MPs this time

[Apollo81]

Said player got lucky since he found good ol pard with AQ10 Kxx Q10 xxxxx

 

Would anyone reopen with gop's hand?

[foo]

Said player got lucky since he found good ol pard with

AQT_Kxx_QT_xxxxx

 

Would anyone reopen with gop's hand?

I'll note that both I and the anonymous GLM both got this one correct. :)

 

...and I highly doubt anyone being honest is going to claim that they will balance after pa-(3D)-pa-pa;?? holding the given hand.

 

But since no one board proves a valid statistical argument, I repeat that this is yet another situation where a well designed simulation would be of interest.

[jdonn]

Said player got lucky since he found good ol pard with AQ10 Kxx Q10 xxxxx

 

Would anyone reopen with gop's hand?

No, sometimes when partner has the best hand possible on the auction with which he won't act, and a fit for my longest suit, I miss a game.

[awm]

Here are some simulation results. I specified that we have the given hand, partner has a first seat pass in a moderately sound opening style, and RHO has seven diamonds with 5-11 hcp. Here are ten random hands under those conditions:

 

(1) [hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(2)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(3)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(4)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(5)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(6)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(7)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(8)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(9)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(10)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(11)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak986h54d5cjt953&w=sqthak6dk7cq87642&e=s7h9873dqt98643ck&s=sj5432hqjt2daj2ca]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

[Echognome]

I'll note that both I and the anonymous GLM both got this one correct. :)

How does it feel to be so right on this hand? And so wrong when compared to the vast majority of expert opinions on this forum?

[awm]

I think that bidding or doubling on the south cards came out better on these hands than I would expect, although obviously there are still bad ones. Here's my evaluation:

 

(1) 4♠ is cold. Partner is unlikely to balance. Unless you play methods where north can show a weak 5-5 hand, north would not open. Bidding or doubling wins this one.

 

(2) 3♠ should make, 4♠ will not make on good defense. Partner will probably bid game if you take any call. The 3♦ contract was not making. Bidding or doubling loses this one.

 

(3) A tricky hand to play or defend. It seems that 3♠ should make, possibly doubled. If you double 3♦, partner will bid four clubs which is probably one off. Opponents were not making 3♦. North arguably has an opening bid on this hand. Bid > Pass > Double

 

(4) Here both north and east might've opened at the one-level. In any case, 4♠ should make. Partner will probably balance over 3♦ in any case. This one is not realistic

 

(5) Here 3♠ is an absolute disaster, doubled down many tricks. Double gets you to 3♥ which is not much better. Pass > Double > Bid

 

(6) Here 3♠ should make. But partner may raise to 4♠ failing. The opponents should not make 3♦. I'll score this as Double > Bid == Pass since bidding may reach 4♠.

 

(7) You can make 4♠ on good play, but partner has a clear balancing call anyway. Call this a wash.

 

(8) Opponents can beat 3♠ on good defense, but 3♦ was making and opponents may not find the double. East's hand may be unrealistically strong. Call this a wash.

 

(9) You're pretty cold for 4♥, but 4♠ will probably fail on the bad break. You can beat 3♦ on defense. Call this Double > Pass > Bid.

 

(10) Opponents can beat 4♠ or 4♥ and may find a double of the latter. Partner will balance in any case. Another Push.

 

(11) Bidding will be a disaster. Double might get you to the making 3♥ though. Opponents were not making 3♦. Call this Double > Pass > Bid.

 

Overall totals on 10 hands (ignoring the unrealistic hand 4), 20 MPs available:

 

Bid: 7.5 Double: 12 Pass: 10.5

[jdonn]

I think partner has a clear balance as a passed hand on hand 1 which means everything is a push, and on hand 10 east will open 1♦ so I'll make it not exist. So I score out of 18 matchpoints Bid = 6, Double = 10.5, Pass = 11.5. That is about what I would have expected I think.

[awm]

I think partner has a clear balance as a passed hand on hand 1 which means everything is a push, and on hand 10 east will open 1♦ so I'll make it not exist. So I score out of 18 matchpoints Bid = 6, Double = 10.5, Pass = 11.5. That is about what I would have expected I think.

If you think north has a balance on hand one and it's all a push, then this gives you:

 

Bid: 7 Pass: 11.5 Double 11.5

 

Taking away hand 10 doesn't really change anything, since it was rated a push anyway:

 

Bid: 6 Pass 10.5 Double 10.5

 

Anyways, it seems like bidding is a bad idea, but doubling is (surprising to me) breaking even with pass.

[cherdano]

On hand 11, with Q7 98763 3 KQ653 partner might jump to 4♥ opposite a double?

[foo]

Here are some simulation results. I specified that we have the given hand, partner has a first seat pass in a moderately sound opening style, and RHO has seven diamonds with 5-11 hcp. Here are ten random hands under those conditions:

Since the traditional range for a opening 3 bid is 4-9 HCP, let's prune the 10-11's?

 

For the same reason we should consider so 4 HCP potential 3D openings (although I perfectly understand that a 2nd chair 3D opening may not consider any 4 HCP hand as appropriate.)

 

I have not looked at your posted examples yet.

[foo]

Here's what I see in a quick glance at awm's 11 examples.

 

B1= 4S makes

B2= 3S goes -1, 3D makes

B3= 3S makes

B4= 3S makes

B5= 4D makes, any NS contract is a disaster

B6= 3D-1, 4S makes

B7= 4S makes

B8= 3S makes

B9= What is this fascination with low percentage bad trump breaks? 3S makes.

B10= 3S makes

B11= Yet Another low percentage bad S break, 3S-1, 3D makes.

 

EDIT: Grrr! too many d@mn boards to avoid typos! Hopefully I've got them all now.

 

In all 11 cases, I have a hard time believing N will balance after pa-(3D)-pa-pa.

Board 3 is the most clear cut balance by N, and bidding 4C over 4D in the

Balance seat may be difficult. OTOH, I know many who would open 1C on the B3 N cards.

 

To makes the results statistically valid, the examples need to be weighted to their

chances of occuring. Far more 32 and 31 ♠ breaks are going to occur than

50 or 51 ♠ breaks given the bidding and S's hand! Some of the ♥ holdings are also in need of serious weighing. The odds of NS having a 7-8 card fit are not well represented in these examples.

 

These examples do not make me regret advocating bidding 3S.

[Guest Jlall]

Here's what I see in a quick glance at awm's 11 examples.

 

B1= 4S makes

You would get there anyway if you pass, partner has a balance. I know you will dispute that, I don't really care, he has one as a passed hand.

B2= 3S goes -1, 3D makes

Come on, if you bid 3♠ partner is raising all day.

B3= 4S makes and is hard to find if S does not bid

YOU HAVE FOUR LOSERS IN SPADES ALONE!!!

B4= Ditto

Partner is balancing with a double and you get there anyway.

B5= 4D makes, any NS contract is a disaster

Agree

B6= 3D-1, 4S makes

Agree

eB7= 4S makes

Partner is balancing anyway

B8= 3S makes

No it doesn't. Diamond lead, spade to king, king of diamonds, HIGH diamond ruffed with spade ten, heart ruffed with spade ace. Down 1, and the defense is obvious.

B9=  What is this fascination with low percentage bad trump breaks?  3S makes.

Now you are whining about the random examples?? They preempted on your right, of course you will get lots of bad spade breaks. Also partner is raising, so you are getting creamed in 4.

B10= 3S makes

Partner is raising!!!

B11= Yet Another low percentage bad S break, Yet 3S can still make.

Firstly, quit whining again! Secondly, you have four trump losers and an ace and a king to lose, well done Foo.

 

These examples do not make me regret advocating bidding 3S.

I see one game swing in on board 6 and many disasters. Well done.

[foo]

Justin, please reread my post. It took me a bunch of passes to remove all the typos cause by looking at too many baords at once while low on sleep.

 

My conclusion however has not changed based on awm's 11 examples.

 

I find B1, B3, and possibly B4 as the most likely balances. Of them, I know many who would open B3 and B4 in 1st or 2nd.

[jdonn]

Foo, do your partners never raise your 3S bids to 4S?

 

Foo, do you understand that simulations will accurately predict the amount of times you get a bad split etc, and as the amount of trials approaches infinity the true odds are going to come out. If you are complaining about the 10 hand sample being too small then why are you trying to use it to prove your point? You cannot have it both ways.

 

Foo, do you understand that when the opponents preempt bad splits become much more likely than the a priori odds?

 

Foo, do you really believe you are an advanced/expert player who is qualified to participate in discussions with other advanced/expert players and speak with authority, risking the lesser experienced forum users thinking you actually know what you are talking about?

[helene_t]

Said player got lucky since he found good ol pard with AQ10 Kxx Q10 xxxxx

 

Would anyone reopen with gop's hand?

I would probably not balance but it would not be absurd to do so. Bidding anything on S's hand would be absurd, IMHO.

[foo]

Josh,

 

Absolutely my partners sometimes raise 3S to 4S. But if they are a passed hand, they know =I've= bid taking that into account and the old "Subtract a K from my hand and =then= consider how to Advance" rule comes into play.

 

Simulations can only predict things double dummy, and they only make overall accurate predictions if enough boards are simulated and in proper proportion to their statistical chance of occurring. 11 boards involving no statistical weighting and some highly unusual suit layouts are suspect as to how overall statistically valid they are. So are boards that involve unusual HCP ranges for the bids involved.

 

The odds I was referring to are not apriori. For instance, my POV as to the odds of a Major suit or 2x Major suit fit are aposteri.

 

They are based on the fact that we can place ~10 of the ♦'s as not being in GOP's hand +and+ on what we are holding when it is time to decide on overcalling or not. We are =5431 when LHO has shown ~7 ♦'s. That greatly increases the odds of Us having at least one Major suit fit. Also, the (3D) bid in 1st or 2nd will usually deny a 4cM.

 

Finally, if GOP has ♠'s, the single most likely holding for them to have if HHx.

[helene_t]

Absolutely my partners sometimes raise 3S to 4S.  But if they are a passed hand, they know =I've= bid taking that into account and the old "Subtract a K from my hand and =then= consider how to Advance" rule comes into play.

Lol. The rules says you can balance with a king less than you need to bid in direct seat.

 

If anything, the fact that p is a passed hand should make you bid more conservatively over a preempt since you don't need to pre-protect p's awkward 13-count and because p can balance slightly more aggressively having passed originally.

 

Simulations can only predict things double dummy

The simulations showed some hands, you can analyze them single dummy if you want.

 

11 boards involving no statistical weighting and some highly unusual suit layouts

You can weight them as you want but that makes no sense. And as for the unusual suit layouts ... well you do the simulations to find out how the layouts typically are, the simulations were not biased with respect to suit layouts.

 

risking the lesser experienced forum users thinking you actually know what you are talking about?

No worries.

[foo]

Absolutely my partners sometimes raise 3S to 4S.  But if they are a passed hand, they know =I've= bid taking that into account and the old "Subtract a K from my hand and =then= consider how to Advance" rule comes into play.

Lol. The rules says you can balance with a king less than you need to bid in direct seat.

 

If anything, the fact that p is a passed hand should make you bid more conservatively over a preempt since you don't need to pre-protect p's awkward 13-count and because p can balance slightly more aggressively having passed originally.

first, let's dispense calling any of this being based on "rules". The laws, rules, regulations etc of Bridge have nothing to do with whether we can or should bid here.

 

second, the overcall and balancing situations are not as simple as any simple "rule". Who has Major suit length =matters=. Especially contesting partscores at MPs.

 

third, once partner passes, they have put out a warning light that they are likely to continue to pass unless

a= they had a marginal pass close to a 1st or 2nd chair opening.

b= the subsequent auction gives them a reason to bid.

 

Having passed initially, just exactly what justification are you expecting most hands with likely few major suit cards to be balancing with here?

 

Thus after GOP's initial pass, Overcaller is essentially in a prebalance situation. Especially if the hand rates to be a partscore.

 

...and passer has to be very careful not to "hang" Overcaller for prebalancing.

[foo]

Foo, do you really believe you are an advanced/expert player who is qualified to participate in discussions with other advanced/expert players and speak with authority, risking the lesser experienced forum users thinking you actually know what you are talking about?

Being provably right matters more than all the rhetoric, claims or insults in the world.

 

So let's dispense with the personal attacks and concentrate on finding the provable truth. That will benefit everyone, from novice to expert.

[gwnn]

wtf, prebalancing after p-3♦-?

 

wtf? i've written many silly stuff on these forums (sorry everyone), but this certainly tops every single one of them

 

prebalancing after p-3♦-?, unfavorable at MP.

[hrothgar]

To makes the results statistically valid, the examples need to be weighted to their chances of occuring. Far more 32 and 31 ♠ breaks are going to occur than 50 or 51 ♠ breaks given the bidding and S's hand! Some of the ♥ holdings are also in need of serious weighing. The odds of NS having a 7-8 card fit are not well represented in these examples.

No, No, and, once again, No

 

1. There is no hard and fast rule that says that you need to deliberately weight a sample to achieve accurate results. In general a large sample size is adequate protection.

 

2. You're complete wrong about the odds of 3-2/3-2 breaks

 

I generated a very simple script using Hans van Stavern's Dealer. I'm attaching a copy of the script file, along with the output. Please note that this sim is specially examining the case in which N/S have an 8 card Spade fit. (I assigned 3 Spades to South because this is the most common holding)

 

predeal

 

north SJ5432, HQJT9, DAJT, C5

south SAKQ

west D8765432

 

action

 

frequency (spades(west), 0, 5)

 

The output is rather telling. a 4-1 trump break is by far the most common outcome. A 5-0 split is more likely than either a 3-2 or 2-3.

 

0 2835138 28.35%

1 4473812 44.74%

2 2235198 22.35%

3 426411 4.26%

4 28924 0.29%

5 517 0.01%

 

Finally, with 10 samples, one would expect North would hold

 

2 hands with doubleton Spade support and

3 hands with three card trump support

 

Here we're looking at 11 samples and we see

 

3 hands with doubleton Spade support and

4 hands with triple spade support

 

There are slightly too many hands with short trump, but its not all that out of whack.

[TheoKole]

Pass

 

Theo