JLOGIC Posted May 15, 2012 Report Share Posted May 15, 2012 lol. You realize that sometimes people just judge hands differently. How can you think that one auction starting 3D X 6D 6S makes RHO less likely to bid 7S than 3D X 5D 5S? Perhaps at one table RHO just decided to bid a grand and at the other table they didn't, given that at the table they didn't bid grand LHO had shown a stronger hand (he had bid 6S) than at the table that LHO had shown a weaker hand. You really should google "causation" because you do not understand anything at all if you think that them having to guess at a higher level makes it easier for them, especially when your example is one guy misjudging and bidding 7 over a lower preempt than the other guy. But cool story that you got to watch vugraph once *thumbsup* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 You misunderstood. I was not trying to establish causation, rather musing at serendipitous result. The idea of giving them more rope to hang themselves is not usually a winning strategy, and I certainly was not trying to assess blame. Will continue to enjoy the top-level pairs on Vugraph, such as yourself. There will continue to be hands where lesser players with simpler methods such as myself would have achieved better results (by accident or on purpose), although not enough of them to have won the match. The fact that none of the pairs with eleven tricks and two singletons could find out whether pard had a bullet or two (on a different board) doesn't change the overriding fact that all those teams would kick our butts, but...... edit: and, as indicated in the post to which you object, I believe your "vote" to bid only 2H on the OP hand might well have led to buying the hand at 5H...where 4H would not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 How can the word "giving" in this sentence: It was another example of a lower-level bid giving the opponents more subsequent problems than a higher one would have. point at anything but a causation? Phil, I think a good (half of a) partnership would bid 4S immediately over 3S with the north hand. I think north's pass is absurd. I don't think that a good south playing with a good north should pull 5HX to 5S, although I am not sure what auction you are talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 How can the word "giving" in this sentence: It was another example of a lower-level bid giving the opponents more subsequent problems than a higher one would have. point at anything but a causation? Phil, I think a good (half of a) partnership would bid 4S immediately over 3S with the north hand. I think north's pass is absurd. I don't think that a good south playing with a good north should pull 5HX to 5S, although I am not sure what auction you are talking about. My opponents passed 3♠. I don't really care what they do. The auction I was referring to was 1♠ - 5♥ - p - p; x - p - ? since some posters where suggesting that was a sensible call over 1♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 If my opponents bid 5♥ directly it would make me extremelly more compelled to bid 5♠ over it than if they went slower, because someone bidding 5♥ to me means that he doesn't want to hear 5♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Unless it is hrothgar, in which case 5H could be anything. 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.