kfay Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa10xh65dk8xxcq108x]133|100|Scoring: Chicago(P)-P-(3♣)-Dbl(P)-?[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Passsssssss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaitlink Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Josh can you please explain your decision? I find things like 3NT vs pass with this kind of hand to be very hard decisions, and I'm never sure what I should do here. What factors about this hand in particular make you want to try for a nonvulnerable penalty instead of a vulnerable game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 I like 3NT, slow stoppers in opponents suit are good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoi5 Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 3NT, we're Vulnerable, it's money bridge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 What factors about this hand in particular make you want to try for a nonvulnerable penalty instead of a vulnerable game? I think it is more like "what makes you want to collect a NV penalty instead of try for game?" I'd prefer taking the sure thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 it's money, so we take the money :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASkolnick Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Along the lines of Tim G., how often do you need to be right when NV versus Vul. Let's assume the following: Some percentage of the time: If Pass Gives you +300, versus +600. You lost 300 points.If you are wrong, you lost -100 versus +300. You lose 400 points. If this were the only two possiblities. You would only need to be right 42.6% (I may be off a decimal) to think leaving the double in is the winning option. On this particular hand, I am not sure why you would think you necessarily have 9 tricks. you have no tricks in clubs (but you do have defensive tricks), your hearts are not a good fit with partner. The spades do fit nicely and your diamonds are ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Don't forget this is money bridge. It's like pass = win somedo the right thing = win moredo the wrong thing = lose At imps, its more like pass = win (if it's the right thing) or lose (if it's the wrong thing) It's more vital to get it right at imps. In money, just cash out and play next hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted January 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Don't forget this is money bridge. It's like pass = win somedo the right thing = win moredo the wrong thing = lose At imps, its more like pass = win (if it's the right thing) or lose (if it's the wrong thing) It's more vital to get it right at imps. In money, just cash out and play next hand. Good point. What would you do on this hand if it were MPs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Good point. What would you do on this hand if it were MPs? I would do the right thing, of course :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 I don't know if that's the right way to think NUNO, obviously at money bridge, the difference with 300 vs 600 is not as huge as it is in IMPs, but anyway you should target to your maximum possible benefit. After reading more posts I feel more inclined to pass, I didn't like that idea at first because there is always a chance that they make it, but here the chance its very slim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Don't forget this is money bridge. It's like pass = win somedo the right thing = win moredo the wrong thing = lose At imps, its more like pass = win (if it's the right thing) or lose (if it's the wrong thing) It's more vital to get it right at imps. In money, just cash out and play next hand. I think it is more like: Pass = win some with probability x and lose some with probability (1-x) Bid 3NT = win with probability y and lose with probability (1-y) Bid 3♦ = win with probability z and lose with probability (1-z) etc etc Now the best thing to do depends on the maximum of how much you win multiplied by the probability subtract the amount you lose multiplied by the probability of that loss for each of the various options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 In money, just cash out and play next hand. This is Chicago. On the next hand (or in three hands' time) the opponents will be vulnerable and we will not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichMor Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa10xh65dk8xxcq108x]133|100|Scoring: Chicago(P)-P-(3♣)-Dbl(P)-?[/hv] Isn't the vulnerability in 'Chicago' scoring neither, dealer, dealer, both ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfay Posted January 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa10xh65dk8xxcq108x]133|100|Scoring: Chicago(P)-P-(3♣)-Dbl(P)-?[/hv] Isn't the vulnerability in 'Chicago' scoring neither, dealer, dealer, both ? I've always played none, not dealer, not dealer, both. Does it really matter that much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 Isn't the vulnerability in 'Chicago' scoring neither, dealer, dealer, both ? I think it varies from country to country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichMor Posted January 6, 2009 Report Share Posted January 6, 2009 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa10xh65dk8xxcq108x]133|100|Scoring: Chicago(P)-P-(3♣)-Dbl(P)-?[/hv] Isn't the vulnerability in 'Chicago' scoring neither, dealer, dealer, both ? I've always played none, not dealer, not dealer, both. Does it really matter that much?Just a little bit. If we are vul on the next hand then it is more attractive to pass the double for penalties; take the points now and hope for a vulnerable game on the next hand. Kinda trivial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 6, 2009 Report Share Posted January 6, 2009 Pass. Take the sure plus. It could be a large plus. Besides, while 3NT may be likely to make, it is not 100%. Sometimes 3♣x is the last plus score available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 If we are vul on the next hand then it is more attractive to pass the double for penalties; take the points now and hope for a vulnerable game on the next hand.This isn't win-lose Chicago. The objective is to maximise the number of points we win. Given that no one has a partscore, and no one is going to make a partscore here, this deal and the next deal are two independent events, each representing an independent opportunity to make money. Whether we're going to score +420, +620 or -2800 on the next deal has no bearing on the correct action on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFA Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 I would pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 I'm hardly an expert on money bridge, but I would just take the nearly-sure plus (pass) and move on to the next deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 Isn't the vulnerability in 'Chicago' scoring neither, dealer, dealer, both ? I think it varies from country to country. It varies from bridge club to bridge club, even within the same country. Having dealer non-vulnerable for the first three deals tends to generate a more aggressive game, for obvious reasons, but (or perhaps therefore) I believe that dealer vulnerable is more commonly played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted January 7, 2009 Report Share Posted January 7, 2009 Playing for money I take the near certain plus, normally 3-500, and don't care much about an unsure game contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.