8 bagger

[Fluffy]

I don't care winning or losing even with barometer I try to play each deal the same.

 

Actually it is sometimes hard when you are 8 up, or specially when you are down, but at least I'd try.

[cherdano]

Give me a break, it was obviously just a BBO match with barometer on and it was the last board. Using common sense is allowed.

All the more reason to simply play to win as many IMPs on each single board, as always. This is why I don't understand people not wanting barometer. Instant results --> can talk about why things went differently at the other table.

Gerben...what you are saying makes no sense. It's barometer, you know you are up 16 on the last board, 6♣ is an action that pretty much can not lose 16 imps. This seems simple.

This time I am with Gerben, what he says makes sense. Of course you can play Barometer matches as win/lose but you can also treat them like a money IMP=$$$ game, you try to win by as many IMPs as possible or lose by as few IMPs as possible (and don't care much about a win by 2).

[cherdano]

I just came back from a cigarette and realized that his problem is actually quite humorous, at least if using my techniques.

 

Suppose I start with 2NT Ogust, and partner has:

 

♠KQJ(10)xx(x) ♥xxx(x) ♦Axx(x) ♣(x)

 

Something like that.

 

His response will be 3♠, "good hand good suit." For a "good suit," without the Ace, I expect KQ10xxx at least, and perhaps KQJxxx.

 

So, my next call is 4♣, asking partner to cuebid. When it maters, he will cue 4♦, showing the Ace and bringing in the grand in spades scenario.

 

Now, I cue 4♥. When it matters, he will cue 5♣. Whatever we have agreed, that's clearly shortness.

 

So, it seems that one can intelligently get to 7♠, and in an auction where the guy holding my hand will know that the alternative contract of 6♣ will be in possible jeopardy from a club stack.

 

There may be other ways to find out even more information, but 7♠ seems to be an imminently reachable alternative strain.

Was it really just a cigarette?

[Fluffy]

just another proof that smoking is not healthy :)

[pclayton]

Give me a break, it was obviously just a BBO match with barometer on and it was the last board. Using common sense is allowed.

All the more reason to simply play to win as many IMPs on each single board, as always. This is why I don't understand people not wanting barometer. Instant results --> can talk about why things went differently at the other table.

Gerben...what you are saying makes no sense. It's barometer, you know you are up 16 on the last board, 6♣ is an action that pretty much can not lose 16 imps. This seems simple.

This time I am with Gerben, what he says makes sense. Of course you can play Barometer matches as win/lose but you can also treat them like a money IMP=$$$ game, you try to win by as many IMPs as possible or lose by as few IMPs as possible (and don't care much about a win by 2).

Maybe its the damn American in me - but wining matters.

 

I'll give you the choice of winning 3 matches by 2 IMPs each and losing the 4th by 30. Or you can lose 3 of them by 2 and the 4th by 5. You have a better overall record in the 2nd set and probably more VP's. You might even argue you played better bridge in the 2nd set.

 

I'll tale the 3 and 1 outcome over the 1 and 3 outcome every time.

[Codo]

I may well be the most ambitiously person I know, but caring about to win a barometer at bbo? Maybe I am not ambitiously enough....

[Guest Jlall]

Why would you play if you don't care about winning?

 

edit: OK some obvious answers to this will be "practice" or whatever, I guess that's just so far away from how I think whenever I'm playing. My priority is obviously competition.

[Codo]

Of course you play to win, but to win any given hand and if I win 2 2 2 and loose 30, I did worse then when I loose 2 2 2 and 5. (To take Phils example).

 

There are few knock out matches in which it pays to bid 6 Club as an insurance against a 16 imp swing. And baormetered team matches at bbo are surely no knock outs.

But each to his own.

[jdonn]

If being up 16 was supposed to be irrelevant, then why were we even told?

[Gerben42]

Maybe its the damn American in me - but wining matters.

 

I'll give you the choice of winning 3 matches by 2 IMPs each and losing the 4th by 30. Or you can lose 3 of them by 2 and the 4th by 5. You have a better overall record in the 2nd set and probably more VP's. You might even argue you played better bridge in the 2nd set.

 

I'll tale the 3 and 1 outcome over the 1 and 3 outcome every time.

 

 

Must be the American way... Double overtime rather than let two teams draw a match when they are equal strength, even in league matches of low-scoring games like ice hockey.

 

This is not a close decision for me. I'll take the 2nd scenario any time.

 

If being up 16 was supposed to be irrelevant, then why were we even told?

 

To lure you into gambling rather than to play bridge?

 

Why would you play if you don't care about winning?

 

I care about winning. But I prefer being up 20 to being up 1 by a landslide.

[Guest Jlall]

Lol@ the notion of gambling rather than playing bridge. As far as I know, bridge is a competition where you try your best to win. In fact I believe it's stipulated in the laws that you must always try your best to win. This means if you're losing you may try to swing, and if you're winning you may do some things differently. If it is barometer and you know the exact score then extraordinary things might happen. Just because it offends your sense of purity does not make it "not bridge."

 

Your inability to try your best to win the match offends my senses as a competitor. But to each their own. If you would honestly rather lose 3 matches and win 1 big than win 3 matches and lose one big and you think that's normal that's really amusing.

[zasanya]

How will I lose 16 imps by bidding 3 ♣?

[Fluffy]

I think the problem arises from viewing the barometer in 2 different ways:

 

 

-barometer TM is for knowing the score at the other table and act accordingly

 

-barometer is set so you can do something (and even improve your bridge in the proccess) while you are dummy or just wait for someone to claim its sure 10 tricks.

 

 

I think gerben and I are on the second camp while others seem on to be on the first camp.

 

Also I prefer o take each board as if the score was 0-0, as if I was playing on MBC but I had no idea when will the play end (not that anyone is gonna care of the result on MBC, but still). Or even as if there was to be a second or third time on the TM.

[Fluffy]

About the american way of thinking maybe its true.

 

When I see te ranking on any american league, no matter the sport, the ranking is made upon Wins-Loses.

 

In Europe almost every League of team sport accepts ties as a result, and the rankings are then meassured in points (3 points for win, 1 for tie, none for lose is very common).

[matmat]

About the american way of thinking maybe its true.

 

When I see te ranking on any american league, no matter the sport, the ranking is made upon Wins-Loses.

 

In Europe almost every League of team sport accepts ties as a result, and the rankings are then meassured in points (3 points for win, 1 for tie, none for lose is very common).

MLS soccer, NHL hockey do it that way too.

 

but in general, yes, a tie is like kissing your sister...

[Codo]

you would honestly rather lose 3 matches and win 1 big than win 3 matches and lose one big and you think that's normal that's really amusing.

You misread Gerbens statement.

He prefers the second of Phils examples over the first.

 

But obviously this is less amusing then that what you made of it.

I think anbody will prefer a big loss and many small wins to the other way round.

[Gerben42]

The main point of the whole thing is to bid with the only goal to not lose 16 or more IMPs is defaitistic.

 

I am trying to WIN the board, preferably by 920 vs 420 or 400 vs -50 or so.

[han]

but in general, yes, a tie is like kissing your sister...

Please elaborate.

[mikeh]

but in general, yes, a tie is like kissing your sister...

Please elaborate.

please don't :rolleyes:

[jdonn]

The main point of the whole thing is to bid with the only goal to not lose 16 or more IMPs is defaitistic.

 

I am trying to WIN the board, preferably by 920 vs 420 or 400 vs -50 or so.

I have no idea what defaitistic means. What I do know is winning by 27 does no more good than winning by 16. You are simply not taking advantage of your situation.