Playing against the client

[han]

I would try to create as many competitive auctions as possible, because those are the auctions that the client will have most difficulty with.

 

So basically, I won't change anything.

[jdonn]

When I saw I was playing against Meltzter's team in early round of the Spingold a couple years ago (Helgemo/Helness, Sontag/Bates, Meltzer/Larsen at the time) I had one thought on my mind and one thought only.

 

Find Justin (who was not on my team) and ask him how we should seat ourselves!

I would have been thinking: "I hope I get a chance to play against Helgemo/Helness."

I got two, and one of those rounds I made 4♠X FOUR!!! times.

 

Wasn't even close to enough hehe.

[pclayton]

Lot of great suggestions, especially from Justin (ty).

 

I like the 'action' suggestion. Anytime you put the ball in the air and take the client out of their comfort zone, I think you are ahead of the game. I've found playing overcall structure creates a lot of early action, and its effective.

 

I'm thinking about countermeasures against the pro's tendencies:

 

A. The pro likes to open 1N so he can play the hand;

 

A' Frequently overcall his NT so the client needs to make a natural call and their transfers go away. They don't play Rubensohl.

 

B. Don't give the client a chance to make a negative double.

 

B' If its close, tend to make a takeout double rather than an overcall. This forces the client to take a natural call.

 

C. They will seldom double you in a part score.

 

C'. Overcompete. They won't double and they might take a push that is ill-advised.

[Guest Jlall]

Yes overcall structure is a very good system for beating up bad players (not saying anything about it's relative merits otherwise, but it is very unfamiliar to most people and they don't know what to do. For example in a pair game I was playing with a client and it went 1S-(1N)=takeout X and she didn't know that 2N would be limit+).

 

As far as doing things to induce LHO to bid suits I think that is extreme. There's no hand that's so close one way or another that my decision would be swayed by whether LHO can make a negative X or not. It's better just to get in and bid to create some action than to worry about LHO being able to make a negative X.

 

As far as the pro opening 1N a lot, this is disadvantageous to his side already. I wouldn't really do anything to try to counter that, it's not a bad thing for your side.

[hotShot]

IV) Don't be nice: Call the TD

 

If the pro is bending partnership agreements very often, this is an implicit partnership agreement and has to be disclosed. In fact the pro and his client would be playing different systems. Incomplete disclosure and playing different systems are against the laws. So call the TD whenever you notice something odd.

 

If they agreed on t/o dbles and the pro isn't using them when he could, call the TD.

If the client makes an t/o dbl in a situation where the pro did not, call the TD.

Something is wrong with your opps disclosure.

 

If the pro bids off-shaped or off-strength NT, call the TD. If the client could bid an off-shape or off-strength NT and he did not, call the TD.

 

Make use off lame excuses (if the TD witnessed them). If the lame excuse for opening off-shape NT was that they count 5-card majors lover than 10 as a 4-card suit, finesse the other hand and call the TD, if the finesse fails. If a 1M opening does not have an honor, call the TD, because the hand should have been opened 1NT.

 

The TD will hate you, the pro will probably kill you, but calling the TD will break the clients concentration (sometimes even that off the pro). He will lose count and play worse.

[han]

The TD will hate you, the pro will probably kill you, but calling the TD will break the clients concentration (sometimes even that off the pro). He will lose count and play worse.

Calling the TD just to disrupt the concentration of one of your opponents is unethical.

[jdonn]

The TD will hate you, the pro will probably kill you, but calling the TD will break the clients concentration (sometimes even that off the pro). He will lose count and play worse.

Aside from the fact it wouldn't work, and aside from the fact it's unethical as Han said, have you ever done what you are advocating and you have a bunch of directors out there who hate you because of it? Somehow I seriously doubt it. Maybe the advice should be left to people with actual experience in doing what they suggest, instead of just pulling terrible tips out from their you-know-whats.

[hotShot]

The TD will hate you, the pro will probably kill you, but calling the TD will break the clients concentration (sometimes even that off the pro). He will lose count and play worse.

Calling the TD just to disrupt the concentration of one of your opponents is unethical.

The setting was:

Lets say this pro will frequently be doing things to make sure he gets to make the bulk of the decisions, including opening wider-range and off-shape NTs, opening lighter, and trying not to make takeout doubles (if you are aware of other tactics, say so).

 

I never suggested to call the TD to disrupt the concentration. I thought I made it clear, that the pro and his client are violating the law. I suggested to call the TD, when it happens.

 

Lets take the wider-ranged, off-shaped NT. If the disclosed range is 15-17 and I see a NT opening made with an (unbalanced) 13 count, this is a legal psych. And if there is any trace/evidence of fielding or frequent psyching, I will call the TD. There is nothing unethical about that.

[Finch]

I also don't think a pro player is acting out of line with these tactics.

Depends what the client is paying for. If the client says "I want to win, play so that we have the best chance of winning" that's fine. If the client says "I want to play with a decent partner and improve my bridge; winning this particular event is secondary" then the pro is out of line.

 

Anyway, back to the question at hand.

I disagree with some of the other comments made here. There's no need to get too aggressive and/or push them around in the auction with wild pre-empts if it is their hand, because they aren't going to have a delicate auction to play in a 5-2 major-suit fit, or find 6m in a 4-4 fit, they are going to play in 3NT by the pro.

 

Competitive partial auctions are different.

 

Some of the other comments made apply any time you are playing a weak pair, not necessarily a mixed pair- but I'm sure you have plenty of practice at beating up bad players, we're more thinking about the pro/client aspect.

 

The only things I'd add are always to be conscious of who declarer is going to be, and remember you can sometimes influence that. For example, in the first board of a big final a few years ago the auction started 1S x 4S 4NT where the pro bid 4NT (not a real pro-hogging-bid). As opener, my technical call was probably to double because I want to consult partner on whether to defend or bid on, but instead I passed and then doubled 5m to ensure the client played the hand. That was the difference between +500 and +1100 when the client lost control.

 

Similarly when you know that the client has the majority of the high cards you can be more aggressive in bidding game, because defence is difficult. 1H P P 1NT P and you are deciding whether to raise to 2NT or 3NT looking at random scattered high cards... bid 3NT if the client opened the bidding - these contracts are very very hard to defend without good knowledge of defending strip squeezes and a lot of faith in partner's carding.

 

I don't want this thread to turn into a dialogue about the disclosure / legal issues involved with the tactics involved by the pro (or your own counter-measures  :)), because we know they exist. We all know it happens and if you've played this game long enough you learn to expect it when you play against a pair like this. I don't want these side issues to be the focus here.

 

Unlucky