Invite? Vul IMPs

[diana_eva]

Vul, IMPs scoring. Would you invite with this hand?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=S2HKJ3DK8653CA983&w=SAK97HQT5D4CJT652&n=SJ8653H9742DAT7C7&e=SQT4HA86DQJ92CKQ4&k=w&d=e&v=e&a=1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P1N(2-5%20%21C%3B%204-5%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2012-14%20HCP)P?]399|300[/hv]

[whereagles]

No. While you have good intermediates, the diamond misfit isn't a good omen and the clubs are a bit too wimpish to compensate.

[MrAce]

Vul, IMPs scoring. Would you invite with this hand?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=S2HKJ3DK8653CA983&w=SAK97HQT5D4CJT652&n=SJ8653H9742DAT7C7&e=SQT4HA86DQJ92CKQ4&k=w&d=e&v=e&a=1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P1N(2-5%20%21C%3B%204-5%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2012-14%20HCP)P?]399|300[/hv]

 

I would invite.

[broze]

Depends on partnership agreements. (Cop out I know) If we agree to stretch to accept invites, I pass. If we agree to stretch to invite, I invite. I prefer to have one of these agreements in place.

[yunling]

Of course it qualifies for a invite in standard, but I don't like to invite with this kind of hands, so pass for me.

[diana_eva]

Depends on partnership agreements. (Cop out I know) If we agree to stretch to accept invites, I pass. If we agree to stretch to invite, I invite. I prefer to have one of these agreements in place.

 

Partner is a robot. The tourney is random deals, not best hand.

 

Edit: opps are humans.

Edited September 3, 2014 by diana_eva

[helene_t]

Robots invite sound and accept aggresively I think. So under those conditions I would pass.

[Zelandakh]

My first impression was that it was clear to pass for the reasons WE gives but the more I think of hands the better inviting seems. It really seems like it is quite low percentage for partner to accept and game not to have play and we are vulnerable at IMPs...

[diana_eva]

... the more I think of hands the better inviting seems.

 

Yeah that was my process of thinking too. At the table I thought pass was clear but then I liked the hand more and more. So I started to wonder :)

[whereagles]

maybe you can convince Rainer run a few (1000) double dummy sims :)

[gszes]

If p has a hand bumping up close to 1N opening bid I want to be in this

vul game so I invite. I know I would invite for sure if p bid 2d and the

failure of p to bid 2d increases the odds of a club fit so go for it. It is

unlikely you will get totally slaughtered and doubled in 2n if p fails to

accept so that's little risk with lot of reward and remember that if 2n is

x we have a run pout to 3c:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

 

Light opening bidders have much more to fear from this action since the

prospect of multiple trick sets even not x starts to put a crimp in the old

risk/reward calculation.

 

I will admit that with only 4 clubs I would pass it is that close:)

[PhantomSac]

would not invite

[rmnka447]

I'm inviting. Bidding and making thin vulnerable games is vital in IMPs.

[MickyB]

Easy pass. IMO, the inviters are way overestimating the correlation between [partner accepting] and [partner being able to make nine tricks], and possibly also underestimating the probability of making seven or fewer tricks.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=S2HKJ3DK8653CA983&w=SAK97HQT5D4CJT652&n=SJ8653H9742DAT7C7&e=SQT4HA86DQJ92CKQ47&wn=Diana_Eva&en=Robot&nn=A_human&sn=B_human&k=w&d=e&v=e&a=1D(Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203+%20%21D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1S(One%20over%20one%20--%204+%20%21S%3B%206+%20total%20points)P1N(2-5%20%21C%3B%204-5%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%202-3%20%21S%3B%2012-14%20HCP)P?]399|300|

Vul, IMPs scoring. Would you invite with this hand?[/hv]

IMO Invite = 10, Pass = 9. Seemingly, robots bid and play better than the average BBO tournament-player.

[diana_eva]

OK thanks all. In a 14 table tourney, only one pair bid (and made) 3NT, with the sequence:

 

1D - 2C

3C - 3N

 

Partner had a flat 14 and game makes with no particular declarer skills required.

[gehrhorn]

OK thanks all. In a 14 table tourney, only one pair bid (and made) 3NT, with the sequence:

 

1D - 2C

3C - 3N

 

Partner had a flat 14 and game makes with no particular declarer skills required.

I probably would not invite. Responded bypassing 1S is nutso to me.

[Zelandakh]

I probably would not invite. Responded bypassing 1S is nutso to me.

It depends on your system. It would be normal in Stone Age Acol for example.

[gehrhorn]

It depends on your system. It would be normal in Stone Age Acol for example.

Agreed. I'm still very much an improving beginner and all I have experience with is SAYC and, more recently, 2/1. If the opening bid in Acol denies a 4card major then there's no chance of missing a 4-4 fit. For the systems I've played 1♠ is a mandatory bid by responder.

[msjennifer]

Although five card majors is almost universally accepted,I like playing the old fashioned 4 card major system.It has it's advantages.Opening 1 spade deprives the opponents of vital bidding space.Their one level over calls with 6 plus HCP are no longer available.Rarely, it conceals the eight card spade fit which they may be having.In a fixed partnership it makes partners life comfortable.If one employs the Canapé style it allows the partnership to play a two or three level contract in a minor with partner already knowing your nine cards without having to reverse.In fact a combination of Super Precision and Blue Team Club has allowed our partnership to play in great comfort as compared to SAYC.Of course I know that practically all are going to dissent my views but my success in some high level tournaments says otherwise.

[Zelandakh]

Although five card majors is almost universally accepted,

Glad that is settled then. I knew those Norwegian Monacans would never amount to anything!

 

 

Agreed. I'm still very much an improving beginner and all I have experience with is SAYC and, more recently, 2/1. If the opening bid in Acol denies a 4card major then there's no chance of missing a 4-4 fit. For the systems I've played 1♠ is a mandatory bid by responder.

A 1♦ opening does not deny a 4 card major in Acol but the requirements for a 2/1 in the Stone Age style are very low. Responder will continue with a 2♠ rebid so the 4-4 spade fit is not lost. In other versions, EBU Modern Acol for example, the hand would be too weak for this bidding sequence.

[whereagles]

Although five card majors is almost universally accepted,I like playing the old fashioned 4 card major system.It has it's advantages.Opening 1 spade deprives the opponents of vital bidding space.Their one level over calls with 6 plus HCP are no longer available.Rarely, it conceals the eight card spade fit which they may be having.In a fixed partnership it makes partners life comfortable.If one employs the Canapé style it allows the partnership to play a two or three level contract in a minor with partner already knowing your nine cards without having to reverse.In fact a combination of Super Precision and Blue Team Club has allowed our partnership to play in great comfort as compared to SAYC.Of course I know that practically all are going to dissent my views but my success in some high level tournaments says otherwise.

 

Have a look at Roy Hugues' "Building a Bidding System" book. He explains the reasons 4-card majors were dropped.