BPO 9 - Hand 1

[mr1303]

Entries seem to have died down now, so we can start some discussion on the hands (I'll post the actual results once we've discussed them a bit).

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saqj763hk653d654c&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sp1np]133|200[/hv]

[Phil]

When I saw this hand last week I thought 2♥ was a no-brainer. I doubt anything will be said or done to change my mind about that.

 

edit: never say never :)

[mike777]

I thought 2s was a no-brainer and 2h was terrible.

:)

[mtvesuvius]

I bid 2♠. This seems like a style thing, I used to bid 2♥, but was convinced that bidding 2♠ was better.

[han]

I bid 2S. I almost always bid 2H with this shape, but here we are very minimal, the spades are strong and it is MPs. At IMPs I would bid 2H, as 4H is by far the most likely game.

[Fluffy]

I think I bid 2♠ but don't remember lol, 2♠ looks like the safest partscore with this suit, with AKxxxx 2♥ would be much more attractive.

[whereagles]

Thx for opening the thread. I'll post the "solutions" for all hands tomorrow (too busy today).

 

About abstentions: I think we could do something about it. I'll post on it in the main thread.

[Free]

I would bid 2♥. We can lose if partner has 1♠ and a long minor, but otherwise we're in a good position imo.

[Fluffy]

I would bid 2♥. We can lose if partner has 1♠ and a long minor, but otherwise we're in a good position imo.

I think in general you also lose when he has 2-4 in the majors and one of them doesn't break

[manudude03]

I think I bid 2♠. While I often bid 2♥ with this shape, I am not going to be happy if partner passes with 1-3 in the majors. Also, I suspect that 2♥ (where a fit is almost certain) is more likely to get a balancing 3m bid than 2♠ (that could potentially be a 6-0). That 3m bid would almost certainly be bad news.

[karlson]

I bid 2S. I almost always bid 2H with this shape, but here we are very minimal, the spades are strong and it is MPs. At IMPs I would bid 2H, as 4H is by far the most likely game.

 

Agree with this basically word for word.

[JLOGIC]

Also agree with hanp, just want to also note that if you do not play a system where you can get out in 3S after 1S-1N-2H-2N (standard bidding is that 3S is forcing), then that is another downside of bidding 2H (of course you should have a system to do so). That is not an unlikely scenario when we have only 10 points and the opps are failing to bid.

 

And finally I would love to dissuade partner from bidding 3C, and he is more likely to bid that over a 2H bid than a 2S bid (for instance 1246 will bid 3C over 2H but will usually pass 2S).

 

There are not that many good scenarios for 2H vs 2S other than partner having a heart fit and hearts playing better which is not a basket I'm willing to put all my eggs into at MP.

[Phil]

Wow. Five years ago I was a 2♠ bidder, with the intention of showing a weak 6-4 over 2N, but I tended to do this with all weak 6-4's. But others had convinced me (so I thought) that you nearly always show the four card suit, since partner can take a preference with a doubleton anyway. In this revision to my thinking, the lower ranking suit could be ignored if the suit quality was significantly different - if the hearts were Jxxx for instance, but certainly not as strong as Kxxx.

 

I am really worried about missing a 5-4 heart fit if I bid 2♠. Sure its more critical at IMPs, but 140 versus -50 is big at MPs too. Its hard to say how a 4-4 heart fit will play here when partner has one or two spades, because I think it depends on how the play will go. I appreciate the comments about finding something safe in case of a serious misfit, and if pard is 1-2, 2♥ is a disaster. 2♥ could also be inferior even if partner is 1-3 with a likely trump lead.

 

To the 2♠ bidders - if you keep the same 10 with an AQJ + K, where is the cutoff between a 2♥ and a 2♠ call? AQxxxx + KJxx? AJxxxx + KQxx?

[TylerE]

2♥ for me. While I admit things could go badly if partner has a not-quite-2/1 type hand (But then again, by opening this hand playing 2/1 I've already bitten that bullet), I'd much rather make a bid that will show 4 more cards of my shape, rather than a bid that shows one more.

[manudude03]

I generally ask myself what suit I would rather play in when partner has 1 spade and 3 hearts. The cutoff for me is probably AQxxxx KJxx.

[kayin801]

And finally I would love to dissuade partner from bidding 3C, and he is more likely to bid that over a 2H bid than a 2S bid (for instance 1246 will bid 3C over 2H but will usually pass 2S).

 

There are not that many good scenarios for 2H vs 2S other than partner having a heart fit and hearts playing better which is not a basket I'm willing to put all my eggs into at MP.

 

This

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=saqj763hk653d654c&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sp1np]133|200|Entries seem to have died down now, so we can start some discussion on the hands (I'll post the actual results once we've discussed them a bit). [/hv]

IMO 2♥ = 10, 2♠ = 7.

[whereagles]

Mark seems to be a bit busy to do the scores, so I'll start by giving the solutions to the first two hands.

 

The full hand for this problem was

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saqj763hk653d654c&w=st942ha8da87ckjt8&n=skhjt942d2ca75432&e=s85hq7dkqjt93cq96&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1sp1np]399|300|[/hv]

 

I thought this would be a good style problem. In Europe, this is a 2♥ bid for most players, whereas in the US it is normal to rebid spades with a minimum and apparently it doesn't matter the 2nd suit is hearts. Regardless of the merits of each approach, bidding hearts here would strike gold whereas rebidding spades is likely to leave you stranded in a partscore with 11 tricks for grabs in the right suit.

 

Justin has made the interesting point that 2♠ might prevent pard from insisting on his would-be club suit, but I would like to mention that rebidding hearts shows 9 cards in the majors whereas 2♠ in this style only shows 6 cards, so the latter bid makes it more likely that opener has club support. Still, 2♠ is a level below, so it's really close.

 

Anyway, back to the scores, 2♥ gets a higher score because most of the (european) field bid that and reached game. Mark will tell you just how much it was and I'll give you the link for the full scores sheet as soon as he puts up the totals.

[mtvesuvius]

In general problems based on "style" are not good since something like this isn't really a bidding problem as much as it is a location problem. Same thing with the two opening bid hands, some would open, some would not -- It's not a matter of bridge judgement as much as it is personal preference. IMO those types of hands rarely make good Bridge Poll questions.

 

All the 2♠ bidders (myself included) will claim this is an unlucky hand.

All the 2♥ bidders can say "See, 2♥ IS better!"

[nigel_k]

In general problems based on "style" are not good since something like this isn't really a bidding problem as much as it is a location problem. Same thing with the two opening bid hands, some would open, some would not -- It's not a matter of bridge judgement as much as it is personal preference. IMO those types of hands rarely make good Bridge Poll questions.

 

All the 2♠ bidders (myself included) will claim this is an unlucky hand.

All the 2♥ bidders can say "See, 2♥ IS better!"

I agree about the two opening bid questions but this one is more about judgment than style. There are hands where each of the choices will work out better and it's not a situation where either can work as long as partner is on the same wavelength. There is a right answer and it depends on the relative frequency of the responding hand types and the expected matchpoints available for various outcomes. These are judgement issues not style issues.

[cherdano]

In general problems based on "style" are not good since something like this isn't really a bidding problem as much as it is a location problem. Same thing with the two opening bid hands, some would open, some would not -- It's not a matter of bridge judgement as much as it is personal preference. IMO those types of hands rarely make good Bridge Poll questions.

 

All the 2♠ bidders (myself included) will claim this is an unlucky hand.

All the 2♥ bidders can say "See, 2♥ IS better!"

I disagree that this is a bad problem, and I don't think it is a style problem. It's a clear judgment problem about which of the two bids is more likely to give you a good score. There are no hidden benefits for one bid or the other depending on partner's expectations (such as for opening bids) - we are probably making our last bid of the auction, and partner will either think we have a 6-card spade suit and know nothing about hearts, or think we are 5=4 in the majors. No matter whether he is American, European, or Irish. This is different for opening bids - opening bad 11 counts is bad unless partner expects us to open bad 11 counts.

 

(Of course, I am not surprised that whereagles picked a problem where what he thinks is the European style succeeds, and where what he thinks is the US style fails.)

[whereagles]

lol I'm not that biased :) I just thought it was a good problem, that's all.

 

I have no problem with the US style, actually.

[gwnn]

I don't know if it's so normal in Europe to rebid 2♥ with a minimum 6-4. I know I had to convince many people to rebid a 4 card suit, especially when it's a minor. I haven't played much in France or Italy (most of my experience is from Romania Iceland and Hungary, not necessarily typical European countries), but I don't think your blanket statement is quite accurate.

[han]

I thought this was a good discussion, with several interesting posts. Also, this difference between European and North American style is new to me. I play the "European style", but I picked it up in the US. As I commented, this seemed like a good hand to deviate from the style though, and rebid 2S.

[Foxx]

Must . . . not . . . bury . . . the major . . . . . . .

 

Must . . . not . . . bury . . . the . . . major . . . . . . .

 

Must . . . not . . . WHEEEEEEE!!!