the_dude Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=st2ha654dq972c752&n=sak953hkt92dktca3&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1sp1np2hppp]266|200|IMPS[/hv] My feeling is N= 75%, S= 25%. Concur? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 50% each for not insisting on playing Gazzilli. In other news, I think this game makes less than 68% of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 This post is in the SAYC and 2/1 Discussion thread, and Gazilli is not part of either, so that is not the issue. Unfortunately, SAYC and 2/1 do not handle intermediate strength hands very well (hence the use of Gazilli and a host of other methods to handle these hands). So North is forced to overbid his hand with a jump rebid, underbid his hand as he did, or misdescribe his hand with a 2NT rebid. All have flaws, and the actual choice led to a missed game. 2♥ is not an error (although it was timid). It was just an unfortunate choice. As for South, I cannot imagine why he would do anything other than what he did. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Don't feel strongly about this one. Both players could have bid 3♥. Personally I would never do so from South but would probably do it from North. So I guess I do feel strongly about this one after all: 50% North 0% South. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_dude Posted January 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 The only reason I gave South 25% is that game is possible on a host of 5-5 hands on the order of AKxxx KQxxx xx x or other variations which may require a finesse but are certainly 50% or better. That being said, I think pass by S is pretty normal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 100% north Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 50% each for not insisting on playing Gazzilli. In other news, I think this game makes less than 68% of the time.I guess everyone knows I'm a big fan of Gazzilli, but this comment is totally irrelevant imo. What's better after 1♠-1NT-2♣!-2♠ showing <8HCP and 2-3♠? You'll even miss the ♥ fit! Even when playing 2♣ as "17+ or nat" responder will bid negative... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I guess everyone knows I'm a big fan of Gazzilli, but this comment is totally irrelevant imo. What's better after 1♠-1NT-2♣!-2♠ showing <8HCP and 2-3♠? You'll even miss the ♥ fit! Even when playing 2♣ as "17+ or nat" responder will bid negative... Many play BART here but I understand many on the forum are a big fan of Gazzilli. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 North is close to something more, he didn't pick it, so be it, not something to care much about really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I'd say more like 80% north, 20% south, though both took perfectly reasonable actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 You can't blame anyone for making the systemic bid.So there is no blame to assign. South has no options to do anything different, but North had some options that could have lead to a different result. The combination of ♠ and ♥ with this semi strong hand is a typical problem hand in both SAYC and 2/1.North has a few bad ways to deviate from the system that could help, but probably won't in this specific case. North could open 1NT to right side a potential NT contract, if the partnership does allow occasional 5cM's, but that won't help.North could bid 2NT instead of 2♥ but that lie would miss the ♥ fit.North could try to force, bidding 2 of a minor, if that is agreed.North could try to bid 3♥, but that would misdescribe his shape, and would lead to a desaster if South has one of then many slightly different possible hands. Do we really want our partner to guess one of these if he has a similar hand again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I guess everyone knows I'm a big fan of Gazzilli, but this comment is totally irrelevant imo. What's better after 1♠-1NT-2♣!-2♠ showing <8HCP and 2-3♠? You'll even miss the ♥ fit! Even when playing 2♣ as "17+ or nat" responder will bid negative... Maybe you should reduce the requirements on 1♠-1NT-2♣-2♥ in your Gazzilli structure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurpoa Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=st2ha654dq972c752&n=sak953hkt92dktca3&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1sp1np2hppp]266|200|IMPS[/hv] My feeling is N= 75%, S= 25%. Concur? This is IMPS. N cannot risk a pass from his partner. His hand is clearly worth a 3♥ bid. I know, partner can be aboslute minimum, and no fit, but even then....posibilities....3♠ in a 5-2 fit should be reasonable On 2♥, S can only visualize game with a hand such as N actually has - but why then did he not bid 3♥ - and many hands in which 3♥ won't make..... 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 100% North for not upgrading! Aces Kings and Tens are undervalued! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Enough hands like this will make you switch to strong club. There is no great answer. Bidding 3H with the north hand seems a little ridiculous (not just under high carded but seems wrong with such good minors). Bidding 2N is possible, but that might lose hearts, no doubt north was hoping for 1S-1N-2H-2S-2N which would describe his hand perfectly. North should be aware to jumpshift a little bit lighter with the majors because of both the increased chance of being able to make game, and the decreased chance that partner can bid over 2H compared to 2D and 2C (basically he won't false preference into a stiff), but I agree with his action. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 This is IMPS. N cannot risk a pass from his partner. His hand is clearly worth a 3♥ bid. I know, partner can be aboslute minimum, and no fit, but even then....posibilities....3♠ in a 5-2 fit should be reasonable there's no alighting in 3♠ once north bids 3♥ - it's GF. south can continue with 3♠ on an 11 count with nothing better to bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 100% to North. Sorry, but this is just bean counting taken to the extreme. North has all aces and kings and excellent intermediates. Even valuing that hand as 18 is too little. Kaplan/Rubens rates it as 20.1 which is too much but you get the idea. Just do whatever you would normally do with 19 HCP and 5422 shape. Without gadgets that is definitely 3♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Justin got it exactly right in my view. Assigning blame to either player is classic resulting. The methods don't handle this combination well.....but that argues for different methods, not for abusing the methods we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I've never played Gazilli, so I hadn't realised that it didn't cope with this hand. That seems a bit of a defect. There are at least two reasonably simple methods available that do let opener bid this hand sensibly: - Transfers. Opener transfers to hearts and then bids 2NT. - 2♣ as a puppet to 2♦. Any action preceded by 2♣ shows a better hand than bidding it directly, so 1♠-1NT;2♣-2♦;2♥ is invitational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I've never played Gazilli, so I hadn't realised that it didn't cope with this hand. That seems a bit of a defect. There are at least two reasonably simple methods available that do let opener bid this hand sensibly: - Transfers. Opener transfers to hearts and then bids 2NT. - 2♣ as a puppet to 2♦. Any action preceded by 2♣ shows a better hand than bidding it directly, so 1♠-1NT;2♣-2♦;2♥ is invitational. Well, I tried to get people to agree what standard Gazzilli is, and everyone refused: "everyone plays it differently, there is no standard!" Free's Gazzilli method does not cope with this hand, but that doesn't mean that none do. As for 2♣ puppet to 2♦, you might want to look up Riton 2♣ on the BBF Systems Index. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I try to always be polite on these forums but it is just amazing to me that the minds of very good players can be so rigidly encased in the straitjacket of the 4321 point count that they can't see North is worth forcing to game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I was thinking with the majors our boxes are: 10-13=2h17+=3h14-16 are a problem but 2h. 10-17 seems to too big of a range on these hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurpoa Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 there's no alighting in 3♠ once north bids 3♥ - it's GF. south can continue with 3♠ on an 11 count with nothing better to bid. Do you really think that 3♥ is GF ?Why would that be (playing BWS2001) ? I see no reason: it is up to responder to take the initiatve. With a good hand he can bid 3NT/4♥ or 4♠ and with a very good hand (could be hidden by his forcing 1NT) he might go into slam investigation.One round forcing yes: 3♠ is an end-of-the-road bid for me. Unless opener has a very strong 6/4 or 5/5 in the majors, he passes.But I am not an expert. Any views on that ?Is it worthwhile to have a poll on this ? 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Elianna and my Gazzilli variant doesn't have much trouble with this hand. We have: 1♠ - 1N2♣(1) - 2♥(2)3♥(3) - 4♥(4) (1) Either 17+ or spades and hearts(2) Less than 8, almost always 4+♥ (in principle could be 13(45) though)(3) Spades and hearts and extras, choice of games(4) I have four hearts The knowledge that there are almost surely four hearts opposite (the 2♥ call) should be enough for opener to upgrade. With that said, there is no really great solution to these hands without Gazzilli (or Riton, or a strong club, or some other method that's not part of SAYC or vanilla 2/1). I'd probably rebid 3♥ on the north hand; it's a mild overbid but the great controls and intermediates do compensate and the risk of missing a game here is just too great. So I'd blame the methods 75% and north 25%. South's pass is normal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 So far as I can see from inside my straitjacket, game is pretty awful opposite xx xxx Axxx QJxx 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.