gwnn Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 AxxQJ9xT8xxxx partner opens 1NT non-vulnerable at mp's. what's your plan? your partner's 1NT opener never is a 14 count, could be a very very bad (maybe bottom 5%) 18 count and includes about a third of his 5M332's in the range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I would pass. Maybe a double dummy simulator will reveal that stayman is a winner, but I am not really optimistic about my position if partner bids either 2♦ or 2♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 the overtricks my partner steals, or the opponents gift are worth more points in NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFA Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Pass wtp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoi5 Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I pass, too. Many things can go wrong and anyway I wouldn't want a partner who opens 1NT (15-17) with 18. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianshark Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I don't see an 8th point anywhere. I don't even know why your asking this question, unless game happened to make opposite pard's 17 count, or some "expert" berated you for not inviting. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 First inform partner that he/she may not open 1NT with 18 when they play with you. Then pass smoothly, maybe LHO will balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 My plan is Pass. With all due respect, this is not a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 stayman. invite in ♥ pass 2♠. invite NT over 2♦... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 stayman. invite in ♥ pass 2♠. invite NT over 2♦... Looks like a zero to me :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 stayman. invite in ♥ pass 2♠. invite NT over 2♦... Looks like a zero to me :) i collect those. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Pass. The only invitation I will send is to the opponents to enter the bidding. RSVP's not required, but they should wear something that won't show blood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 stayman. invite in ♥ pass 2♠. invite NT over 2♦... Looks like a zero to me :) I think you are being very harsh; I would estimate that stayman is only a small loser (something like a 40-45% action, if passing 1N is a 50% action). I would bid stayman if I were swinging for tops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I just want to clarify. Is the view of everyone that this is a non-problem butAxxQJxxJxxxxxwould be a bid, or at least a 'problem'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I just want to clarify. Is the view of everyone that this is a non-problem butAxxQJxxJxxxxxwould be a bid, or at least a 'problem'? I would stayman this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I just want to clarify. Is the view of everyone that this is a non-problem butAxxQJxxJxxxxxwould be a bid, or at least a 'problem'? I would stayman this hand. I wouldn't. The ♦J isn't enough for me. I would Stayman Axx QJTx Jxxx xx however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianshark Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Yeah, pretty much. Your hand becomes a 'bad' 8 count I suppose because it now has less than the average number of high spots, so I suppose it's more of a problem than a clear bid. I know there's not a world of difference between the 2 hands. But you have to draw a line somewhere and say what's good enough to invite and what isn't, and opposite a 1NT bid, the ol' 4-3-2-1 point count with a decent 5 card suit being worth a point, and a few 10s and 9s being worth half a point is just as good as any. You can't really get any more accurate without peering into your partner's hand to see where you want to be, and even then you may need to peer into your opponents hand. And even then you may need to know what they will lead or how they will defend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 I just want to clarify. Is the view of everyone that this is a non-problem butAxxQJxxJxxxxxwould be a bid, or at least a 'problem'?I would pass both. At mps, bidding is lunacy unless swinging for tops, with the corollary that one is collecting zeros more often than tops. This approach does depend, to a modest degree, on your partnership style about invites. Mine is that opener is supposed to accept unless he has a reason not to, while others may choose that he is supposed to decline unless he has a reason not to... the latter school reaches a lot of 2N down 1.. both break even in terms of reaching or missing good/bad games. Obviously there is more to gain at imps by responding with josh's hand.. but it is (to me) a clear pass even red at imps. BTW, I really, really don't like the idea of ever downgrading an 18 count into a 15-17 range. If it happened, and we missed game because partner passed a flat soft 7 or 8 count, I know where I would assign the blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Obviously there is more to gain at imps by responding with josh's hand.. but it is (to me) a clear pass even red at imps. Well this is the crux. Is this hand obviously better than the original one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Obviously there is more to gain at imps by responding with josh's hand.. but it is (to me) a clear pass even red at imps. Well this is the crux. Is this hand obviously better than the original one? 1. the op said mps2. yes, the second hand is 'obviously' better than the 1st3. They are both, for me, clear passes even red at imps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Obviously there is more to gain at imps by responding with josh's hand.. but it is (to me) a clear pass even red at imps. Well this is the crux. Is this hand obviously better than the original one? I'd say the original hand is the better one. ♥QJ9x ♦T8xx beats ♥QJxx ♦Jxxx IMO. I'd pass both hands, normally. But I can see myself inviting with the OP hand - if I need a swing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Gwynn asked me to do a double dummy simulation. We used the following hand: A73QJ921096472 Notice that the diamond 8 has become a 9, I blame Csaba. For partner I didn't allow 18-counts, we did allow 5-card majors (15-17) and 6-card minors (14-16) but only when the suit has at most two of the top 5 cards. 5422 shape is allowed when the 5-card suit is a minor and the 4-card suit is not clubs. We generated 100 deals. The strategy was as follows: pass 2H or 2S. Over 2D bid 2NT. Partner will expect the invitation with 16- and 17-counts, but not with a 4333 16-count. These were the results, assuming that the rest of the field plays 1NT: 2H giving a bottom: 2 times.2H giving a top: 20 times. 2S giving a bottom: 16 times.2S giving a top: 14 times. 2NT giving a bottom: 16 times.2NT giving a draw: 14 times. 3NT giving a bottom: 9 times.3NT giving a top: 9 times. The total is 43 wins, 43 losses and 14 draws. Whether this double dummy simulation is useful or not I'll leave to you. I did notice how often 2H does well when partner has 3 hearts, maybe bidding 2H over 2D and pulling to 2NT if partner then bids 2S would improve the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 It occurred to Roger and me that the 22 hands where partner responded 2H was a little low. I ran 200 more hands and on those hnds, partner responds 2H 55 times. So indeed it seems that 22 was quite low but it seems that was just a coincidence, not because I used incorrect specifications. It also seems that partner bidding game 18 out of 48 times is on the low side. 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.