"That was a big view!"

[Guest Jlall]

I passed, but I was playing with a client so I thought this was a pretty clear view to take (if she is declaring a dicey 4H we are in an ave - position anyways so may as well go for the top in the bidding and neutralize the play). However I really thought the options were pass, 2N, and 3H, I just cannot see making game if partner passes an invite. I think 3H is way better than 2N because if 3N CAN make it often needs to be played by partner anyways, given how bad a minor lead through partner into the t/o Xer is.

[dburn]

It seems to me that there will be no views to take in the play of whatever contract you reach - it will either make or it won't, regardless of who is at the helm. Try to construct a hand with which partner will face a guess at any point during the play of any contract, and then get back to me.

 

Still, you can overdo the kind of thinking Justin exhibits here. Only yesterday I had:

 

K106432 3 AJ654 Q

 

and opened 1S in first seat at game all (four-card majors, strong no trump). Partner bid 2C (Acol style, not game-forcing, could be a balanced 11-count with four clubs). RHO (Tony Forrester) doubled. There didn't seem to be much point in bidding diamonds now, so I bid 2S. Partner raised to 3S. I, thinking that diamonds or spades or both might break badly, passed. Partner had:

 

A5 A1042 1082 K982

 

They led the nine of diamonds (from 9x). Spades were 3-2. I made a shame-faced eleven tricks (yes, I know, but I didn't lose a club), and vowed never again to accept the premise that one should not do the normal thing because of "inferences from the bidding". Most of the time these days, no one has their bidding anyway.

 

Mind you, 1S was a bit silly on the hand Justin gives. How would redouble (followed by penalty doubles from both sides thereafter) have done?

[han]

Wow dburn, I am impressed. To be honest, at this point I have no idea whether the play will be clearcut or difficult.

 

In my experience weak partner's will often find a way to lose an extra trick, especially when you least expect it. :D

[mikeh]

I passed, but I was playing with a client so I thought this was a pretty clear view to take (if she is declaring a dicey 4H we are in an ave - position anyways so may as well go for the top in the bidding and neutralize the play). However I really thought the options were pass, 2N, and 3H, I just cannot see making game if partner passes an invite. I think 3H is way better than 2N because if 3N CAN make it often needs to be played by partner anyways, given how bad a minor lead through partner into the t/o Xer is.

A couple of points:

 

1) in my answer (4♥), I assumed that partner was at least as competent as the field, so wanted to be in game, as I expect the field to be unable to stop short, unless we had agreed that partner could open lighter than the norm. When the problem is to be impacted by partner's skill level, you should perhaps disclose that info in the OP

 

2) I am not a pro: the few times I have played 'pro' have been as a teammate either playing the second half of KO's in place of the client or as part of the 'other pair'. It seems to me that taking a view (passing with a prime 13 here) is likely to be counterproductive to the partnership if one of the goals is to improve partner's bridge ability. I can understand inviting... downgrading due to the auction, but passing? When partner could still be holding x KQxxxxx KQx Ax as an example?

 

If, on the other hand, the object is simply to win master points, without worrying about the client's improvement or understanding of the game, once again, maybe we should be told this in the conditions of contest.... I very much doubt that Justin would have passed 2♥ playing with a good player.... unless really swinging for the fences in the hope of an anti-field top.

[Guest Jlall]

1) in my answer (4♥), I assumed that partner was at least as competent as the field, so wanted to be in game, as I expect the field to be unable to stop short, unless we had agreed that partner could open lighter than the norm. When the problem is to be impacted by partner's skill level, you should perhaps disclose that info in the OP

Why would you assume I would care what anyone would do with a client? This problem was to see what people would do in normal circumstances with a normal partner. Think outside of the box, maybe I changed the problem a bit from one in real life, hence me saying "i passed, but..." meaning I had a different context for my problem.

 

If, on the other hand, the object is simply to win master points, without worrying about the client's improvement or understanding of the game, once again, maybe we should be told this in the conditions of contest....

 

Once again, maybe I don't think this is relevant because I think it is a good problem playing with anyone and I don't care how people think they should play if they are trying to win masterpoints.

 

I can understand inviting... downgrading due to the auction, but passing? When partner could still be holding x KQxxxxx KQx Ax as an example?

 

Yes, but partner could have other hands as well. If those hands are much more frequent and enable a better stop then you can still pass despite this possibility. Maybe you don't understand passing, but I don't understand forcing to game, I would much rather pass even if my partner was Versace.

[y66]

Good match point problem. Understand it now, I think, after looking at a bunch of hands. Looks like 3N makes 1 time in 4 from pard's side, 1 time in 7 from mine. 4H makes 2 times in 5. Nice pass at the table.