Ballancing enemy's preempt

[nikos59]

To Chamaco: sorry, bad expression: I had an opening *weak 2* hand,

and I have lied to pard by passing.

The rest of my dissertation stays unchanged

 

n

[Chamaco]

To Chamaco: sorry, bad expression: I had an opening *weak 2* hand,

and I have lied to pard by passing.

The rest of my dissertation stays unchanged

 

n

Nikos, i know you are a good player, and we both agree that the problem stems from not opening a weak 2.

 

I just state that if I balance here, my pard will always raise me if he has a decent hand (when 3H would make but 4H goes down), and he will pass when he is minium and opps have the balance of points waiting to double us.

 

Bidding here just puts my pard in trouble. The next time I balance he will never know if I have an opening hand or just a competitive hand.

 

the usual rule is that balancing at the 3 level shows a full opening hand in hcpo or distribution.

 

For instance, if you bid 1NT with 20 points aren't you

later going to show the extra ace if you can? 

 

This is much different here: the difference between my hand and and the requirements for balancing is not 1 ace only, but 2 tricks (9 losers vs 7 losers).

The distortion is much bigger.

I would forgive my pard for not opening a weak 2 with a so-and-so suit, opposite an unpassed pard; but I won't forgive him for balancing at the 3 level.

In this case better pass, there are still good chances that we get a good score, while overbidding by 2 tricks your hand is much more likely to bring misfortune.

Bridge is playing the odds.

 

Finally, one more thing for "intermediate beginners": never try to recover a bidding mistake you previously made, if you at a high level (3 or more). Most often than not pard will not understand the bidding, he may run to a different suit, or simply you may end in an hopeless contract.

If you misbid before and you are at a high level, just accept it.

By the way, trying to recover from a bad bid and hoping that your pard understands, is likely to be sanctioned by the tournament director, if the opps call him.

[whereagles]

3H may be undisciplined and horrible for partnership trust and all that, but you know what? I have the feeling it's the winning bid. I prefer to play the hand now and apologize later, than being drowned with remorse for failing to bid 3H when it was the good move.

 

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something. If it went

 

(1C) pass (3C) pass

pass ??

 

wouldn't you balance 3H now? Why not doing the same here?

[luke warm]

I would forgive my pard for not opening a weak 2 with a so-and-so suit, opposite an unpassed pard; but I won't forgive him for balancing at the 3 level.

whatever my partner does, i've found it best to remember 2 things... 1) he acted in good faith, and 2) in his judgement he did the right thing at the time

 

none of us are always right, but we're often wrong... forgiving partner is what the game is all about, and we can only hope he is as forgiving as we are

 

this is why i refuse to play with (more than once, anyway) a person who doesn't understand that 2 opponents are plenty, nobody needs 3, and that post mortems are best handled in private

 

No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.

Never bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

 

Besides, I prefer to lose one board than one partner.

 

why can't you trust that your partner did what looked right at the time? why can't he trust that you did the same? there has to be room for judgement, and anytime judgement is exercised, errors can be made... besides, there's nothing that says balancing after 1C : p : 3C is done as a preempt over a preempt

[Chamaco]

3H may be undisciplined and horrible for partnership trust and all that, but you know what? I have the feeling it's the winning bid. I prefer to play the hand now and apologize later, than being drowned with remorse for failing to bid 3H when it was the good move.

 

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something. If it went

 

(1C) pass (3C) pass

pass ??

 

wouldn't you balance 3H now? Why not doing the same here?

No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.

I do not like to bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

 

But I would be more tempted at MP than the hand we are discussing.

The situation is VERY different: in this case (1C-p-3C) we know they have a fit and we have more reasons to fight. After the 3C opening preempt and all pass we have no idea if they have a fit or not.

 

 

 

Besides, I prefer to lose one board than one partner.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something.

 

Put down this way, this is a wrong concept.

At MP you compete violently for the partscore if you are sure opps have a fit, and especuially at the 2 level.

The old adage "the 3 level belongs to the opponents" often holds true.

Besides, the point is to compete when you think it is right: here, even in those cases where 3H makes, yout pard will raise to 4 because he will think your hand is stronger.

 

It is lunacy to expect partner pass our balancing if he holds an opening hand: he is supposed to bid game if he holds an opening hand that was not strong enough to bid over 3C.

 

If he does not hold that hand, and he is weaker, RHO will double because he has 14/15 + hcp in misfit with pard.

Bidding 3H is against odds: you may hit a lucky hand once every 20 hand like these, but you lose 19 out of 20 hands and break ptship trust.

 

Discipline may make you lose one board once in a while at MP, but will win many other boards and will be respectful of parttner.

 

This is a very important concept here in a Beginner-intermediate forum.

[Chamaco]

none of us are always right, but we're often wrong...

I forgive a pard that makes a mistake, a revoke, or whatever.

believe me, I understand all kinds of errors.

 

The only time time I do not forgive is when a pard breaks grossly the agreements and he is aware of it: if he does that, he starts to play alone and not as a couple: he is bidding only his cards and not giving me a choiice to say my word on the hand. He is being plainly selfish and unrespectful.

And he loses my trust.

Even if the board comes out with a plus, I will not trust him in the next boards.

 

I accept it when he makes a "judgment bid", distorting a bit this hand.

But here the distortion is abnormal, by 2 tricks. It is like making a reverse when you have an 11 point count; or bidding a slam 2 aces off.

 

My pard should respect me and bid according to our agreements, if he has some bridge knowledge.

 

I would forgive a 3H bid only in 2 cases:

 

1) he took the wrong bid out of the bidding box (lapsus manus)

 

2) he is a beginner and has no idea of bridge. In this case I would be very patient to explain why 3 H is wrong.

 

In all other cases it only shows selfish bidding.

[whereagles]

> No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.

> Never bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

 

That's probably not what you wanted to say B) xxx KQJxxx Kxx x is a preemptive hand and you'll want to bid 3H after

 

(3C) pass pass ??

[Chamaco]

> No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.

> Never bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

 

That's probably not what you wanted to say B)  xxx KQJxxx Kxx x is a preemptive hand and you'll want to bid 3H after

 

(3C) pass pass ??

 

You are right, my expression was not precise.

The hand you show is close to a 7.5 losers hand.

With a 7 losers hand (playing strength of an opener) I have no objectioin to a 3-level balancing so this is a good stretch, even if the hand has preemptive features.

 

But with a 9-loser hand (the original posted hand) I think it is sheer lunacy.

 

However, I have edited my post on the 1C-p-3C sequence, discussing the main difference with a 3 level opening preempt (in one case there is a sure club fit, in the other not).

[whereagles]

Well, don't get me wrong... You're probably right in that 3H is too risky B) It's just that I feel an overwhelming urge to bid it, and I usually follow my instincts, eheh.

 

I wouldn't blame a partner of mine who bid it, for I know he had a difficult decision. The best thing you can say to partner when he takes a wrong view is "I probably would have done the same."

[Chamaco]

Well, don't get me wrong... You're probably right in that 3H is too risky B) It's just that I feel an overwhelming urge to bid it, and I usually follow my instincts, eheh.

 

I wouldn't blame a partner of mine who bid it, for I know he had a difficult decision. The best thing you can say to partner when he takes a wrong view is "I probably would have done the same."

Regardless of what i said about forgiving or not (anyone who knows me knows I never get upset), the point is that here it is ABSOLUTELY NOT a matter of hand evaluation.

 

I agree when you refer to a difficult bid where you may stretch by *one* trick.

Here you are stretching by *2* tricks. (bidding a 9 loser hand as if it was a 7 loser hand).

As I said, it is like reversing with 11-12 hcp or bidding a slam off 2 aces.

 

It is not anymore a matter of evaluation, it is just grossly overestimating the hand.

 

If a pard bids with this hand, I will never say "I'd bid this way too". Probably I would not get upset, but I'd spend at least one hour of our next post mortem to explain to him- very nicely - why bidding anything with that hand is hopelessly wrong.

 

Bridge is partnership game: the first thing my partner should think there is: "What shall my partner do if I bid something?"

 

This message should be very clear to the beginner-intermediates who read this.

 

Discipline, discipline, discipline: even if you have a long suit, sometimes you just can't bid it, if the level is too high. Even if you are at Matchpoints.

Sometimes not bidding it leads to a poor score, it's life, but one should play the odds and see how many times passing this bid out will keep him out of trouble.

 

Just to avoid misunderstandings, "DISCIPLINE" does not mean "be rigid": you can use your judgment, and I love partners who use judgment, but only in CLOSE decisions. You may overbid by one trick sometimes, it's ok.

Not here: here bidding overbids by 2 tricks, it's not at all a close decision, it's only a matter of will power, to restrain oneself from bidding only because we have more than 5 cards in a major.

 

I recommend all the articles by Mike Lawrence on Bidding over preempts.

[whereagles]

If a pard bids with this hand, I will never say "I'd bid this way too". Probably I would not get upset, but I'd spend at least one hour of our next post mortem to explain to him- very nicely - why bidding anything with that hand is hopelessly wrong.

 

I don't think it's a good idea to convince pard his decision was "hopelessly wrong", when he tried to do his best in a difficult situation. If something, I'd tell him he was "a bit over-optimistic". Later his own judgement would assimilate the learnings.

 

Besides, if dummy comes up with

 

AJTx

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

3H is far from hopeless B)

[Chamaco]

I don't think it's a good idea to convince pard his decision was "hopelessly wrong", when he tried to do his best in a difficult situation. If something, I'd tell him he was "a bit over-optimistic". Later his own judgement would assimilate the learnings.

 

Besides, if dummy comes up with

 

AJTx

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

3H is far from hopeless :)

1) If pard has such a hand he must bid 4H over you reopening.

If pard has a decent hand he cannot stop in 3H.

If you agree with pard's pass of 3H here, you will miss many games when you actually balance with a real opening hand.

That's all the point of the post.

 

If my pard reopens 3H and I hold such a hand I may even think of slam: pard must be short in clubs, with as little as 2 aces and some spade honors, slam is easily on (barring club ruffs).

If instead my pard can reopen with nothing, I'll never know where to stop.

 

2) This should be clear to the beginner-intermediates: NEVER PLAY PARD FOR THE PERFECT HAND. This is a well known rule

 

3) If pard has the hand you posted it may be more prudent to call the director (2 J's of spades in the deck B) ).

 

4) I will tell my pard, VERY NICELY, that despite his efforts to do his best, his choice was hopelessly wrong. :)

Not to discourage him, but to make sure that he really understand that this situation is nowhere close to a "judgment" situation.

Everytime I have told to a beginner partner that his choice was a real mistake, with a smile, I have seen that they were very responsive.

If I tell him that he was "a bit optimistic" he may believe that there was any chance for that to be a good bid.

I prefer to be clear about that, but with a big smile on my face :)

[nikos59]

To Chamaco:

 

You say that if pard holds

 

AJTx

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

over the reopening, he must bid 4H.

 

This (i.e. the "he must bid" part) is going too far, isn't it? I mean, hasn't partner seen us passing? Why on earth should he be keen on hanging us for reopening

as a passed hand, i.e. for contesting the partial? Has this pard

never played matchpoints? (I assume the original setting was

matchpoints). Can't this partner count to 13? Because any counting

partner knows that not only me but also the fourth player is short

at clubs.

 

In my humble opinion, any sensible partner holding the above hand will immediately guess that most likely points at the table are 10 apiece (give or take a jack) for everyone and will pass speedily. Even thinking to bid with this

hand above is an overbid and an insult to partner.

 

After all, if partner is a passed hand and I am a passed hand and the

contest is matchpoints, I am assured of a fine score with 170 and I

leave 3H well alone.

 

nikos

[Chamaco]

To Chamaco:

 

You say that if pard holds

 

AJTx

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

over the reopening, he must bid 4H.

 

This (i.e. the "he must bid" part) is going too far, isn't it?

I do not think so:

 

The balancer is marked with clubs shortness and at least about 10 hcp (obviously none of which wasted in clubs unless it's an Ace) or 7 losers for his balancing.

 

xxxx in opps suit increases the value of our hand (expecting pard with shortness).

The 9+ card fit also increases the chances (added possibilities of throw ins and ruffs keeping trump control, less risk of bad trump split).

 

As I said, it is enough that balancer has 2 aces and something in spades to suggest even more than game.

 

A reasonable hand for balancing is:

 

♠Qxx

♥ATxxx

♦Axxx

♣x

 

or even a distributional hand short in hcp but with 7 losers:

 

♠xx

♥JTxxxx

♦Axxxx

♣

 

Or whatever you want: just combine at your leisure any 10-11 hcp count or a 7-loser hand, with 5+ hearts and shortness in clubs and you will see that some layouts will fail (e.g. when balancer has wasted values in diamonds) but most layouts will make game either as cross ruff or as dummy reversal.

 

This is a game where an expert wants to be despite shortage of hcp. Fit matters.

 

I think this is a clearcut 4H bid and I am sure that anyyone who is so aggressive to suggest a 3H balancing with the hand before, will bid 4H with this hand opposite a passed hand balancer.

[whereagles]

I don't think it's clear to jump to game on that 4414 hand. After all, you're opposite a passed pard who failed to open 2H and rates to have club shortness (thus making it likely he streched to bid 3H).

 

But ok, suppose pard bids 4 with

 

AT9x <--- swapped jack to 9 ;)

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

I go 1 down in 4H but they're cold for 11 tricks in clubs, so... :P

 

Also, with Qxx ATxxx Axxx x, pard could perhaps have doubled.

[Chamaco]

I don't think it's clear to jump to game on that 4414 hand. After all, you're opposite a passed pard who failed to open 2H and rates to have club shortness (thus making it likely he streched to bid 3H).

 

But ok, suppose pard bids 4 with

 

AT9x <--- swapped jack to 9 ;)

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

I go 1 down in 4H but they're cold for 11 tricks in clubs, so... :P

 

Also, with Qxx ATxxx Axxx x, pard could perhaps have doubled.

If you bid 4H opposite the posted hand, do not expect to play them undoubled :)

(BTW, there are 10 tricks in clubs not eleven with the diamond ruff).

 

But the point is that bidding 3H means play partner for the perfect hand, a common mistake to be avoided.

 

Sometimes passing will lead to a poor matchpoints result (like in the case you just presented= 4HX-1 = -100 vs 3C+1 = - 130), but it is much better to recriminate on a single hand out of many, but having followed the agreements with pard than the opposite.

Most other times your discipline will earn you a good result, and keep harmony with partner: your pard will know more precisely what to expect when you do bid; if your bid may range from 7 to 9 loser, your pard will be stuck all the time.

Discipline is the key to take good decision when you are at a high level and do not have the room to explore further the potential of the hands.

 

In the long run, sticking to precise agreements and deviating only in really close situations (this one not being one of them) earns the well-deserved unconditional trust and respect of partner.

 

Sorry to seem insisting, it's not a personal thing but I do believe this should be clear in a beginner-intermediate forum.

[luke warm]

If a pard bids with this hand, I will never say "I'd bid this way too". Probably I would not get upset, but I'd spend at least one hour of our next post mortem to explain to him- very nicely - why bidding anything with that hand is hopelessly wrong.

 

I don't think it's a good idea to convince pard his decision was "hopelessly wrong", when he tried to do his best in a difficult situation. If something, I'd tell him he was "a bit over-optimistic". Later his own judgement would assimilate the learnings.

 

Besides, if dummy comes up with

 

AJTx

KQxx

x

xxxx

 

3H is far from hopeless ;)

i agree with this, and i'd like to add that IF i told partner anything at all it'd be in private... never ever at the table, in front of the ops

 

and chamaco, i'm not disagreeing with you about the necessity for partnership understandings, only with the 'i won't forgive' part... it sounds very much like you're saying you've never made a bidding mistake, one that (at the table, at that time) you felt (judged) to be correct... not one, maybe, you'd repeat, but one that "felt right" at the time

 

to me it's not quite logical to say a decision was 'hopelessly wrong' if, in fact, it was correct (that time)... maybe say something like, "it did work out that time, but it tends to undermine p'ship trust... it might be better to bid according to our agreements in the future, for both of us, so that we can always trust one another's bids"

[the hog]

3H may be undisciplined and horrible for partnership trust and all that, but you know what? I have the feeling it's the winning bid. I prefer to play the hand now and apologize later, than being drowned with remorse for failing to bid 3H when it was the good move.

 

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something. If it went

 

(1C) pass (3C) pass

pass ??

 

wouldn't you balance 3H now? Why not doing the same here?

No I would not balance that hand after 1C-p-3C preemptive.

I do not like to bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand.

 

But I would be more tempted at MP than the hand we are discussing.

The situation is VERY different: in this case (1C-p-3C) we know they have a fit and we have more reasons to fight. After the 3C opening preempt and all pass we have no idea if they have a fit or not.

 

 

 

Besides, I prefer to lose one board than one partner.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

Besides, this is matchpoints. At MPs, if there's the slightest chance the hand is yours, you have to bid something.

 

Put down this way, this is a wrong concept.

At MP you compete violently for the partscore if you are sure opps have a fit, and especuially at the 2 level.

The old adage "the 3 level belongs to the opponents" often holds true.

Besides, the point is to compete when you think it is right: here, even in those cases where 3H makes, yout pard will raise to 4 because he will think your hand is stronger.

 

It is lunacy to expect partner pass our balancing if he holds an opening hand: he is supposed to bid game if he holds an opening hand that was not strong enough to bid over 3C.

 

If he does not hold that hand, and he is weaker, RHO will double because he has 14/15 + hcp in misfit with pard.

Bidding 3H is against odds: you may hit a lucky hand once every 20 hand like these, but you lose 19 out of 20 hands and break ptship trust.

 

Discipline may make you lose one board once in a while at MP, but will win many other boards and will be respectful of parttner.

 

This is a very important concept here in a Beginner-intermediate forum.

 

I wouldn't bid on this hand either Mauro over (1C) P (3C). The problem is not so much that 3H may be the right spot, rather it is that you are unlikely to be able to play 3H. Partner is far more likely to bid 3NT or 4H IF 3H had been right because he will not expect this rubbish in your hand.

 

When 3H is not right, you are going down a lot. The downside of operating with 3H on this hand is far too great.

One final point - to hope partner turns up with KQxx of H is akin to hoping you will win the lottery. You do have 6H after all. Hx is somewhat more reasonable.

[Chamaco]

it sounds very much like you're saying you've never made a bidding mistake, one that (at the table, at that time) you felt (judged) to be correct... not one, maybe, you'd repeat, but one that "felt right" at the time

No no I am not saying that.

If it sounds like that, then I have chosen the wrong words, sorry for that.

 

What I am saying is that I believe that biding is a very very very poor choice here, not a matter of judgment and that when this happens, I want my partner to know it (not yelling at him, telling it very nicely, if he is a listening partner).

 

I will repeat it for the last time, and Ron has posted the same concept as well: if your pard passes 3H here he will be broke and wwe'll go for a number; if he has something useful he'll raise to 4H and we'll go down.

On average you are bound to minus more than their club partscore more often than not, AND quite often we'll be severely penalized.

This should be made very clear in an intermediate- beginners forum and should be very clear to any experienced bridge player.

 

Bidding here shows one of 2 things:

 

- having no clue of this bidding sequence: in this case i will be very nice to explain this to my partner; I am always ready to explain the reason of a very poor chice to a partner who tried to do his best;

 

- if the bidder is a good bridge player, it just means he plays only with his own cards and does not intend bridge as a partnership game, not thinking of what partner will do, no respect of partnership. The sequence is obvious. A good player knows that it is impossible to stop in 3H if pard has a decent hand.

I expect him to apologize even if the bid turns out well, if he does that, no problem at all.

 

 

Bidding here is like passing a 4NT ace ask by pard, or reversing with 11 hcp because it breaks a basic agreement. What would you do if your pard passes your 4NT ace ask ? You would probably explain to him very nicely that he has no clue of what he did :). If he insist that it is the right thing and that he is a good bridge player the discussion may become interesting :P .

I would do the same.

 

Finally:

I always make mistakes, but I do apologize when I do them, Luke.

But in my experience, the kind of players who like these bids never apologize.

Unfortunately, the kind of people who do this bid usualy grossly overestimate not only the value of their hands but also the quality of their own play and bids :)).

They lack humbleness: if you tell them (aways nicely and with a smile) to go and study the books on these bidding sequences (there are books quite fine on this) they'll just say that they do not need books, that's theory but real bridge is something else: the typical attitude of people who do not want confrontation.

Most of the time they'll be arrogant instead of apologizing, even if your observations on their bad bids are told very nicely and with a smile. They will be arogant because they will not accept that you teach them nicely what is the right bid because that woul mean to accept the evidence that they bid like a real beginner.

But that is the plain truth: they bid like a beginner.

Many of them put "expert" on profile, perhaps mistaking this term with "experienced". ;)

 

But maybe you are luckier than me in your occasional partnerships.

 

(PS- to avoid any misunderstanding: I do not believe it is the case of helene_t. :) The simple fact she posted the hand shows that she is willing to verify te correctness of a choice she made)

[helene_t]

The good news is that p had a good 6-card spades. The bad news is that he first bid 3NT (I dono why) and then doubled them in 4♣ (he rightly assumed I would have more defensive values). Defending 3♣ would be some 25%, this was a 0%.

[whereagles]

Hum.. exactly what me feeling was telling me: "Selling out to 3C is bound to give me a bad score" ;)

 

You got a bad score anyway, but at least a risk was taken to improve your chances. And if pard had bid 3S... :P

[Chamaco]

Hum.. exactly what me feeling was telling me: "Selling out to 3C is bound to give me a bad score" ;)

 

You got a bad score anyway, but at least a risk was taken to improve your chances. And if pard had bid 3S... :P

yes but there is no way to stop in 3H even when it i the right spot . That's the whole point.

 

And as i told, better risk the occasional 25% at MP but keep agreements correct.

 

Besides, we do not know the hand of pard (6 good spades).

It is likely the 25% scorec comes by not opening weak 2 this hand or not overcalling by pard.

This is where the postmortem shd focus, not on balancing with this hand.

[EarlPurple]

If I did bid 3♥ here it is clearly a competitive bid and not an invitation for partner to go on and bid more. If I am not allowed to compete part-score because my partner will punish me by raising, then it is me who is playing with the wrong partner. I obviously do not have an opening bid because I didn't open the first time.

 

By the way, I would expect for that sequence a hand with 7 hearts and most of the values outside the suit, thus not a good pre-empt in front of partner.

 

This hand may justify passing then balancing into 3♥:

 

♠A9

♥J976532

♦KJx

♣x

 

Ok, you might decide sometimes to open 2♥ or 3♥ with that hand. I'd probably open 2♥ on it, but passing them coming in later is not unreasonable.

[Chamaco]

This hand may justify passing then balancing into 3♥:

 

♠A9

♥J976532

♦KJx

♣x

 

Ok, you might decide sometimes to open 2♥ or 3♥ with that hand. I'd probably open 2♥ on it, but passing them coming in later is not unreasonable.

Earl, the hand you posted is a 7 loser hand, way stronger than the original hand. I agree on balancing 3H with the hand you posted.

 

I would expect a good partner to reopen with such a hand.

 

The original posted hand is a 9 loser hand, it differs by 2 tricks, and it is not a small difference as you obviously know.

 

I am not arguing with balancing with disributional values, I argue with the distributional strength of the original hand, abnormally weak even for balancing.

[whereagles]

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something ;)

 

Of course, if I knew this particular pard was bound to take 3H too seriously, I'd certainly pass. Bidding 3H does require an experienced partner in front, who knows better than burying me for over-competing :P