Average plus bridge

[Vilgan]

In matchpoints, if a grand slam feels possible... what % does it need to feel like to take the push? I've always been of the opinion that if a grand feels like 65% or better and reaching the small slam feels like child's play, to go for it. However, I've heard a variety of bridge teachers say things at the table like "it should be 90% to bid it, since the field probably won't be there". Every time I hear this, I argue with it.. but it seems like I'm shouting into the wind on the subject.

 

Why does it need to be so rock solid? Is this a widely held view, or just around here? I don't know, it seems like bridge contains millions of percentages.. and I'm not sure I understand how this is so different. If the odds are in favor of your decision, why not go with the odds? Sure, sometimes we will be wrong. However more often it will be right, and isn't a major part of bridge choosing the routes that are right more often than not?

 

I dunno, maybe I'm just not an average+ style of player. However, every time I hear someone say it "why bid 7 when the field won't bid it" I feel like grinding my teeth. Is there something I am just not understanding here?

[kenrexford]

The returns is the issue, at matchpoints.

 

You get matchpoints from play OR bidding.

 

If 1000 people bid and play a hand, maybe 900 are in 6♥, 100 in 7♥. Imagine that you make 7 because you are in the top 20% of the field, and only the top 20% would bid 7♥.

 

For bidding the grand, you might get a 950. For making the overtrick in the small slam, you get 850 MP. So, bidding the grand gains 100 if it makes. If it fails, however, you get a 950 for not bidding it, but a 50 for bidding it.

 

So, you risk losing 900 to gain 100. This is where the odds come in.

 

This also is another reason why I hate MP. It seems wildly difficult to look at a bunch of strange faces and determine how many of these unknown idiots will bid what. If you compare results in two different sections, the same result will often produce wildly different MP scores. So, you have to guess the likelihood of random idiots bidding some specific bid before you can assess the percentage necessary to make that bid.

[Vilgan]

In how many (potential) grand slams is the over trick that crazy hard to find though? I mean, sometimes there are lengthy squeezes or a need to count the hand to make a wiser choice. However, many times all it needs is a 3/2 break in a suit or something similar that everyone with 2 master points will find.

 

So it seems like a lot of the time, the outlay would like something like this

100 people bid 7, 95 make it

900 people bid 6, 855 people make it

 

So if you bid 7 and make it, you get like 90.5% of the masterpoints, whereas if you bid 6 and make 7 you get like 51% of the masterpoints (which sucks if you are aiming for a 65%+ game).

 

I am not trying to argue.. just understand :) I have had hands come up that took very tricky play to make the extra trick. But it also seems much more frequent that every monkey and their uncle could make it and it was actually bidding 7 that made the difference.

[kenrexford]

I'm just providing the logic as I understand it.

 

Personally, however, my view is to bid the grand if it looks like a fair bet. A "fair bet" is not a percentage thing. I have no idea what a 90% slam is. I know that a grand turns on partner having what I know he has, plus such-and-such, or plus a squeeze, or plus a lead, or whatever. Translating this to 92.35% probability to make is silliness to me. Broad strokes, maybe.

 

But, then, I generally suck at MP comparatively.

[Codo]

I still wait for the day where the complete field is in a slam.

 

There is always at least one who has a misunderstanding.

In weaker fields there ary some who do not have the tools to find it.

 

So every 6M+1 or 6NT+1 will give you at least 70 %, normally more.

 

I remember an article in a bridge journal about a hand where you had 13 tricks in NT or in Heart in a hand where any serious paartnership should find this out.

 

Just in the highest class of the national championship you had to be in 7 to make an above average score.

 

In a lower bracket and in the ladies event just few reached 7 Heart, just one or two pairs 7 NT.

6 NT+1 was well above average. (around 75 %).

[awm]

Yeah everyone can complain about the field. Then again, the same thing happens at IMPs -- if you know that opponents at the other table will be in small slam then the odds you need for a grand are substantially different than if you think opponents at the other table will be in game...

 

Anyways, MP odds are simpler because you don't have to figure out IMP differences or ratios. Basically:

 

(1) If the grand slam will make more than half the time and you think that almost everyone will be in slam then bid the grand.

 

(2) If you think a substantial percentage of the field will have trouble getting to slam at all (field is weak, hands are hard to bid, or you needed some special gadget that you play to get there) then don't bid the grand unless it's virtually cold.

 

(3) Normally don't bid contracts that make less than half the time (ignoring "sacrifices" of course). There are a few exceptions if you think the opponents have found a bid most people won't (i.e. you bid 6♦ to make, opponents sacrifice in 6♠, you are sure that 6♦ was cold and that most of the field won't find the good 6♠ sacrifice, now it might be favorable to bid 7♦ when it's less than 50-50).

[ArtK78]

Keep in mind that, even in the best of fields, there are sometimes problems that arise at other tables that you cannot anticipate.

 

For example, Adam states that if you know that 100% of the field will be in the small slam, and the grand slam is better than 50%, you should bid the grand slam. That is true as far as it goes. But it is almost never the case in real life.

 

In a given hand where 12 tricks in hearts is 100% and 13 tricks in hearts is 60%, and one less trick is available in notrump, here is what a likely distribution of contracts might be on the hand:

 

7NT 5%

7♥ 12%

6NT 15%

6♥ 35%

Game 25%

Partials, non-heart games and cue bids - 8%

 

There might be other choices, such as minor suit slams.

 

One of the more annoying results in bridge is to bid a 70% grand slam which fails and then find out that you lost to a pair that passed a 3♦ cue bid and scored +110. But it happens all of the time.

 

I believe that I related the story about how my partner and I had a mixup on a reverse sequence in the last round of a Swiss Team playing for the win. He thought that my bid was passable, and did so. I thought it was forcing. The only thing that prevented 7♦ from making was 4-0 trump offside (Jxxx behind the AKQx) That is what happened, so we scored +170 while our opponents, who had no such bidding misunderstanding, were -50 in the grand. Just bidding game would have won them 6 IMPs. The small would have gained them 13 IMPs. But they lost 6 IMPs. On this particular hand, no one could make an argument that they should not have bid the grand. But that just goes to show you how funny this game can be at times.

 

All of these factors go into determining what the proper odds are for bidding a grand slam.

[cherdano]

It really depends. If partner has a 15-17 hcp 1NT opening, and you are looking at 17 hcp, then pretty much everybody will find a small slam. So it is worth bidding a 60% grand. However, if your auction started 1S 2H 3C 4D (splinter) and you are looking at a perfect fit with 26 hcp total, then probably not everyone will find 6C.

[Finch]

What Codo said.

 

There are very, very fields where you won't get a very good board for making small slam + 1 as long as you are in the right small slam. Even if 7H is cold, there will still be people in 7NT going off, people taking an insufficient penalty, people having a bidding screw up and playing in their 3-2 fit etc etc

 

IN particular, it just doesn't pay to bid low HCP distributional grands. If you are (say) 25 -high, then bidding small slam will be a huge score as some of the field will be in game. Last time I played in a country-wide simultaneous pairs we had

 

-

Axxxx

K109x

Kxxx

 

opposite

 

xxx

-

AJxxxx

A10xx

 

we got an 80% board for making 5D+1 with grand playable...

 

It's only if partner opens 2NT in first seat and you have (say) a 14 count that you should start looking for a grand because everyone will bid a small slam.

[Echognome]

Very true that bidding grand just doesn't seem worthwhile.

 

In one of bbo's ACBL games last night, our opponents had:

 

[hv=d=w&v=&w=sqxhqxdkjtxxxcakj&e=sakxxhakxxdq9xcqx]266|100|Scoring: Imp Pairs[/hv]

 

And to their credit, they bid accurately to 6♦. Yes 6NT is rock-solid, but it was imps, so they at least got to the right level.

 

I predicted we would lose imps on the board (I guessed 4, and the answer was 3.8). The traveller was:

 

3N(1), 5♦(2), 6♦(4), 6N(5), 7♦(1), 7N(1)

 

The 7N auction going: 1N - 6N; 7N.

[Mbodell]

[hv=d=w&v=n&w=sakq4hqt4daj543ct&e=sjt3ha3dktcakqj64]266|100|Scoring: MP

1♣*-2♦* 16+;gf 5+ single suited clubs

2♠*-2NT* relay break 0-1 club and spades; relay

3♥*-3♠* 5+ diamonds and 4 spades but wrongly interpreted as single suited spades 6331; relay

3nt*-6♠ 4351 but wrongly interpreted as 4 controls; to play

 

We both messed up here as West knows we are in, at best, a 4-3 fit and East messed up the relay break sequence.

If we relay properly 7nt is clear. over 6♠ a correction to 6NT is fairly clear.

 

Our 6♠+1 1010 was good for 3/6 matchpoints and 1020 was a top. 3 1020, 1010, 940, 490, 420 were the scores on the hand.[/hv]

[manudude03]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s9hdt98643cakqjt5&s=sat842hk7dakq5c97]133|200|Scoring: MP

1♦-(2♥)-X-(P)

3♣-(3♥)-4♥-(P)

5♣-(P)-6♦-AP[/hv]

 

2♥ was intermediate. 4♥ showed a strong "club" raise.

Bidding was hardly perfect. 7 in each minor is cold, 6NT makes assuming East had the missing Ace for her bid and rebid and is also cold when played by South. Yet this turned out to be a top since we were the only pair in slam. Wasn't the strongest field ever, but there were a couple of pairs who can find slams comfortably.