How light do you balance?

[Siegmund]

Possibly interesting possibly not.

 

♠xx

♥J9xx

♦A9xx

♣AJx

 

Unfavorable vulnerability, matchpoints.

 

(1D)-P-(P) to you. No special agreements. Expert partner, adequate opponents.

[mike777]

as a nonexpert I pass,

 

balancing is hard for nonexperts.

 

my second choice is 1nt.

[Yu18772]

It is not about "light" - i dont balance because of distribution, two Aces and 2 Jacks are plenty to balance 1m.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

[the hog]

1NT, just. However this depends largely on partner's proclivities.

[akhare]

What does "it" in "Even thinking about it..." option mean?

 

Does it mean that it's an automatic balance and that it's so obvious that you have to crazy to consider passing? Or does it mean that it's crazy to considering balancing with the hand?

[CSGibson]

depends on the partner. With some, I wouldn't consider it, with others who might pass a pretty big hand with inappropriate shape I would...probably still pass. Either partner has diamond shortness and couldn't act, or they are not in their best trump fit, and I should leave it alone.

[mcphee]

I'm in with 1NT. The requirement to have 12-14 is too much. Although the enemy will not get rich playing in 1D, neither will I.

[wyman]

I would balance 1N.

[Zelandakh]

It's a point of shy of even thinking about it (whether briefly or insanely). B-)

[Phil]

Was this a case where partner tanked over 1♦?

 

I'd pass, even though its dangerous at these colors. Per Harry Callahan, "a good man has to know his limitations".

 

We have a bad 10 count, a poor side suit and length in LHO's suit. Its unlikely we have much of a fit, and whatever plus we have we will make on power. Our doubleton spade is also a warning sign.

 

You'll hear the standard argument from players about "if we take 8 tricks, we are better off playing the hand than defending". While that is true, it will not do you much good if you are contracting for nine, or if the opponents can find a better strain.

 

If you balance, you know one of two things are about to happen:

 

1) Your opponents are going to find their spade fit. Or, LHO is rebidding 1N which will play better than 1♦. Or perhaps RHO suddenly joins the party and bids his long spade or club suit

 

2) Partner will raise to 3N. Can you blame him looking at a good 13 or 14?

 

edit: strange choice of poll answers

[lalldonn]

My range over a minor is 11-14 so I would pass. I definitely think people bid 1NT too light, but that might be related to the fact that I think they don't double enough in direct seat on balanced hands.

[ggwhiz]

I'm bidding 1nt in my regular partnership but passing otherwise.

 

Our overcall style in front of an unpassed partner requires more beef than most and partner would NEVER hang me beyond 2nt especially at mp's

[hrothgar]

I'd pass

 

The risk / return ratio just doesn't seem right

 

1. Partner has points, but wasn't able to overcall 1♠

2. The opponents are declaring in a minor, which is rarely good at MP

3. We're red, they're white. The difference between -90 and -100 is a big one.

 

(10,000th post)

[gwnn]

Congratulations!

 

You gotta draw the line somewhere and to me this is a point shy. By the way I don't think the poll options are necessarily in order.

[Siegmund]

Personally I see lots of reasons to pass and not many reasons to think about bidding. NV I still wouldn't bid but I at least know people who would consider if they weren't vul.

 

Was this a case where partner tanked over 1♦?

 

No. What actually happened at the table was that the player holding these cards was in 2nd seat and passed on the first round, and a "discussion" arose as to whether it made any sense at all to play (p)-p-(1D)-p- (p)-1NT as natural (10-12?) even as a passed hand, rather than mini-unusual.

 

Essentially the answer depends on how many hands there where you would pass in 2nd seat but want to bid 1NT in balancing seat. (For a lot of people who "are a point shy of even thinking about it" the answer is clearly "almost none." For people who like bidding here, perhaps quite a few.)

[Quantumcat]

I pass it out. You have length in the opponent's suit. If pard has a good hand, he also has length in the opponent's suit. Defend.

 

Even if you are making some number of notrumps, if you bid then pard is going to get over-excited and you will end up in too high of a contract when you could have gotten an almost guaranteed positive from defending.

 

If you had a solid 1NT bid (12-14 or whatever your personal range is) that is fine, because then when pard bids 3NT or invites you have a decent shot at making it.

[mikestar13]

Not crazy but I wouldn't do it (assuming middle of the road direct overcalls). Exchange then spades and diamonds and it is an absolutely routine balancing double of 1♦. Either partner is weak or they are in they wrong suit. You do need a natural 1NT overcall in balancing seat, but it requires a it more than this I might even gamble on it if I had a third spade and the same high cards (better safety if partner has spades but no values and we need to run). I would think about it and probably do it if there were overriding state of the game considerations.

[JLOGIC]

pass, not close to me

[Rossoneri]

I chose I might balance, but reading through the comments, the passers have won me over.

[wyman]

pass, not close to me

 

Maybe I was thinking about this wrong, but:

 

* it seems like it's right to balance here almost anytime LHO has a weak NT, since I doubt that if we hold > half the deck that we're going to get rich playing for 50s

 

* if LHO holds a 18-19NT, he'll dbl. Do we have a place to run? RHO is unlikely to hold a 4cM (am I wrong about this? Especially white, it seems like people are responding on air pretty frequently). I have tolerance for clubs and hearts, and the only way pard would run out to spades is if he has 5+ (although admittedly if he has 5 spades this could be ugly since his hand is bad enough that he didn't overcall, the fact that he didn't overcall 1S also makes it less likely that he has 5 spades, so this could be kind of moot).

 

* if LHO holds 12-17 with diamonds, it also seems like we're likely to have a fit and around half the deck.

 

The -100 v -90 argument is compelling, but it's kind of a narrow range. I wish I had a good sense of the probabilities here. e.g., if I pass it out, what's my expected score? if I bid 1N, what are the probs that LHO hits it and it floats? that LHO hits it and pard bids? that it floats? that LHO passes and pard bids? And what we expect to score up in each case. But I definitely don't think I do. Hell, I don't even know what partner's expected shape is.

 

I'm really interested in comments.

[gwnn]

Maybe I was thinking about this wrong, but:

 

* it seems like it's right to balance here almost anytime LHO has a weak NT, since I doubt that if we hold > half the deck that we're going to get rich playing for 50s

 

* if LHO holds a 18-19NT, he'll dbl. Do we have a place to run? RHO is unlikely to hold a 4cM (am I wrong about this? Especially white, it seems like people are responding on air pretty frequently). I have tolerance for clubs and hearts, and the only way pard would run out to spades is if he has 5+ (although admittedly if he has 5 spades this could be ugly since his hand is bad enough that he didn't overcall, the fact that he didn't overcall 1S also makes it less likely that he has 5 spades, so this could be kind of moot).

 

* if LHO holds 12-17 with diamonds, it also seems like we're likely to have a fit and around half the deck.

 

The -100 v -90 argument is compelling, but it's kind of a narrow range. I wish I had a good sense of the probabilities here. e.g., if I pass it out, what's my expected score? if I bid 1N, what are the probs that LHO hits it and it floats? that LHO hits it and pard bids? that it floats? that LHO passes and pard bids? And what we expect to score up in each case. But I definitely don't think I do. Hell, I don't even know what partner's expected shape is.

 

I'm really interested in comments.

Suppose for a second that we could prove that on this particular hand, 1NT would work well if everyone at the table followed with their best possible double dummy action. That still doesn't mean that we should do it. What would your 1NT mean then? 10-15? 10-14? I'm not saying that 10-14 is irrational, maybe it's good, but there's definitely a tradeoff here. So even if pass here is "wrong", you have to think about the whole system imo. If you routinely bid 1NT here on 10 counts, it could well be that you will be hurt more when you bid 1NT here on 14 counts.

[wyman]

Suppose for a second that we could prove that on this particular hand, 1NT would work well if everyone at the table followed with their best possible double dummy action. That still doesn't mean that we should do it. What would your 1NT mean then? 10-15? 10-14? I'm not saying that 10-14 is irrational, maybe it's good, but there's definitely a tradeoff here. So even if pass here is "wrong", you have to think about the whole system imo. If you routinely bid 1NT here on 10 counts, it could well be that you will be hurt more when you bid 1NT here on 14 counts.

 

Actually, I tend to mark 10-15 for balancing NT (15s mostly happen over 1M -- they have a real suit, so dbl+1N seems like it should show more than a mediocre 15 with K3(2) in their suit imo). My attitude toward balancing NT is that -- especially at MP -- it's less of a constructive "maybe we have a game" measure as it is a "let's score better than defending" measure. And I don't balance with all 10s, but this seemed to me like a reasonable balance (again, at MP; I'm fine passing and taking +50 or +100 or -90 if that's what's coming our way at IMPs).

 

Back to the 10-15 range: there aren't a whole lot of 14-15 counts that can't act over 1D but where partner can balance 1N (fewer still where partner has ♦Axxx), so game is definitely not my first concern. Every partner I've played with and I have had the "don't hang partner for balancing" discussion. And even if you occasionally bid that 22-23 point 3N (at IMPs), at least the rest of the deck is pretty well marked.

[wank]

protecting here is criminal. you deserve for the opps to get to 4M.

 

over minors you should have a decent hand to protect because partner can happily double directly with weak NT type hands.

[gnasher]

protecting here is criminal. you deserve for the opps to get to 4M.

I think the risk of that is very small. When they try to stop in 1♦ the chance that they can make 4M is already very low. Our possession of two aces makes it lower. Our length in diamonds coupled with partner's failure to bid over 1♦ makes it unlikely that LHO has lots of shape, so even less likely that they can make game.

 

over minors you should have a decent hand to protect because partner can happily double directly with weak NT type hands.

That makes it less likely that he has an opening hand, but arguably it gives us more reason to bid. If the expectation is that he is in the 9-11 range, that makes it unlikely that he'll raise us.

[gwnn]

Back to the 10-15 range: there aren't a whole lot of 14-15 counts that can't act over 1D but where partner can balance 1N (fewer still where partner has ♦Axxx), so game is definitely not my first concern. Every partner I've played with and I have had the "don't hang partner for balancing" discussion. And even if you occasionally bid that 22-23 point 3N (at IMPs), at least the rest of the deck is pretty well marked.

The problem is not partner having a 15 count, the problem is him having an 10-11 count and being interested in game if we have 15 but wanting to stop (very) low when we have 10. It has nothing to do with hanging partner, it's just that too wide ranges will lead to some bad contracts (as will too narrow ranges, because they will make some the range of some other action unduly wide).