Assess your matchpoint score

[Cyberyeti]

This hand genuinely surprised me with the matchpoint scores.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sj3hkjt86dct86542&w=sqt9hq42dak983cq7&n=sak864ha53dj7cakj&e=s752h97dqt6542c93&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1n(12-14)d(Pens)3dppdppp]399|300[/hv]

 

I think opps had issues about what the second double was and we quickly wrapped up -300.

 

What % of the matchpoints do you think this was worth, regional swiss pairs, standard fairly mixed.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sj3hkjt86dct86542&w=sqt9hq42dak983cq7&n=sak864ha53dj7cakj&e=s752h97dqt6542c93&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1n(12-14)d(Pens)3dppdppp]399|300|

This hand genuinely surprised me with the matchpoint scores.

I think opps had issues about what the second double was and we quickly wrapped up -300.

What % of the matchpoints do you think this was worth, regional swiss pairs, standard fairly mixed.

[/hv]

About 70% assuming that of NS pairs:

• 15% Reach a partscore.
• 10% Fail to double a ♦ sacrifice.
• 5% Go down in a slam.

[Fluffy]

There is no slam going down, the only pairs that could beat you are 1♦-1♠ all pass or some bad auction where south only counts points and ends up with +230.

 

80% on a good field, 60% on a very bad one.

[billw55]

I would think -300 would score very well, maybe 80-90%, and a cold top would not surprise me. NS have misbid badly. Par should be -650 or so for 4M N-S. 5♦x will be -800. A few NS might bid a slam, but they also might make it.

 

I could be overestimating the field though.

 

edit: in fact, now that I think about it, a matchpoint fix is probably the reason this hand made the forum.

[Cyberyeti]

Go down in a slam

 

Nobody managed that although 1 NS got a complete bottom for 2N-1 !

 

Standard was very mixed, quite a few welsh internationals to people playing their first serious event.

[WellSpyder]

Nobody managed that although 1 NS got a complete bottom for 2N-1 !

 

Standard was very mixed, quite a few welsh internationals to people playing their first serious event.

Nobody managed to go off in 4♥, then? In a mixed field I would have thought that was quite possible, eg ♦ lead ruffed, ♥ to A and a losing ♥ finesse, followed by another ♦, ruffed. Now the last trump drawn, ♣AK cashed, and so long as West doesn't ruff ♣J declarer will go off.

[Cyberyeti]

Nobody managed to go off in 4♥, then? In a mixed field I would have thought that was quite possible, eg ♦ lead ruffed, ♥ to A and a losing ♥ finesse, followed by another ♦, ruffed. Now the last trump drawn, ♣AK cashed, and so long as West doesn't ruff ♣J declarer will go off.

No, 2N-1 was the only minus, I suspect the field was up to either playing ♣AKJ before drawing the last trump or playing ♠AKx either of which will make 4♥. I have the frequencies and will publish them later.

[billw55]

Standard was very mixed, quite a few welsh internationals to people playing their first serious event.

In such a field, trying to estimate results is a fruitless endeavor. Much easier to just wait for the scores.

[Free]

I would think it's a very poor score. Opps have enough ♦s to sacrifice much higher than 3-level. After a 1♦ opening many roads lead to us making game or them defending higher.

[Cyberyeti]

I would think it's a very poor score. Opps have enough ♦s to sacrifice much higher than 3-level. After a 1♦ opening many roads lead to us making game or them defending higher.

We were EW in the land of the weak no trump, so 1N-X was going to be a pretty common start.

[billw55]

I would think it's a very poor score. Opps have enough ♦s to sacrifice much higher than 3-level. After a 1♦ opening many roads lead to us making game or them defending higher.

I don't understand. The side with the diamonds got -300 at the table.

[Fluffy]

We were EW in the land of the weak no trump, so 1N-X was going to be a pretty common start.

 

I overlooked the land of weak NT, this makes things a lot harder for NS, and 50% for -300 can be fine.

[billw55]

I overlooked the land of weak NT, this makes things a lot harder for NS, and 50% for -300 can be fine.

I suppose. But, if it is the land of weak NT, shouldn't it also be the land of defenses to weak NT?

[CamHenry]

I suppose. But, if it is the land of weak NT, shouldn't it also be the land of defenses to weak NT?

 

The most common defense to weak 1NT (that applies here) is double for penalties. I think most E players will try escaping to ♦; how they do that and what S does will vary. There will be a fair few 2♣ transfer starts; some XX showing a single suiter and being left in by a misunderstanding, and other gratuitous disasters. Overall I think a lot of NS pairs may run into trouble: after the start

1N-X-2♦-?

not all will have discussed whether doubles are for takeout here (I think they should be, as then S can show values with no clear direction), and some S hands might bid 2♥ - at which stage N says "I've got almost a minimum double with 3-card support, so I'll pass".

 

You're then booked for a bad score conceding 300 in 3♦X as E/W.

 

Of course, I think S should do something stronger than 2♥ - 3♦ would be my choice over 2♦ - and then you probably find some game or another. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't 6♥ have play even on a ♦ lead?

 

(edit: 7♥ makes double-dummy unless my analysis is incorrect, but it needs the ♠ break and the trump guess)

[Cyberyeti]

The most common defense to weak 1NT (that applies here) is double for penalties. I think most E players will try escaping to ♦; how they do that and what S does will vary. There will be a fair few 2♣ transfer starts; some XX showing a single suiter and being left in by a misunderstanding, and other gratuitous disasters. Overall I think a lot of NS pairs may run into trouble: after the start

1N-X-2♦-?

not all will have discussed whether doubles are for takeout here (I think they should be, as then S can show values with no clear direction), and some S hands might bid 2♥ - at which stage N says "I've got almost a minimum double with 3-card support, so I'll pass".

 

You're then booked for a bad score conceding 300 in 3♦X as E/W.

 

Of course, I think S should do something stronger than 2♥ - 3♦ would be my choice over 2♦ - and then you probably find some game or another. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't 6♥ have play even on a ♦ lead?

 

(edit: 7♥ makes double-dummy unless my analysis is incorrect, but it needs the ♠ break and the trump guess)

 

I think many people play 1N-X-2♦-X as pens.

 

6♣ would earn you all the matchpoints.

 

Frequencies as follows.

 

-100: 1 (2N-1)

100: 1 (3♦-2)

150: 1 (4♦-3)

200: 3 (spade partial)

230: 2

260: 3

300: 1

650: 1

680: 2

710: 10

800: 5

 

So we got 62% for -300.

[WellSpyder]

we got 62% for -300.

What did you expect?

[Cyberyeti]

What did you expect?

 

A bit better than that (when we played the board which was in the final match as our last board, we were getting less than 60 according to the bridgemates, I was slightly surprised when I looked the board up today and found it had climbed to 62), I was surprised how many people played partscores or didn't double 3/4♦.

[JLOGIC]

We are obv biased by you posting the hand in this manner, it was clear you got much lower than expected, I cannot expect estimating anything other than top on this board which means 90-100 %. I do not live in a country where wk NT is standard though, I guess thats what made people stop in partscore.