Really surprised about this poll

[jdeegan]

I don't think that's a valid aet of sims for determining this.

 

How do we do in ♥ when responder's ♥ are 2 or more cards longer than spades?

 

Or better yet, do this:

 

Generate 5000 random responder hands

 

If responder holds 4 good, or any 5 clubs defend 3♣ X

Otherwise we play in responders longest suit, with ♥ rather than ♦ when equal length.

 

That will come close to telling us how X does. I'm sure ♥ is worse than ♠ on random hands, but how about when responder actually has ♥?

:P I agree with your sentiment, but I would broaden it to include sims in general (for the most part). For most bridge hands they get very tricky pretty quick when all four hands are in consideration. As a trained statistician, the only ones I trust usually involve a huge amount of labor. First, you have to cast a very wide net and run, say, 100 sims that never leave out a possible hand. Then you have to cull out (by hand) the ones that don't fit the conditions. That, typically, leaves, maybe, 50 hands. Then you have to analyze each one by hand taking into account possible bids by opponents and possible opening leads. Assuming double dummy defense by a robot that peeks is often a surefire way to get a wrong answer.

 

On this hand, you can very quickly use ordinary probability calculations to, at least, get the expected number of cards in each suit for each hand. With a little thought, you might be able to come up with a way to calculate the actual variances as well.

 

Come to think of it, if all you are after is suit distribution, Pavlicek's hand generator might do a quick and dirty job. Just don't forget to include East (with at least six clubs) and then cull out the occasional odd hand where he has too many clubs or a second long suit.

 

The expected values are:

East: 2-2-2-7

South: 5-3-3-2

West: 3-4-4-2

North: 3-4-4-2

This alone, should show you why 3♠ is the correct bid.

[PhilG007]

X looks clear to me.

A double in the direct seat would be for takeout....the last thing you want

with that holding in RHOs suit(!) Pass is the correct action on this hand.

If it's passed round to partner and HE doubles for takeout(as he should)

you can safely pass it for penalties...and prepare to enjoy the coming feast(!) :)

[gordontd]

A double in the direct seat would be for takeout....the last thing you want

with that holding in RHOs suit(!) Pass is the correct action on this hand.

If it's passed round to partner and HE doubles for takeout(as he should)

you can safely pass it for penalties...and prepare to enjoy the coming feast(!) :)

I think you must be looking at some other hand.

[rhm]

:P I agree with your sentiment, but I would broaden it to include sims in general (for the most part). For most bridge hands they get very tricky pretty quick when all four hands are in consideration. As a trained statistician, the only ones I trust usually involve a huge amount of labor. First, you have to cast a very wide net and run, say, 100 sims that never leave out a possible hand. Then you have to cull out (by hand) the ones that don't fit the conditions. That, typically, leaves, maybe, 50 hands. Then you have to analyze each one by hand taking into account possible bids by opponents and possible opening leads. Assuming double dummy defense by a robot that peeks is often a surefire way to get a wrong answer.

 

On this hand, you can very quickly use ordinary probability calculations to, at least, get the expected number of cards in each suit for each hand. With a little thought, you might be able to come up with a way to calculate the actual variances as well.

 

Come to think of it, if all you are after is suit distribution, Pavlicek's hand generator might do a quick and dirty job. Just don't forget to include East (with at least six clubs) and then cull out the occasional odd hand where he has too many clubs or a second long suit.

 

The expected values are:

East: 2-2-2-7

South: 5-3-3-2

West: 3-4-4-2

North: 3-4-4-2

This alone, should show you why 3♠ is the correct bid.

I wish I had your certainty what is right. I am not convinced at all.

Even if spades is your most likely successful strain, it does not follow that 3♠ is the right bid, mainly because this bid puts most of your eggs in one basket.

It is obvious that after 3♠ you can not play any more 3♣ doubled, 3 ♦ or 3♥ and you are unlikely to reach game in a red suit if that is right.

Is spades so much more likely the right strain that we should ignore all those alternatives combined?

If West has four or more spades we will likely reach spades anyway after DBL, that is DBL does not preclude playing ♠, if our spade fit is good, but overcalling 3♠ will preclude many other contracts.

If West has less than three cards in spades it is very likely we belong somewhere else, including 3♣ doubled or a red suit. Neither do I relish the thought that a vulnerable three level overcall might get raised on two cards,

Overcalling 3♠ is probably best if West has precisely 3 spades with less than 5 cards in hearts.

I do not need Pavlicek to know that partner is much more likely not to hold this precise combination in the majors

Also when we have only a 5-3 fit in spades, game in spades might not be so hot when partner is a passed hand and a preempt makes bad breaks more likely than usual.

It is not uncommon that 3NT plays better in such scenarios.

If partner is weak we might belong in a red suit even though he has three spades.

It is true that since LHO is passed the risk that we run into a penalty DBL diminishes, but a 3♠ overcall on a five card suit is still more dangerous than DBL.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[benlessard]

I agree with Rainer, there is just too much thing that can happen for a simple sim to make any sense here. For example X may rightside a S contract or advancer may raise to 4S with only 2 spades etc..

[aguahombre]

I wish I had your certainty what is right.

No, you don't.

[MrAce]

I think you must be looking at some other hand.

 

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif

[aguahombre]

If West has four or more spades we will likely reach spades anyway after DBL, that is DBL does not preclude playing ♠, if our spade fit is good, but overcalling 3♠ will preclude many other contracts.

Earlier someone advanced the contention that Pard with 4-4 in Majors would bid 3H over the double, and since we don't intend to bid 3S after doubling, the Spade suit would be lost. But I agree with you, instead. Right or wrong, I will bid 3S, not 3H with the 4-4 just to be consistent with what is right to do at the 1-level and for the same reasons.

 

And because of the above, I think if our Majors were reversed the 3H overcall rather than the double would be a lot more attractive.

[jdeegan]

I wish I had your certainty what is right. I am not convinced at all.

Even if spades is your most likely successful strain, it does not follow that 3♠ is the right bid, mainly because this bid puts most of your eggs in one basket.

It is obvious that after 3♠ you can not play any more 3♣ doubled, 3 ♦ or 3♥ and you are unlikely to reach game in a red suit if that is right.

Is spades so much more likely the right strain that we should ignore all those alternatives combined?

If West has four or more spades we will likely reach spades anyway after DBL, that is DBL does not preclude playing ♠, if our spade fit is good, but overcalling 3♠ will preclude many other contracts.

If West has less than three cards in spades it is very likely we belong somewhere else, including 3♣ doubled or a red suit. Neither do I relish the thought that a vulnerable three level overcall might get raised on two cards,

Overcalling 3♠ is probably best if West has precisely 3 spades with less than 5 cards in hearts.

I do not need Pavlicek to know that partner is much more likely not to hold this precise combination in the majors

Also when we have only a 5-3 fit in spades, game in spades might not be so hot when partner is a passed hand and a preempt makes bad breaks more likely than usual.

It is not uncommon that 3NT plays better in such scenarios.

If partner is weak we might belong in a red suit even though he has three spades.

It is true that since LHO is passed the risk that we run into a penalty DBL diminishes, but a 3♠ overcall on a five card suit is still more dangerous than DBL.

 

Rainer Herrmann

:P All of your arguments are reasonable. At issue is whether bidding 3♠ is better percentagewise than double. Passing or doubling and then bidding 3♠ are both out of the picture according to ordinary bridge logic (not to say that either one or the other might not work best on any given hand). Most of the decision depends on the distribution of the various suits. We know for sure the expectancies. We know that the probability distributions around these expected values follow a binomial distribution, meaning they are roughly symmetrical in each case.

 

I was hoping someone listening might have Pavlicek's hand simulator up and running. I don't anymore. In fact, from where I am now, calculating all one gazillion of the binomial distribution outcomes might actually be easier for me than reviving Pavlicek. My point is that there is a clear probabilistic solution that resolves the issue of which is the better bid. Double gets killed (most of the time) when we play in a 4-3 red suit rather than a 5-3+ spade fit. It wins (on balance) when partner passes (rare). It wins when partner has 5 or 6 hearts. It breaks even (more or less) when partner has four or more spades and not four hearts or diamonds.

 

One last thing by far more important than all the probability B.S. JLOGIC bid 3♠.

[rhm]

One last thing by far more important than all the probability B.S. JLOGIC bid 3♠.

I value JLOGIC views, but I have my own head and I dislike idolization.

Even top players have been known to disagree on bridge issues.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[dake50]

I ran a simulation with the first 2 hands having no bid, 3rd hand a normal 3C opener (7 cards or a good 6 card suit) and 4th hand fixed as shown. Results for number of tricks made over 1000 deals were:

 

. <=8 9 10+

♣ 528 283 189

♥ 613 190 197

♠ 376 254 370

NT 806 93 101

 

Difficult to be certain but it looks to me that 3♠ is a winner - it beats pass given that it makes 624 times (unless partner raises a lot when he shouldn't and 3♣ also makes quite often if you pass. --

 

*** Looks like 3C fails 52.8%; 3S makes 25.4%; 4S makes 37%...

always assuming we can get the 3S/4S decision right. I'd guess that switches 10% into 4S-1 from 3S tally.

Looks like pass wins most often. Wins big when we get set 3C + set 4S at the other table.

Further what if "normal 3C" is deviant in 3rd seat? Will 2+DT preempt find a double of 4S? On a non-strong auction by us?

A biggest plurality is 3S making 8 or fewer tricks 37.6%.

The double hoping to get 3H into the picture fails 61.3%.

[ArtK78]

I ran a simulation with the first 2 hands having no bid, 3rd hand a normal 3C opener (7 cards or a good 6 card suit) and 4th hand fixed as shown. Results for number of tricks made over 1000 deals were:

 

. <=8 9 10+

♣ 528 283 189

♥ 613 190 197

♠ 376 254 370

NT 806 93 101

 

Difficult to be certain but it looks to me that 3♠ is a winner - it beats pass given that it makes 624 times (unless partner raises a lot when he shouldn't and 3♣ also makes quite often if you pass. --

 

*** Looks like 3C fails 52.8%; 3S makes 25.4%; 4S makes 37%...

always assuming we can get the 3S/4S decision right. I'd guess that switches 10% into 4S-1 from 3S tally.

Looks like pass wins most often. Wins big when we get set 3C + set 4S at the other table.

Further what if "normal 3C" is deviant in 3rd seat? Will 2+DT preempt find a double of 4S? On a non-strong auction by us?

A biggest plurality is 3S making 8 or fewer tricks 37.6%.

The double hoping to get 3H into the picture fails 61.3%.

 

Pass wins most often? You go plus against 3♣ 52.8% of the time. You go plus in 3♠ 62.4% of the time. And game is possible.

 

"A biggest plurality is 3S making 8 or fewer tricks 37.6%." Maybe I don't understand the definition of plurality. Are you saying that 3♠ making 8 tricks is a more likely conclusion that 3♠ making exactly 9 tricks or 3♠ making exactly 10 tricks? Who cares? I am concerned with 3♠ making 9 or more tricks.

 

Just looking at two of your results - 3♠ goes down 37.6% of the time and 4♠ makes 37.0% of the time. A virtual 50-50 proposition. If I were to flip a coin and say heads you are -50 (or -100), tails you are +420, I would take that choice over being +50 52.8% of the time. And my side controls whether we are going to advance 3♠ to 4♠.

 

I really do not understand your conclusion.

[quiddity]

I don't think pass is quite as bad as the sim suggests. Partner will balance on some of the slam-dunk hands where he has a stiff club and a max; he might even balance with a 4432 and two small clubs. So passing will not miss ALL the games.

[jdeegan]

I value JLOGIC views, but I have my own head and I dislike idolization.

Even top players have been known to disagree on bridge issues.

 

Rainer Herrmann

:P For goodness sakes! All I am saying is that every Tom, Dick and Harry is forever eager to offer a bridge lesson. The wise bridge player must be discriminating in knowing whom to listen to. If two players who have represented a major country in international open competition (or something close to that) disagree about the right bid, that is to be taken seriously. Otherwise, just be properly appreciative you have had the opportunity to get a genuine bridge lesson for free.

[dake50]

Pass wins most often? You go plus against 3♣ 52.8% of the time. You go plus in 3♠ 62.4% of the time. And game is possible.

 

"A biggest plurality is 3S making 8 or fewer tricks 37.6%." Maybe I don't understand the definition of plurality. Are you saying that 3♠ making 8 tricks is a more likely conclusion that 3♠ making exactly 9 tricks or 3♠ making exactly 10 tricks? Who cares? I am concerned with 3♠ making 9 or more tricks.

 

Just looking at two of your results - 3♠ goes down 37.6% of the time and 4♠ makes 37.0% of the time. A virtual 50-50 proposition. If I were to flip a coin and say heads you are -50 (or -100), tails you are +420, I would take that choice over being +50 52.8% of the time. And my side controls whether we are going to advance 3♠ to 4♠.

 

I really do not understand your conclusion.

 

*** 376 > 254 and > 370 Therefor is the biggest plurality. What do you not catch?

Again-1 3S goes plus 25.4% plus 37.0% = 62.4% ASSUMING YOU GET THE 3S/4S decision right.

If you err 10%, that's 52.8 for setting 3C compared to 52.4 (62.4-10%).

Again-2 construct the hand partner must have to make 4S when he bids it over 3S.

Justify your claim that is as likely as the 37.5% threshold for VUL-IMP game.

I want my partner to go 4S over 3S with SQxx, HQJxx, DQx, Cxx don't you?

If yes, you must have that much to try 3S.

[Vampyr]

I think you must be looking at some other hand.

 

I think that the problem is that the spades and clubs are difficult to distinguish in the diagrams -- though the many posts discussing a 3♠ overcall might have made the matter a bit clearer.

[lamford]

I think you must be looking at some other hand.

One in the beginner forum presumably.