OH NO we missed slam :(

[gwnn]

This is a thing that I've been thinking of lately, but my reasoning just falters and I can't seem to get to a clear conclusion.

 

Imagine you play Pairs in a decent enough field. You're declarer and when you see dummy you realize what the title says: not only do you see a solid (60+ %, say) slam missed, but you're reasonably sure a good part (75%) of the field will be in it.

 

The question basically goes: what do you need to do here? Does one need to play for the "overtricks" (4♥+3) just as usually? Or does it make sense to try and find the 100.5% line to make? I remember Fred once wrote an article when a mourning declarer failed 4♠ cause of a horrible 5-0 trump break. Can one play specifically to cater to the 75% of the field going down in slam (ok so ♠Q is offside, ♣K is offside, trumps have to be 4-1, etc)? I guess this situation can be generalized for missing game or "missing" 1NT in lieu of 2m, etc.

 

I realize this is a very non-specific question. But this is a problem I seem to be facing quite often (:)). Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

[Fluffy]

When this happens with partscores and you say 'we missed game!' then playing for trumsp to be 4-1, or whatever that makes game be missed is ok.

 

For slam vs game its different, you don't know yet what oppoennts have, they might make big preempts that don't allow 6 to be bid, or even they force some 7s, or good defences.

[SoTired]

I agree. You missed slam, but you have no idea whether the field bid it or not.

 

BTW, if this is a frequent problem for you, maybe you need to strengthen your backbone and bid more. The worse that can happen is you go down.

 

Seriously... The fear of going down prevents exploring some good slams.

[Edmunte1]

It's pretty simple. When you're short of slam, you're fighting only with that part of the field that isn't in the slam. So you don't have to do something special against the odds. Let's consider 2 cases:

 

1. The slam makes, the score sheet will be something like:

980, 980, 980, 980, 980, 980, 480, 480, 480, 480, you'll get 3/18 MP=16.66%, but if you try something fancy your 450 will get a zero

2. The slam doesn't make, so the score sheet will be something like:

450,450,450,450,-50,-50,-50,-50,-50,-50, and you'll get 15/18 MP=83.33%. If you try something fancy you'll get a top for 480 or 12/18=66.66% for a 420.

Considering that slam is odds on, more frequent you'll lose in case 1., losing 16.66% than winning in case 2. the same number of MP's.

 

For more MP's decisions like this one i strongly recommend you Hugh Kelsey's book Match-Point Bridge

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

assume 6 makes, no matter what, 75% of the field

will beat you, if 6 goes down, you will beat 75% of

the field.

 

In other words you should not worry about 6, worry about

the guys in 4H, and this means you should try to make as

many tricks as possible.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[dcvetkov]

Another excellent MP book

 

"Matchpoints"- Kit Woolsey

[Halo]

Reese also made the argument many years ago about ignoring the slam bidders in this kind of situation.

 

Taking special measures applies to, say, being almost sure you are in the wrong part score, and taking a particular line in the play can recover/win against a field that has almost certainly outbid you.

[whereagles]

No definite answer because I think the type of field matters here.

 

For example, in a weak field, if the slam is hcp-based and easy to spot, everybody will be in it (or in 7!), so I would probably assume some 5-0 breaks and assure my game when slam fails.

[asc]

safety play here no mater if we take 16% or 0% , sometimes overtricks are comming from safety play (singleton K for example).

[mike777]

No definite answer because I think the type of field matters here.

 

For example, in a weak field, if the slam is hcp-based and easy to spot, everybody will be in it (or in 7!), so I would probably assume some 5-0 breaks and assure my game when slam fails.

I do not understand these repeated references to weak fields. I thought all fields are called weak outside of the final cutdown at the Blue Ribbon pairs.

[Fluffy]

No definite answer because I think the type of field matters here.

 

For example, in a weak field, if the slam is hcp-based and easy to spot, everybody will be in it (or in 7!), so I would probably assume some 5-0 breaks and assure my game when slam fails.

I do not understand these repeated references to weak fields. I thought all fields are called weak outside of the final cutdown at the Blue Ribbon pairs.

I dunno what Ribbon pairs is, the strongest I played was European Open Championship Final in Tenerife 2 years ago, I hope Frances agrees with me in that this was not a weak field ;)

[kenrexford]

If you missed it, they missed it.

 

If the slam goes down on the normal line, your play will not affect the play at the tables where slam goes down. Similarly, if the slam makes at the other table, your line will not change that.

 

You are competing against those who did not bid the slam. If that's just you, going down one in a cold game beats down two in slam, and +420 beats -50 just as much as +450.

 

All that said, if this is the first of three boards, and you absolutely know that the entire field will bid and make slam, and if you are in a strange town such that no one has a clue who you are or how good you are, you can do a preparatory idiocy coup. The opponents already have decided that you and partner cannot bid worth anything. Let them think that you cannot play the cards, either. Play it like a buffoon! Go for that ridiculous line, not an intricate and exotic line, but a strange line (like playing to drop the stiff King or getting the odds all off). On the next two boards, the opponents might let their guard down, because you prepared them to think that you are an idiot. ;)

[Apollo81]

Tables in slam do not affect your score as they get either 980 or -50 which are both outside the range of possible scores for you. Assume the field is in game and play accordingly.

[Fluffy]

There is an exception, when you play 3NT, and the field could be in 6♣, then going 1 off in 3NT because the minor breaks badly might be stupid, and ducking AKQxxx opposite xx 'could' be in order.

[mikeh]

The advice about ignoring the slam bidders is (imo) right. So, you are in your own little mini-field of the 25% or so who missed the slam. Your task is to maximize your matchpoints within that field. So take the same line as if there was no slam bonus available to the field: in your field, that is true.

 

The exception might be if you were close to the end of an event and (somehow.. maybe it was a barometer scoring event where you knew where you were lying) you absolutely needed a top.. then you'd have to assume that the slam was going down on normal lines of play... if it makes, you are doomed to a poor score anyway... so you may as well play for slam to fail. However, that will usually result in a zero, and if your estimate of your game was a little conservative or if you over-estimated how many pairs would reach slam, you may end up regretting this approach.

 

It is useful to compare this to an imp decision: where if you ARE convinced that the slam is routine... maybe you've had a major bidding accident.. then you should definitely play for the slam to fail. 450 against 980 is the same 11 imps as 480 v 980, so you are gambling with house money playing for slam to fail.

[jdonn]

I find the estimate of the other table or the field is usually way off, and never are the amount in slam that you think will be, so I tend to ignore them and focus on myself.

[kenrexford]

I find the estimate of the other table or the field is usually way off, and never are the amount in slam that you think will be, so I tend to ignore them and focus on myself.

This works with dating, as well.