4 level pressure bid

[the hog]

"I dont care much for slams"

 

"There are very few absolutes in bridge.

In theory, even playing against a good team, if there are no sacrifice issues involved, you need a little better than 50% to bid a slam. "

 

I found those two comments interesting. Over 14 boards from last night, here are 3 slams. You are playing against a good team.

 

KQx

Axxxx

Kxx

Kx

 

Axx

x

AQxxxxx

xx

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

Kx

KQxx

AKxxx

xx

 

AJx

Axxx

x

AJxxx

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

xx

Kxx

AQxxx

Kxx

 

x

AQxx

JTx

AQJTx

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

 

None of them are clear cut to make or to bid. You need to bid and make all three to TIE the match. Before anyone makes a smart aleck comment, no I did not go for 1100 on one of the other boards; they were virtually all pushes or a couple of imps either way.

 

I somehow think Paul and Whereagles might have lost this match by over 30 Imps.

[twcho]

Ron, your hands did not prove anything.

 

Hand 1. If 6D play be north, it is an excellent contract but it is normal to play by south, then the chance may just slightly better than 50% (good opp likely to lead C).

 

Hand 2. You have a sure loser in C, and you have to hope H breaks and you have to establish either C or D, seems that the total chance less than 50%.

 

Hand 3. Almost a straight 50% bear any ruff possibility.

 

So the result can be either way if cards are placed the other way round.

[Free]

1) 6♦ by north is EXCELENT, 6♦ by south is 50% (a little less - 0.00005% or so, cause someone might have a singleton ♣ and the other plays A and small).

 

2) Is a great slam imo! If the ♥ don't break, you can still finesse in ♠ to discard your ♣ loser. Combine your chances, imo this one is a fair amount above 50%.

 

3) I hate this one, it's on a finesse... I wouldn't bid it in either case with the tools I've got, unless I really need some imps.

[whereagles]

I somehow think Paul and Whereagles might have lost this match by over 30 Imps.

Not a chance. If I were playing, I would be winning by 50 imps at the time, not losing by 30 as you were :)

[Free]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

[the hog]

"Ron, your hands did not prove anything."

 

What on earth are you talking about? I did not say they are in the refrigerator - read my post! What I said was that if you don't bid and make these 3 you will lose on each of them. The point is that if you play a strong team, they will bid slams of this sort. The slam bonus favours bidding 50% slams. Work it out. If you play against poor players there is an argument for staying out of them, but not against quality opponents.

[MickyB]

I disagree, it seems to me that saying out of a 55% slam is an excellent roll of the dice in a match that you otherwise expect to lose.

[inquiry]

The slam bonus favours bidding 50% slams. Work it out.

Vulnerable if you don't bid a slam (let's say in hearts) that makes, you get 680 versus possible 1430. A difference of 750 points. If you bid the slam and it goes down one, you lose 100 versus the 650 you could have made, also 750 points.

 

You win 13 imps (or keep from losing 13 imps) when you bid a 50/50 slam that makes, and you lose 13 imps (or fail to win 13 imps) when you bid a 50/50 slam that goes down. I hardly see how "SLAM BONUS FAVORS" bidding these slams.. .it is a push.

 

Even if you go two (or one doubled), you avoid +650 and lose 200, that si 850, which is still 13 imps (takes 900 to get to 14).

 

So if a slam is EXACTLY 50% or better, the math shows no preference when vul. If the slam is less than 50-50 (needs a finessee AND a good break), the math favors not bidding it vul.....

 

Now to the situation when not vul. The slam bonus is 500, the game bonus you lose if it goes down in 300 then plus the trick score.

 

If you bid slam and it makes you win 11 imps, if you bid slam and it is down one, you lose the 450 you could have made in game, and you gain lose the 50 for going down, the same 500 pts and the same 11 imps. In a minor, you would gain 11 imps if right, but lose only 10 imps if wrong. Down two in the slam is the same 11 imps.

 

So either way you slice it, bidding slams need a 50% to break even (slighlty less if you are stickler for math when slam is in the minor)... the SLAM BONUS doesn't favor bidding slam or stopping with the slam is exactly 50-50.

 

Ben

[whereagles]

Trouble is.. how can you be sure a slam is on a finesse ONLY? For instance, slams on a 44 fit can go down on a 4-1 break (28%) on suit management problems, even when your side holds AKQJ of trumps and the finesse works. Even a solid 54 fit may have trouble opposite a 4-0 break (10%). And, have you considered the chance opponents won't even reach GAME?

 

It's never easy to calculate real odds at table.

[paulhar]

Naw, I wouldn't have lost by 30, I would have already been losing by 30 already so I need the three slams to go down to win! :huh:

 

I forgot something. My analysis is for MP or team matches. If you're playing a short BBO X-IMP tourney, then bidding a close slam is a good thing because you need to pick up tons of IMPs somewhere to win the tourney.

[inquiry]

Trouble is.. how can you be sure a slam is on a finesse ONLY? For instance, slams on a 44 fit can go down on a 4-1 break (28%) on suit management problems, even when your side holds AKQJ of trumps and the finesse works. Even a solid 54 fit may have trouble opposite a 4-0 break (10%). And, have you considered the chance opponents won't even reach GAME?

 

It's never easy to calculate real odds at table.

well if a 4-1 will get you, I assume a 5-0 will get you too, so the odds change.. instead of 28.26, it becomes 32.174.. but let's don't be pendantic about it. I understand what you mean...

 

My rule is not to bid any slam I can figure out needs a finessee and a good break in one or more suit. I am willing to risk a 5-0 split in one suit where they might get o ruff at trick one, but thats about it.

 

And yes, it is hard to figure out the odds.. my post was poking a hole in Ron's statement that the "ODDS FAVOR" bidding the slam. When in fact, they are exactly equal. And the odds are actually aGAINST bidding a grand slam, but that is a different issue.

 

ben

[mishovnbg]

Hi whereagles!

Did you try your skills playing poker? If not imho will be good idea to change the game you play B) . There is a big difference between pressure bidding and gamble. The right pressure bid must aim opps, not your own p. Have you regular p and how many years you play with him? If you have, will be nice to ask him what he think about your preempts with such hands... If you don't have the question "why" have clear answer...

Normally experts hate to guess, as well as to open high with unusual hands. They prefer to receive more info about board, include from opps and they believe in their right decision based on additional info.

Misho

[whereagles]

Misho: as I said, I would open the second hand 1S or a strong club if I'm playing a system that allows me find out about the key cards (S K, C A, D AQ). If I'm not playing a precise system, I'd be more than happy to risk losing a slam in order to play my 4S in peace and quiet.

 

Partner has nothing to do with this. Nor poker.

[Free]

A strong ♣ opening? You MUST be kidding, come on! Open 1♣ with something like this and you have no chance at all to find out about keycards, since opps will intervene like hell with ♥s or ♣s...

[whereagles]

I don't see what's the problem of opening a strong club. If they overcall my 1C with hearts, they would have overcalled a 1S opening just as well. If I had hearts instead of spades, there might be a preference in opening 1H, but as it is I can outbid them all the way to 4S, so I'm ok.

 

Besides, give pard a not-so-unlikely 1534 and they might regret the heart overcall. You don't always need to think in terms of the worst-case-scenario B)

[paulhar]

Besides, give pard a not-so-unlikely 1534 and they might regret the heart overcall. You don't always need to think in terms of the worst-case-scenario B)

You're going to pass 1H doubled? :)

[Free]

I don't see what's the problem of opening a strong club.

Play strong club for 1 month against decent opps (this is players who actually know something about bridge) and you'll KNOW what the problem is...

[Gerben47]

Open 4♠ on the first and 1♠ on the second.

 

Just to mention this. Accurate slam bidding is important. It has been identified as one of the key reasons the Dutch Open Team did not do well in recent European Championships (don't know about Malmö).

 

If the opposition is good enough, don't worry they won't reach game where you are considering to bid slam or not. With grand slams it's different. It might be that others are in game only.

 

The problem with strong club can be summarized as:

 

1♣ (2♠) now what? Oh well, at least you can double for takeout. Next round:

1♣ (2♥ = ♥ or ♠+♣) now what? Don't they ever shut up? What suit do they have? I'm confused...

 

Gerben

[whereagles]

I don't see what's the problem of opening a strong club.

Play strong club for 1 month against decent opps (this is players who actually know something about bridge) and you'll KNOW what the problem is...

Look... how about you stop talking to me like I'm a beginner? I've played strong club for years against top competition in european championships. And quite honestly, I don't remember any particular board where opponent's overcalls on my strong club openings led to disaster. But I do remember a few boards where I myself made unsound overcalls on their strong club openers and got trashed.

 

Just because you open a strong club on an unbalanced hand doesn't mean you'll always get preempted to death. That sort of thing only happens on american movies!! Reality is different. Overcalls on strong clubs are not that hard to handle, especially if you hold a flexible hand like AQTxxxx -- KJxx Kx.

[mishovnbg]

whereagles: "I've played strong club for years against top competition in european championships. And quite honestly, I don't remember any particular board where opponent's overcalls on my strong club openings led to disaster. But I do remember a few boards where I myself made unsound overcalls on their strong club openers and got trashed."

Do you really believe to your own words or you again just kidding? Any player who used to play strong ♣/♦ had a lot of mistakes after opps preempts, as well as some gains of course.

I watched several matches, here in BBO, where Rado&Joro played vs Ron&Rubin. Rado's pair used to play vs 1♣ opening (16+) Rambler (complicate, but most destructive, based on Law). Several times (!) Ron&Rubin give up when after 16 boards they already lose by 50/70 imp, because 1♣ coming too often!!!

 

Shortly: if opps know what to do after strong 1♣/♦ opening, you are in trouble, because need to guess almost all time. It is true that most of pairs are too lazy to use something complicate...

 

Misho

[whereagles]

Well... I agree it's not easy, but I don't think the situation is as bad as you make it. If it were unbareable, no world-class expert would be playing strong club systems, don't you agree?

[Free]

I played MP at top level in Belgium this year, and we came against 1 strong ♣ pair which had the bad luck to open 2 boards with 1♣ against us in the semi-final. Result: 2 tops for us! In the final we met them again, and they opened only once with 1♣. Result: a top for us on that hand!

 

In my local club (not the highest level, but still ok) they have a club system called "Petit Carreau" which is a strong ♣ system. These days our opps actually FEAR to open a 1♣ against us, because we have a really great system (and it's quite simple) against it. I can't count the successes on my fingers and toes that I've had with intervening with it after strong ♣s, but I actually can count them on 1 hand where I ended up in the brown mess: 3 times. And these days the system has been adjusted so these cases don't come up anymore.

 

The problem is not the strong ♣ SYSTEM, it's the strong ♣ OPENING. Against the pair mentioned above, we played again on an international tourney (mostly benelux) in Ostend. They didn't open with 1♣ and they got 2 nice scores.

The power (why the world-class experts play it) is the limited openings, and despite of the poor 1♣ opening, we/they accept the consequences and try to deal with it. That also means you shouldn't open 1♣ as much as possible, but as few as possible. That's why I think opening strong 1♣ with such hand is an awful bid.

[mishovnbg]

Well... I agree it's not easy, but I don't think the situation is as bad as you make it. If it were unbareable, no world-class expert would be playing strong club systems, don't you agree?

Yes!

Actually in not vul the best way is to play strong ♣/♦. In vul there is no right answer at all, so most of top players continue play it. One of best solutions is to play in vul something like polish club (look Rumen-Kalin system).

Misho

 

P.S. I did research about systems of top world players and posted it here in BBO. Only 25% of them use strong ♣/♦ system and between theese 25% some use in vul different system.

[pclayton]

I played MP at top level in Belgium this year, and we came against 1 strong ♣ pair which had the bad luck to open 2 boards with 1♣ against us in the semi-final. Result: 2 tops for us! In the final we met them again, and they opened only once with 1♣. Result: a top for us on that hand!

 

In my local club (not the highest level, but still ok) they have a club system called "Petit Carreau" which is a strong ♣ system. These days our opps actually FEAR to open a 1♣ against us, because we have a really great system (and it's quite simple) against it. I can't count the successes on my fingers and toes that I've had with intervening with it after strong ♣s, but I actually can count them on 1 hand where I ended up in the brown mess: 3 times. And these days the system has been adjusted so these cases don't come up anymore.

 

The problem is not the strong ♣ SYSTEM, it's the strong ♣ OPENING. Against the pair mentioned above, we played again on an international tourney (mostly benelux) in Ostend. They didn't open with 1♣ and they got 2 nice scores.

The power (why the world-class experts play it) is the limited openings, and despite of the poor 1♣ opening, we/they accept the consequences and try to deal with it. That also means you shouldn't open 1♣ as much as possible, but as few as possible. That's why I think opening strong 1♣ with such hand is an awful bid.

I totally agree with Free. The worst thing about playing a strong club system is opening 1♣. Opponents feel a lot more liberties to come in at the one level. Why? Because the opening is a lot lower than a strong 2♣ opening AND its a level lower. Sure, sometimes if we are forced onto a natural bidding track after we open a strong 1♣ we frequently land on our feet, but I can tell you some significant disasters that have occurred which have cost us some big events.

 

As a result, our competive bidding section of our strong club is close to 30% of the notes. Know what to do every conceivable situation at the one level and 2 level.

 

Edgar Kaplan once suggested playing a strong club ONLY when the opponents were vulnerable. I don't feel this strongly, but you see his point.

[inquiry]

The basis of a poll I gave last week was mucking with the opponents big club.. the full hand was....

 

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sa2h75daj2cqj9865&w=skqjhaqj842dkq85c&e=s8763ht63d763cak2&s=st954hk9dt94ct743]399|300|Scoring: IMP

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass

 1♣!   3♣    3NT   5♣

 6♥    Pass  Pass  Pass

 

[/hv]

 

Playing for the first time with a pick up partner, at favorable vulnerability, I applied the pressure witha 5♣ bid. Turns out we are a bit too high, given that we are surely down one too much in 5♣. Perhaps this would be a better story for the strong club guys if they had stopped to double us in five clubs. But it turns out, that West took the push. Even 5♥ is down on non-club/heart leads. But it is difficult to pass that monster west hand, to give partner a chance to double (clearly that is the winning auction if you are then brave enough to sit for it with a void and an unannounced great 6 card heart suit).

 

In fact in the pass out seat i had a difficult time for some reason. I could see no club tricks for us on this auction, and clearly what I thought was no heart tricks (how was I to guess there is no entry to dummy to hook my king). So partner needs two tricks in spades and diamonds. given the bidding, I thought this EXTREMELY unlikely. But after some thought and despite teh bidding, I choose pass. And low and behold partner began ACE-ACE. Happy diays.

 

Ben