a while, so maybe the defensive methods may have changed.

[whereagles]

Moscito here just means pard, being a passed hand, will usually have a weaker hand than in other systems. E.g. there are many 10 hcp hands with which pard would have opened 1st seat.

[EricK]

Moscito here just means pard, being a passed hand, will usually have a weaker hand than in other systems. E.g. there are many 10 hcp hands with which pard would have opened 1st seat.

When RHO opens and I have 19HCP partner never has 10 HCP (even if it is theoretically possible, he never has that many!)

[hrothgar]

Moscito here just means pard, being a passed hand, will usually have a weaker hand than in other systems. E.g. there are many 10 hcp hands with which pard would have opened 1st seat.

Whereageles brings up a point that I consider crucial...

 

Partner's maximum strength is considerably weaker playing MOSCITO than it would in many other bidding systems. (In theory, partner could have a bad 11 count if he was balanced)

 

Personally, I didn't see any bids that I liked particularly and decided to psyche a 1NT overcall. Sure, I lied about shape and range, but for once I actually had a stopper :-)

 

I considered doubling, but I didn't like any rebids over 2♣. In particular, I was worried about the auction

 

P - (1S) - X - (P)

2♣ - (P) - 2N - (P)

3N

 

Unfortunately, I ended up with the following auction

 

P - (1S) - 1N - (P)

2♠ - (X) - P - (P)

3♣ - (X) all pass

 

Free ended up transferring to clubs and LHO started doubling.

[joshs]

Moscito here just means pard, being a passed hand, will usually have a weaker hand than in other systems. E.g. there are many 10 hcp hands with which pard would have opened 1st seat.

Whereageles brings up a point that I consider crucial...

 

Partner's maximum strength is considerably weaker playing MOSCITO than it would in many other bidding systems. (In theory, partner could have a bad 11 count if he was balanced)

 

Personally, I didn't see any bids that I liked particularly and decided to psyche a 1NT overcall. Sure, I lied about shape and range, but for once I actually had a stopper :-)

 

I considered doubling, but I didn't like any rebids over 2♣. In particular, I was worried about the auction

 

P - (1S) - X - (P)

2♣ - (P) - 2N - (P)

3N

 

Unfortunately, I ended up with the following auction

 

P - (1S) - 1N - (P)

2♠ - (X) - P - (P)

3♣ - (X) all pass

 

Free ended up transferring to clubs and LHO started doubling.

The first problem here is the range you are playing for the 1NT overcall is wrong!!

 

If partner is a passed hand and the most he can have is a balanced 10 count or an unbalanced 9 count (I can't remember the ranges in Moscito offhand), there is no point ever overcalling 1N on only 15. Further, if partner truely has a maximum, say a 9-10 count, he will certainly balance, so you will never miss a game passing with a 15-16 count. In fact partner, will balanced with 7-8 and shortage in spades, and maybe even with 6 and the right shape. If partner passes with scatter values and spade length, you will be very very happy defending.

 

If you were doing something sensible, and playing 1N as more like a great 16-19, or 17-bad 20, or 17-20, or something like that, a 1N overcall would be in the range (or at least close to within the range). Pass might still be right, but its not because you had too much for 1N and not enough to x and then bid 2N opposite a passed hand....

 

I find that this is a recocurring problem among light opening bid players, a first or second seat pass limits there hand more than in standard, but they don't adjust their methods to take advantage of that additional information.

 

For instance, Qxx Kxx Qxx AKQx

Non-Vul vs Vul,

Partner passes, RHO bids 3S, your bid?

In standard you have a guess, and most players would bid 3N on the tenuous stopper hoping that it makes. (I think that bid is wrong, but its not wrong by that much, and if you want a drop more to bid 3N, add another J somewhere and then I will make the same argument)

 

Playing a method where partner can not have a balanced 10 or 11 count (say 10-12 NTs), and might have even opened some unblanced 9 counts, I think 3N is rediculous. You need partner to have an absolute max, to even have reasonable play at making 3N, and if he had that hand, he might be able to x back in (say x Axxx Axxxx xxx). Personally if he xed back in I would pass rather than venture 3N where I have no tricks and RHO can probably duck the first spade to keep a link with partner...

[Echognome]

I would double and bid NT.

 

As for Josh's comments, I don't understand why we are adjusting our bidding to "if game is unlikely, we won't bid". Why can't we battle for part-score? I think it's exceedingly important in MPs, but also why lose the 5 imps swings in IMPs? I mean in MPs, by not overcalling 1NT with a good 15 count, we are taking a huge anti-field position and we better well be right. (I know we're anti-field by playing MOSCITO to begin with, but we'll often end in the same spot as the field anyway.) In IMPs, I don't see why we are changing our ranges so much. OK, so we have some risk of being doubled if we have a bad 15 count. Maybe we can adjust our methods on the margin. But are going to be really happy when it goes (1♠) - P - (2♠) - P - (P) - ? and we're sitting with AQx Kx AQxx JTxx.

[mr1303]

What happened to 3♣ X?

[whereagles]

There are some things you should not ask and that is one of them :(

[Free]

What happened to 3♣ X?

3♣X was just made, tnx to ridiculous defense of our opponents. -1 should probably most frequent, but I think there were ways for -2...

[pclayton]

What happened to 3♣ X?

3♣X was just made, tnx to ridiculous defense of our opponents. -1 should probably most frequent, but I think there were ways for -2...

I didn't think the defense was that ridiculous. I think it was something like this:

 

[hv=n=shj7xxxdqj9xxxcqx&w=saqxxhaq9xdaktxc8&e=s98xhk8xdxct96xxx&s=skjt7xxhtdxxcakj7]399|300|[/hv]

 

Frederick won the stiff heart lead on the board and led the ♣8. North has to rise at this point, I believe to beat it, but played small. South won and exited a diamond. Declarer won, ruffed a diamond, and played the ♣10 (small is better), but South crashed, but the defense still won 4 trump tricks.

 

North has to win the ♣Q, give pard a heart ruff and get a spade ruff. Again, not that routine, but I think the defense should be found. An initial spade lead makes it easier.

 

I can't ever see this going -2; the defense can't ever come to 6 trump tricks.

[Finch]

errmm...

heart lead

8 of clubs won by South with the Jack

Spade ruff

Heart ruff

AK of clubs

 

one off (unless declarer rose with the ace of spades, in which case two off)

[Free]

Ok, should've just been -1 then, I probably mixed up with another hand :)

[joshs]

I would double and bid NT.

 

As for Josh's comments, I don't understand why we are adjusting our bidding to "if game is unlikely, we won't bid".  Why can't we battle for part-score?  I think it's exceedingly important in MPs, but also why lose the 5 imps swings in IMPs?  I mean in MPs, by not overcalling 1NT with a good 15 count, we are taking a huge anti-field position and we better well be right.  (I know we're anti-field by playing MOSCITO to begin with, but we'll often end in the same spot as the field anyway.)  In IMPs, I don't see why we are changing our ranges so much.  OK, so we have some risk of being doubled if we have a bad 15 count.  Maybe we can adjust our methods on the margin.  But are going to be really happy when it goes (1♠) - P - (2♠) - P - (P) - ? and we're sitting with AQx Kx AQxx JTxx.

Please give me a layout? yes white on white at mps, not bidding 1N can be a loser when

a. you can't make 1N

or

b. You can make 1N but the opps will bid it first

and their are declarer's advantage issues.

 

Its also a huge winner most of the rest of the time.

 

Personally, a and b is a strong argument for playing 1N overcalls white/white at mps with a 13-16 range normally (as Marty Bergen advocates). My claim is you will score MUCH MUCH better on average overcalling 1N white/white on a random 14 count opposite an unpassed hand, than overcalling 1N on a random 15 count opposite a passed hand (playing light opening bids). If you want to do the second, you definitely should do the first. Its irrational to bid only in the second case when you have a lower expected combined number of points in the partnership (and a much lower maximum) than in the first case.

 

What I am claiming is your bidding is totally inefficient if

you have 2 ways of getting to the correct spot when you have 15 opposite 8 (you overcall AND partner balances for instance) or 19 opposite 8, and no ways of getting to the correct spot when you have 15 opposite 2 or 19 opposite 2. This is kind of like players who play takeout x's in the balancing seat, and penalty x's in the direct seat. You have two ways of bidding one hand (good holding over there's) and no way of bidding another hand (good hand, but shortage over their suit).

 

At IMPS, you rarely ever lose 5 imp swings playing this style (ok if you let them play 1N with half the deck, and declarers advantage gives each declarer 1 more trick than deserved, you might lose 5 imps, but once again, maybe thats an argument for lighter NT overcalls, which is not my style, but NV there certainly is a case for it....). You often win 5 imp swings this way. You also often win 10 imp swings this way. I just don't understand the comment.

 

Note: How much you have to adjust your ranges depends on how light you open in 1'st second. If you opened ALL 8 counts, I probably would want to adjust by 3 points. if your partnership only opens 1/2 a point light, I wouldn't bother adjusting by much at all.

 

Also Note:

Compare the following two hands auctions:

 

Hand 1: Auction P-1S-1N-P-3N-All Pass

Dummy: xx Axx QJxxx xxx

Declarer: QJx KJx Kxx AKx

 

You are not coming close to making this.

 

Hand 2: Auction: P-1C-1N-P-3N-All Pass

Dummy: xxx Axx QJxxx xx

Declarer: AKx KJx Kxx QJx

 

Here you are a mild favorite. Frequently a 1C opener is 3 or 4 cards, a 1S opener is never 3 or 4 cards (at least in the US). Consequenly, you need more values to make 3N when the opps open a major than open a minor.

 

Further when they open a minor, you also have more options: you might be able to x, and you might be able to overcall a 4 card major. Admittely, overcalling 1N (espeically NV) also has more to gain since the opps might lose their 4-4 major suit fit that way. My main point is each of these factors (Vul, partner's range, the suit the opps opened, and so forth) should effect the optimal range for a NT overcall....

 

I mean if you hold KTx xxx xxxx QJx,

and partner opens 1C and RHO bids 1S, doesn't it feel like bidding 1N is much more sensible when playing a weak NT than when playing a strong NT? Partner's expected range, and typical hand should effect the ranges for your bids....

[TheoKole]

Double first for take out, and convert any club bids to equivelent NT levels.

 

Any suit bid including diamonds I raise 1 level, (I ALWAYS assume that partner has responded with a minimum hand, theoretically this is 0 points, but you can't play with your head in the sand.)

 

If LHO redoubles and it is passed around to me, I will bid 1NT (the best bid available I guess, even with a singleton club). Partner will know my strength, spade stoppers, and all transfer responses are on, including Garbage Stayman and minor suit stayman.

 

Theo

[Echognome]

This is perfect. This helps me understand what you are trying to argue and we can at least debate it with a basis. I do agree with you that if partner is a passed hand, we might want to consider any marginal calls, especially vulnerable against not. However, I try not to adjust my bidding too greatly.

 

You mention having two ways of getting to the same spot as being inefficient. I think you're missing the fact that once partner does not act in a certain way, then you can infer certain things about the hands. I am saying that it seems your style is to put tremendous pressure on the balancer.

 

So Hand 1:

 

North: xx Axx QJxxx xxx

South: QJx KJx Kxx AKx (you need an extra card here, but agree it won't matter)

 

P - (1♠) - ?

 

I personally didn't find the auction 1N - 3N that realistic. I imagine North would invite on the hand and South would sign off. But even if North chose the aggressive action, it could easily be a push versus NOT bidding 1N. For what is south to do when it goes:

 

P - (1♠) - P - (2♠);

P - (P) - ?

 

So I now have to balance on my 3=3=3=4 or my 3=3=4=3 or let the opponents rob me blind? Is partner supposed to guess that one of my hand types is a balanced 16 count with a stopper in their suit?

 

I am not quite sure what you're advocating. If I had to guess, you are saying that South should pass twice. Then South misses an easy 3NT vs xx xx AQJxx Qxxx. Or South should balance. Then NS are in real trouble vs xx xxx xxxxx xxx. OK, NS is in trouble by bidding 1NT as well, but at least they can get out a level lower. I think the principal is to get in and out of an auction quickly rather than having to guess when to balance.

 

I guess I'm agreeing that we should all make some adjustments based on our opening style. I think in particular when to balance or protect, but also when to overcall 1NT. But I think it's rather extreme to move my 1NT overcall style to be, e.g. 17-19 just because partner is a passed hand. For me to change to that, I would have to be playing 8-13 point openers or the like. I currently play 10-15, but will routinely pass bad balanced 12 counts. Thus I don't see the need to adjust my 1NT overcalls.

[awm]

At some point I had some issues with this too. I think it's mostly a communication issue. The main point is that there are two ways to play opening bids:

 

(1) Mostly count high card points. Don't adjust very much for distribution until you know for sure you have a fit.

 

(2) Assume you have a mild fit and bid accordingly.

 

Which style you play makes a huge difference in the subsequent auction. Let me try to explain why:

 

(1) This is Josh Sher's preferred style. As he opens light, virtually all 10-counts will open. Very few 9-counts will open. Obviously you can adjust your high card point value as you see fit, but the point is that a 5-5 8-count is not an opening bid in this style whereas a balanced 10-count is. Playing this method, there's a very strong inference that a passed hand will not have ten points. This should definitely effect your bidding opposite a passed hand, especially when you are balanced and can tell that game is unlikely opposite partner's 0-9.

 

(2) A lot of people play this style, often without discussion of the impact on the rest of the system. Here, a 5-5 8 or 9-count could easily be an opening bid whereas a balanced 10-count (and maybe some 11s and 12s) would be a pass. In this style, there is not a particularly strong inference about partner's lack of values due to failure to open (he could still have a balanced 11 or whatever). In this case you shouldn't change your bidding much opposite a passed hand (or not much more than standard bidders do) because it can be extremely difficult for two balanced hands to get into an auction later if you pass at first opportunity.

 

It's possible for either style to be internally consistent, and we can argue forever about which is "better." I would make the point that Josh's style (1) is a better fit for a 2/1 game force type followup structure where partner has to be able to decide whether to force game on a misfit at his first bid.