Please bid!

[jdonn]

The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous. There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

Neither is America, made up of more than 50 states. Although it may well be more homogeneous than Europe is. Still you will get different answers to bidding polls in different areas of the country in many cases.

[cherdanno]

The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous.  There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

Neither is America, made up of more than 50 states. Although it may well be more homogeneous than Europe is. Still you will get different answers to bidding polls in different areas of the country in many cases.

Uhm, in terms of anything bridge related North America is more homogeneous than Germany alone.

[Rev Dino]

I am willing to bet that virtually all top Italian players would double with this hand, and most of them are European.

 

I can not agree that most of Italians are Europeans, but all of them.

 

I never said 2D is good I just said it seemed to me at the table the best. Taking serious Croatian forum or not is your personal choice, but you could keep it for yourself and it would be nicer. I found at this site whole bunch of a stupid things and I kept it for myself. I do not have in my mind to persuade people what to think about different European bridge sites.

 

I do not see much sense why it is important who did you talk to. MFA and Fluffy should be good if they are what you said, but OK, I should not be bad myself ranked high here and was captain of national team at last years European championships in France. I am not a pro but I finesse OK. And the people I spoke to here are certainly not basketball but a bridge players. The important thing is that the "bridge schools" are very different and that's the fact. Like in any other sport. Let say football: Italians - defense, Germans - stamina, Portugal - technique, English - long balls, French - atack...You still do not agree?

 

And asit is almost 01:00 a.m. I am sleepy. But I wll give you tommorow something else to show you how many different answers we will get on this forum. OK?

[bluecalm]

I am convinced 2D is the worst option.

My way to improve my intuition in such cases is :

a)listen to good players

b)run some simulations, go through hands and see what option fares the best.

 

All good players I talked to hate overcalling 2D on those hands.

I saw some sample hands and while it certainly may be variance my conclusion was that we are much more likely to lose very good club or heart fit than diamond fit after 2D overcall.

I would like to comment on style things. You can't go as far as saying that any decision with some alternatives is "style thing". Some things are simply better and some are worse. We won't ever improve if stop discussing if 2D is WORSE or BETTER than double saying it's "style thing" instead. Well if it is then some styles are worse than others.

I am more open minded about such things these days but still there is a line somewhere. I am pretty sure most my bridge friends would say 2D is insane/stupid/retarded if it weren't the public forum (we are young and like to exaggerate :rolleyes: ). I don't see anything unreasonable about drawing the conclusion : "Croatian forum A voted for 2D" --->>>> "probably they are not as good as people here". It's simple bayesian reasoning. The more bad decisions one makes the more likely it is that he/is is bad at making decisions. I hate political corectness it's better to have honest heated debate than situation where everybody holds their views in the name of being nice.

 

My opinion is : "2D is bad" and "people who vote for 2D are probably not that good". I accept that I may be wrong and I may be convinced by strong arguments but for now it's the way I feel about the matter.

[gnasher]

I saw some sample hands and while it certainly may be variance my conclusion was that we are much more likely to lose very good club or heart fit than diamond fit after 2D overcall.

What works on this hand isn't the only thing that matters.

 

If you double on this hand, you reduce your accuracy on the other hands where you make a takeout double. Auctions starting with a takeout double work better if advancer can expect the doubler to have at least two 4-card suits.

 

Similarly, if you bid 1NT on this hand, you reduce your accuracy on the other hands where you overcall 1NT. Auctions starting with a 1NT overcall work better if responder can expect a notrump-oriented hand.

[Jlall]

easiest double of the decade

[OleBerg]

I expected to be outnumbered when I voted for 2♦, but I didn't expect the bid to recieve such criticism. After all, it is the bid that caters best to 2♠ raise by LHO.

 

At MP's I don't hate 1NT.

[Rev Dino]

but I didn't expect the bid to recieve such criticism.

Me neither. I just wanted to be socialized but I feel crucified at the public forum.

 

All from me for some time. HNY and be good.

[Fluffy]

5 card suit at the 2 level uhhggg

 

Bidding a 5 card suit at the 2 level must be your last resource, maybe with something such as

 

xxx

Kx

AQJxx

AKx

 

But certainly with AQxxx no!

 

NOTE: My views on the 2 level overcall are not standard :)

[Rev Dino]

5 card suit at the 2 level uhhggg

Exactly, but it looks like people do not read those posts at all.

 

I never said 2D is good, and never said I still do, but that SEEMED to me at the table good. SEEMED, past tense. Much better players, not to say pros and champs bided even more stupid things at the table.

 

About 5 cards overcalls let me copy-paste what I wrote before:

 

"For 2D you are short for a card and will have problem to find possible heart fit." Dec 31, 05:37 a.m. forum time

[gnasher]

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

[pooltuna]

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

[jdonn]

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

 

And oleberg who says 2♦ is best if they raise to 2♠? If partner has 5(+) hearts or clubs and 0-2 diamonds then double is best if they raise to 2♠.

 

I also don't see why he feels crucified. Does he just feel bad most people hate a 2♦ bid? Does he want people to not discuss any bid they think is bad?

[pooltuna]

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

 

And oleberg who says 2♦ is best if they raise to 2♠? If partner has 5(+) hearts or clubs and 0-2 diamonds then double is best if they raise to 2♠.

 

I also don't see why he feels crucified. Does he just feel bad most people hate a 2♦ bid? Does he want people to not discuss any bid they think is bad?

Nevertheless I choose to take the risk of 2♦when I hold

 

Kxx

A

AQxxx

Qxxx

 

presumably unlike you who now can no longer make a comfortable TOX and presumably chooses to pass?

[Codo]

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

Maybe not personally, but if Han writes that you should not take the Croatian mailing list too serious and you are the captain of the Croatian team, you can take this quite serious.

 

If you choose 2 ♦ and you are not used to the bad style on this forum and read the words which expressed their opinions about this bid, you may feal criticised too.

 

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact. If you are not used to this style, this can be very insulting.

[eyhung]

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact.

My opinion is that this ought to win the award for best self-referential quote of the new year.

[eyhung]

BTW, I hate 1NT and I really hate 2D. Enough has been said already about why 2D is bad, but not 1NT. My general rule of thumb : if the hand is in range but lacks potential for a double-stopper, it probably isn't a 1NT bid over 1M if there's any reasonable alternative. Here we do have one: double.

 

Why do I want a double stop? The opponents will be leading a 5-card suit with plenty of entries to the suit -- you don't get rich at notrump when the opening lead tends to set up 4 tricks for the defense to your 1. So I do not see why we should charge into notrump while we still have multiple playable strains (diamonds, hearts). In general it's harder to get out of notrump than it is to get in.

[rhm]

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact.

My opinion is that this ought to win the award for best self-referential quote of the new year.

Trouble is that most people think their opinion is fact, rather less that it might be dogmatic :angry:

 

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

Maybe there is a difference between Croatia and BBF-land, but my immediate thought was it was more likely to be a question of age and/or skill level.

 

I think most players at my local club (England) would not double with this hand because they have learned that a dbl shows a 4-card hearts. Some would avoid 1NT because it shows 16-18. I would attribute this more to skill level, or having been taught bidding theory long ago, than to being English. English BBF posters are more likely to dbl, or maybe bid 1NT, but certainly not bid 2♦.

 

By the same token, I think most of those players at my Dutch club who would not overcall 2♦ would give as reason that the hand is too strong - not that the suit is too weak or that there is a better alternative. Again, I would expect Dutch BBF posters not to bid 2♦ either, but for the right reason.

[gwnn]

it would be more than shocking to me if anybody in the top 100 players of the world bid 2♦. top 100 according to any reasonable criterion.

[Rev Dino]

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

 

If any knowledge about stochastic process in probability theory...

 

some facts:

 

S fit 0,5 %

C fit 22%

D fit 66 %

H fit 22%

double fit 24%

no fit 12%

 

more-less

 

9 cards D fit is more probable then 8 cards C or H

 

opp have S fit 74%

 

Let me also try to answer on: "it would be more than shocking to me if anybody in the top 100 players of the world bid 2♦. top 100 according to any reasonable criterion. ", gwnn's from yesterday

 

DD analisys on 4000 boards number of tricks for:

 

opp:

5,19 7,68 5,64 4,55 6,19 NT, S, H, D, C

 

you:

6,93 5,00 7,00 8,13 6,49 NT, S, H, D, C

 

In 20,8 % they have 1S sharp but you at least have:

9 tricks in D in 52% and 9 tricks in any (including D) 67%

 

In 24,6 % they have 2S sharp but then you have at least:

8 tricks in D in 66% and 8 tricks in any (including D) in 80%

 

Statistics will tell that D fit probability is 54,4% but that's the difference between statistics and stohastics 66% above mentioned. I generated that first two seats do not have an opening, neither preemptive bids on any level.

 

And so...and so...and so...giving us that BY FAR the best CHANCE to have a fit and make contract for you is 2/3 D. Second best is 1NT, what is hard to expect to be bided by your partner if you double (what 50% of the members here voted).

 

 

Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

 

Thank you!

[phil_20686]

And so...and so...and so...giving us that BY FAR the best CHANCE to have a fit and make contract for you is 2/3 D. Second best is 1NT, what is hard to expect to be bided by your partner if you double (what 50% of the members here voted).

 

 

Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

 

Thank you!

Yes, but these statistics do not tell the whole story, as many times a t/o double will still lead to playing in diamonds. Many people will play that

 

1s x 2s 2n

 

shows two 4 card suits for example, and then they will always find a 9 card fit if they have one. Also, the statistics will be heavily biased for when you ahve a ten card fit in diamonds which could make a gazillion tricks, but in this case, the t/o double also gets you to diamonds.

 

Further, one assumes that one is playing imps, in which case the chance is making game in hearts rather than diamonds is heavily weighted, as the chance of ten tricks in hearts is much greater than 11 tricks in diamonds.

 

Not only this, but you lose ground in the area of sacrifices when tyour 2/1 overcalls can have such a low ODR, partner may well now choose to sacrifice in what he things is a ten card fit when you are beating 4s by several tricks, or, just as bad, will not sacrifice when you have more of a distributional hand in case you ahve this hand and are beating 4s.

 

Further, making a t/o double maximises the chance of partner finding a penalty double later if the oppoents decided to be a little frisky. [this is a small thing in this example - you have too mcuh extra strength for this to be likely]

 

My own feeling is that thsi hand is a clear double at imps. I would still double at MP, but i expect it to be close now, as there will be many 5-3 fits and leads that save a trick, however here i am also happy with a heart lead at MP.

[bluecalm]

My way to improve my intuition in such situations is to generate deals with 1S opener and our hand as 2nd to act. Then I just go hand after hand looking at all 4 hands and see how different actions fares. Sometimes it's not clear after many hands. Sometimes it's too difficult to predict what would happen to draw conclusions. Sometimes it's obvious which action is better.

I agree that maybe you will land in worse partscore often after a double. Maybe even 2♦ leads more often to the best partscore (but I think it's not true), so what ? You will have many disasters which costs 10's of imps like not finding 4♥ game or 9+card fit when they preempt while disasters (like missing 5D game) after a double are rare.

 

I don't believe anybody who tried this exercise can believe in 2♦ overcall anymore.

Of course different people will draw different conclusions because of their style. I play that 2D overcall almost promies 6 card suit. Overcalling on 5card suit is rare. Partner of the overcaller will be very happy to go to 5level with good distribution and 4+support. Opposite this hand he will make phantom sacrifice quite often. Even taking into account all this I am sure that if you just go hand after hand and see on your own eyes how dbl fares comparing to 2D you will just hate it as most people on this forum do.

[jdonn]

Statistics in the hand of someone who doesn't know how to draw conclusions is a dangerous thing. Here are some facts back at you.

- Double does not prevent you from playing in diamonds!

- Overcalling diamonds is the only way to possibly reach a 5 or 6 card fit in any suit.

- Overcalling diamonds is the most likely way to go for a number (well ok that one's not a fact but I'm sure it's true).

- The two most likely strains for game are notrump and hearts, and 2♦ is the worst option to reach them.

 

Really how can you say it's most likely we have a diamond fit therefore it's right to bid diamonds? There is so much more to it. I would probably dispute more but I don't understand half of what you wrote, sorry.

[eyhung]

[Now, I am still ready to learn from experts and first 100 top world players and would like if somebody can explain me, after above mentioned FACTS, would D fit, as best, be easier found by biding 1NT, X or 2D?

The game would be quite simple if the goal was to find your longest combined trump fit. Obviously 2♦ is the call that gives you the best chance of finding a fit -- it is your longest suit. But remember, you get a big bonus for games. Overcalling diamonds is unlikely to get you to game when the enemy can open the bidding and you do not have shortness. This is why the potential reward for 2♦ is small but the potential risk (getting doubled in 2♦ or missing game in hearts or notrump) is large. Double has low risk (you are offering partner a choice of 4 strains (notrump, hearts, diamonds, clubs) and has great potential reward because it allows partner to bid game in 2 strains.