Game Try

[ArtK78]

I have been having trouble lately with game tries. When I make a natural game try in a new suit, my partner invariably puts me in game with anything in the suit of my game try regardless of whether he is good or minimum for his prior bidding.

 

Take this hand from last night (IMPs, 12 board match, converted to VPs):

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skqj72h82dakj4cq9&n=s963hk73dq62cjt42&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sp2sp3dp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

We play a light opening system at this vulnerability, so my 1♠ opening could have been on as little as a balanced 10 count with 5 spades. The 2♠ response has a wider range than in standard - it is 6-12, typically with 3 card support.

 

Making a game try on the South hand is automatic - I have an A and a Q more than minimum. I made what I thought was the obvious game try - 3♦. My partner, who is a good player (one NABC and getting close to GLM), looked at the ♦Q and bid game, despite his minimum hand. This was a terrible contract, and went down 1 when the ♥A was onside. I almost snuck through a club on the second round of the suit to make it, but that is not the point.

 

Is my partner's 4♠ bid a poor (some might say terrible) call? Or should I bid 2NT (or something else) rather than 3♦ as my game try? 3♠ is not a game try, so that is not available.

 

For what it is worth, the hand was a push. So my opponents at the other table have problems with their game tries also.

 

Thanks.

[kenrexford]

4♠ was an idiotic bid. Partner has what appears to be at most two cover cards for you -- the diamond Queen and the heart King. If that is enough for game, he is expecting a 5-loser hand. With most 5-loser hands, you would blast game yourself anyway, so his take is already suspect.

 

But, let's assume a 5-loser hand that is poor on HCP's. This is usually a 5-5 holding. Something like your hand with an extra diamond and one fewer club or heart and probably not the club Queen. If you have that hand, the heart King is only potentially useful if you have short clubs. So, that King is only worth a 50-50 trick 50% of the time, or 25% of a trick. Plus, it is a less useful trick because it does not support some other diamond card or spade card in your hand needing support. Compare how more useful the diamond or spade King would be in protecting and growing up your hypothetical spade or diamond Queen or Jack. Thus, the heart King may well force another finesse in one of your two suits frequently and might instead by 12.5% or 20% of a trick.

 

Plus, if partner wants to be a lunatic and encourage you further, he always has a hedging 3♥ option over your 3♦, whether that for you is game last train or a card, either of which works this time.

 

The solution, then, is not so much systemic as CHO judgment.

 

 

 

[aguahombre]

I am pretty sure that accepting a game try with that North hand is not best, no matter what your try structure is.

 

I am pretty sure that a range of 6-12 for the simple raise to 2M is not best.

 

Will stay out of dogma about what game try structure is "best", but I do know that "help suit" is ill defined and requires much more than casual discussion to implement. We like 2M+1=nondescript game try, with inferences from bypassing 2M+1 (we would not bypass 3C with this hand). But this, too, requires much discussion and agreement about Responder's continuations.

[ArtK78]

I am pretty sure that a range of 6-12 for the simple raise to 2M is not best.

 

While this is not the point of this thread, I will say that when you play a light (10+) opening system using a standard structure, there are some things that you have to live with. A single raise shows the usual minimum of 6 HCP up to the bottom of a limit raise, which is about 12 HCP when you open all 10 counts.

 

Perhaps this could be improved. But since the 1NT response is not forcing opposite a balanced minimum opening hand (1NT is "semi-forcing"), there is not a whole lot you can do unless you want to risk playing in 1NT with a known 5-3 fit.

 

I have not had many problems playing it this way, except for when partner bids game on his 6 counts. :)

[neilkaz]

Your pd's hand is wretched. A good rule is to deduct a point for 4333 in a suit contract. OK add back a point for the Q in your game try suit, but still this hand sucks and is at the bottom of the 6-12 range you play.

 

You need to have some long and serious talks with pd concerning various types of game tries.

[ArtK78]

Your pd's hand is wretched. A good rule is to deduct a point for 4333 in a suit contract. OK add back a point for the Q in your game try suit, but still this hand sucks and is at the bottom of the 6-12 range you play.

 

You need to have some long and serious talks with pd concerning various types of game tries.

Not possible. While I have serious disagreements with some of his hand evaluation, I recognize that he is a better player than I am, and has considerably more tournament success than I do. So I have to live with his idiosyncrasies as best I can.

 

To elaborate on my original post, I thought that the 4♠ bid was incredibly silly. But he believes in his call, which to me would only be (arguably) right if I were showing a 5-5 or 6-5 hand. So, while I don't think it is right, I will have to adjust my game tries to avoid long suit game tries without truly long second suits. Of course, if I were 6-5 in spades and diamonds, the only card in his hand that has any value at all is the ♦Q, which is not enough to accept the game try if I could not bid game myself. The ♥K is only of value if I were 5/6 - 2 - 5 - 1/0.

[wyman]

But Art -- you can have discussions with him without lecturing him. Talk to him about what his game tries look like after 1S-2S. Ask whether he'd make a g/t with your hand and if so, which. There's an obvious disconnect, so even if you're willing to defer to his system/judgment, you've got to bridge the gap somehow. The best way to do that would be to discuss with him and mimic him as much as possible. This will be helpful to you as well so you know what he's holding when he makes a g/t.

 

Fwiw, I think south has a clear 3D natural g/t and north has a clear reject, but that's not really germane to the underlying issue.

[mike777]

I take it you prefer to not play simple raise as 8-11 and bid 1nt with less or more and 3 card support.

 

Clearly you have a game try.

[ArtK78]

I take it you prefer to not play simple raise as 8-11 and bid 1nt with less or more and 3 card support.

 

Clearly you have a game try.

You are correct that we do not bid 1NT and then raise with less. Our 1NT bid is not 100% forcing. Opener passes with a balanced minimum (10-11 HCP).

 

Second, bidding more with only 12 HCP is not a good idea when your lower limit of your opening bid is 10. I consider 13-14 to be the range for a limit raise opposite one of our openings when we can have a 10 count.

[Fluffy]

While this is not the point of this thread, I will say that when you play a light (10+) opening system using a standard structure, there are some things that you have to live with. A single raise shows the usual minimum of 6 HCP up to the bottom of a limit raise, which is about 12 HCP when you open all 10 counts.

 

Perhaps this could be improved. But since the 1NT response is not forcing opposite a balanced minimum opening hand (1NT is "semi-forcing"), there is not a whole lot you can do unless you want to risk playing in 1NT with a known 5-3 fit.

 

I have not had many problems playing it this way, except for when partner bids game on his 6 counts. :)

 

 

You can play 2 way bids at the 2 level to split range, something like 1♠-2♥ showing either 10-12 raise (or 6-8) or natural with hearts (whatever your range) would work for you.

 

EDIT: 6-8 works better than 10-12 on competition as you can then use double vs pass to differentiate one over the other.

[ggwhiz]

Not possible. While I have serious disagreements with some of his hand evaluation,

 

Sounds like zero chance of changing his mind/style so how about just giving him a new toy? Discuss using the intervening bid (3♥ here) as a 3 1/2 Spade bid. Doesn't have to promise a heart value like others play it but give him the choice and be careful making game tries in the suit right below yours.

 

Adding to what he won't change might save a few.

[the hog]

The 3d bid was idiotic. You asked for help in ds and pd had it. Why are you making a game try on this 5422 hand.

[cherdano]

The 2♠ response has a wider range than in standard - it is 6-12, typically with 3 card support.

I would expect problems with game tries in this system opposite any partner.

[Cyberyeti]

The 3d bid was idiotic. You asked for help in ds and pd had it. Why are you making a game try on this 5422 hand.

 

What do you want him to do opposite 6-12 ?

 

I think you might want to play 2N as a serious game try and 3any as a less serious one or vice versa (serious/frivolous 2N) with a simple raise this wide.

[the hog]

Look at his hand. 6 losers, an unsupported q and a d suit that does not need support. 3 d was very poor. If you want to make a gt, and i certainly would not, then bid 3 c. Making a gt on this shows a lack of hand evaluation skills.

 

 

 

 

 

 

,

[jogs]

The 3d bid was idiotic. You asked for help in ds and pd had it. Why are you making a game try on this 5422 hand.

 

Agree. Your hand is no better than

♠ KQJxx ♥ xx ♦ AKJx ♣ xx.

The Qx of clubs is of unknown value.

 

Help suit game tries are overrated. Sometimes

opponents lead your second suit if you just

jump to game.

[Cyberyeti]

Look at his hand. 6 losers, an unsupported q and a d suit that does not need support. 3 d was very poor. If you want to make a gt, and i certainly would not, then bid 3 c. Making a gt on this shows a lack of hand evaluation skills.

 

 

You are completely ignoring what partner's raise is in the OP, IT IS NOT A STANDARD 6-9 you can't pass, he will have 11 if you do. There are plenty of 8-9s that are sufficient for decent play for 4♠, but the chance of more means you must bid.

[mycroft]

I don't think you can play a system that will simple raise on 6-12 and employ successfully the system you play opposite a limited partner. This argument is basically boiling down to "I need to ask two questions at once, and have only one call for it. Whose fault is it that he answered the wrong one?" Answer: the system - next time he chickens out with useful cards in your "help" call, you'll have 5440 concerned about avoiding 3 diamond losers and a trump, and whose fault will be the -170?

 

If you played a 11-17 1NT opener, you would need a seriously different response structure than standard to survive it. Why is this any different?

 

I'm guessing what's needed is something like people above are suggesting - a "I'm going to make a GT that needs a maximum to work" and others that are "GT, I'm pretty certain you're on a 'standard' raise", or a "I'm about to make a GT, tell me if you're min; if max, where you have help" lebensohlish system.

[the hog]

You are completely ignoring what partner's raise is in the OP, IT IS NOT A STANDARD 6-9 you can't pass, he will have 11 if you do. There are plenty of 8-9s that are sufficient for decent play for 4♠, but the chance of more means you must bid.

 

And you are not playing bridge, but are resulting. The fact is that if you play such a stupid response structure, then you need to be aware you will miss a number of good games and overbid on many hands. To make a gt on the shown hand is idiotic as you are highly likely to end up too high. That the op says it is automatic shows that the op has a very poor sense of hand evaluation. The fact that you so vehemently support him does not suggest much confidence in yours either. I repeat, the 3D trial is ridiculous. I amsurprised that a number of other posters don't see this.

[nigel_k]

2NT is a better game try, for two reasons:

 

1. It's a better description as the hand is quite balanced and partner's diamond holding is not key, you may do fine opposite xxx.

 

2. If partner's judgment is poor, he doesn't get to use it much over 2NT. All he can really do is signoff with a minimum, bid game with a maximum, or show where his values lie which means you get captaincy.

[wank]

Your hand is no better than

♠ KQJxx ♥ xx ♦ AKJx ♣ xx.

The Qx of clubs is of unknown value.

 

 

 

ovbiously self-contradictory nonsense. the utility of the queen of clubs is unknown until we see what partner has, and indeed, see the lie of the opponents' cards. as it may be useful, it means the hand is clearly better with it than without it. people on here seem very quick to throw their queens and jacks in the toilet in the auction.

 

fwiw i think it's entirely normal to make a game try of some variety, but i think the methods are a joke.

[lowerline]

1. A range of 6-12 for the simple raise is unplayable. Opener will have to make a game try every time he has a decent opening of 13hcp or more.
2. Did your partner know that his range was 6-12? How can he accept when he is at the very bottom of that range?

Your hand is even worth a game try opposite a standard 6-9, so blame the system first and your partner next.

 

Steven

[Zelandakh]

Bidding a HSGT of 3♦ on this hand is just wrong, not because the hand does not have the values for it within the system played but because you do not need any help in the suit. Qxx is a bad holding opposite a HSGT, not a good one. A singleton or void would be a good holding. Both 3♣ and (especially) 3♥ are better. Whether 2NT is an option depends on what that means within the methods.

 

More important than this would be to discuss with partner a philosphy of giving and accepting game tries. The general advice for game tries in most texts is to sign off with a minimum, bid game with a maximum and use your holding in the game try suit with something in between. If you instead play that a game try only asks for something in the game try suit then you also need a general game try, ideally the first step, to complement that. In that structure, over 2NT Responder would bid game with a max, sign off with a min and give their own game try with something in-between.

 

Another option would be to combine these two ideas to adapt to the wider range of the 2M raise. What would work here would be for 2NT to be a weak invite catering to partner being at the top of their range with a direct (HS) game try being a stronger invite. A better option would be to adjust the system to allow the 10-12 hands with 3 card support to have an alternative route to 2M. But that is probably not a reasonable solution opposite a partner that does not understand game tries yet.

[Cyberyeti]

And you are not playing bridge, but are resulting. The fact is that if you play such a stupid response structure, then you need to be aware you will miss a number of good games and overbid on many hands. To make a gt on the shown hand is idiotic as you are highly likely to end up too high. That the op says it is automatic shows that the op has a very poor sense of hand evaluation. The fact that you so vehemently support him does not suggest much confidence in yours either. I repeat, the 3D trial is ridiculous. I amsurprised that a number of other posters don't see this.

 

Will emphasize I wouldn't play this, but I'm not going to miss a trivial game opposite something that's not even maximum like Axx, xxx, Qxx, Kxxx, so I will make a game try.

 

I will add I hate having to raise on a 3334, would much rather bid 1N and take the consequences of partner passing (which TBF is easier if you are at the top end of 6-12 where 1N can easily play equally well).

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I am pretty sure that accepting a game try with that North hand is not best, no matter what your try structure is.

 

I am pretty sure that a range of 6-12 for the simple raise to 2M is not best.

 

Agree ...

 

In the 1st place, Responder's 6 hcp should be downgraded because of the 3 3 3 4 .

 

( In 2/1, 2S is 8,9 exact.... w/3 cards .)

 

1S - 1NT

2D - 2S

pass