PhantomSac Posted November 23, 2014 Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 Do you think partner will bid on if you are allowed to whisper to him (after his 2♥ call): "I have a club void (that is, a 3 suited hand), and 9 HCP"? Absolutely. Construct some 9 HCP hands with a club void and I think you will agree. His clubs are also not wasted, a likely line is to set up his hand via a ruffing club hook. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted November 23, 2014 Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 Very true. I didn't inspect the yellow tab and thought it was 15-17 no trump. To be honest I would be completely shocked if game was 96 % opposite a strong NT lol, 96 % is a lot. Thats better than being in 7N on AKQ AKQTxx xxx xx opp xxx xxxx AKQ AK. I think something else went wrong but good to know you had partner at 3 points more than they had! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagles123 Posted November 23, 2014 Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 this has been a very interesting and informative thread for me, ty Jinsky for posting the hand :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted November 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 It seems as if Jinksy and his partner each made decisions which complemented each other well this time. Even though a five-card major is acceptable in their style for a 12-14 NT opening, it would not have occurred to me to do that with such a suit-oriented hand. So, we would open 1H and get to 4H by North. Oh, well. Yeah, we don't have a choice in our system. The only other possibility would be a 2H opening, but that would significantly misrepresent the shape of the hand. At least P knows this is one of your possible holdings for a NT bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted November 23, 2014 Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 You're gonna laugh at me but 9 points + 3 for the void with 4 trumps and an 8 card fit. I think that's GOREN? (add infinite with a 9 card fit and 4 trumps for a void). That gets you to 12, your partner has 12-14, so in support points you probably have an invite. However since the downsides of inviting (can't show your shortness, may induce them to double when things are bad, more likely to induce a trump lead, etc) outweigh the gains (stopping in 3H opposite a minimum), just bid game. If you really want some way to quantify what to do here, I think using support points is fine (+1 for doubleton, +2 for singleton, +3 for void with 8 trumps. With 9 trumps +1 +3 +5. Add less if you have only 3 trumps, 3 trumps and a void def not worth +5 obviously, even opp a 6 card suit.) So with a singleton and 7 points and 4 trumps you have a minimum limit raise opp a 1M opener, etc, it's really not that far off from accurate. Nobody should laugh. Goren's support point analysis worked 50 years ago, and it is still a good basis for an initial evaluation. The finer points of the analysis were also known back in the day - eg. lotsa trumps and nothing wasted in the opponents suits is good. This just had not been demonstrated using a computer or codified yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 23, 2014 Report Share Posted November 23, 2014 Nobody should laugh. Goren's support point analysis worked 50 years ago, and it is still a good basis for an initial evaluation. The finer points of the analysis were also known back in the day - eg. lotsa trumps and nothing wasted in the opponents suits is good. This just had not been demonstrated using a computer or codified yet.Ah, come on. Give em an opportunity to laugh at one of our best contributors, whether it is deserved or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Ah, come on. Give em an opportunity to laugh at one of our best contributors, whether it is deserved or not. Somebody must have taught Lew. Lew taught Bob. Bob taught Justin. Justin is doing a wonderful job trying to teach others. Just trying to clear away some of the BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 Somebody must have taught Lew. Lew taught Bob. Bob taught Justin. Justin is doing a wonderful job trying to teach others. Just trying to clear away some of the BS.Nobody taught Mathe anything. He either agreed with his "forefathers" or he didn't. :rolleyes: And it didn't matter whether he was right or not. Things were the way he said they were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 I'm a blaster also, especially at teams. Non vulnerable, the scoring methodology says it's about even whether to bid game vs. part score at IMPs. But making thin games is one of the keys to winning at IMPs. If, as one previous poster stated, you add points for the void, you've got enough to bid game. By LTC, you have a 7 loser hand opposite approximately a 7 loser opener, so you figure to make about 10 tricks ([7+7 actual losers] - 24 possible losers = -10 losers or 10 winners). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 24, 2014 Report Share Posted November 24, 2014 I'm a blaster also, especially at teams. Non vulnerable, the scoring methodology says it's about even whether to bid game vs. part score at IMPs. But making thin games is one of the keys to winning at IMPs. If, as one previous poster stated, you add points for the void, you've got enough to bid game. By LTC, you have a 7 loser hand opposite approximately a 7 loser opener, so you figure to make about 10 tricks ([7+7 actual losers] - 24 possible losers = -10 losers or 10 winners).There is a little more to LTC than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 I think I owe an apology to Jinsky. When I wrote what I wrote in this topic I thought this was a 15-17 NT. I still believe we should bid game, but making another bid than 4♥ is not as absurd as I said it was, vs weak NT. My bad bro, Sorryhttp://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif I really thought you passed 2♥ after finding a fit and your pd showed 15-17. I am sure you will agree that in this context passing 2♥ would be absurd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 I think I owe an apology to Jinsky. When I wrote what I wrote in this topic I thought this was a 15-17 NT. I still believe we should bid game, but making another bid than 4♥ is not as absurd as I said it was, vs weak NT. My bad bro, Sorryhttp://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif I really thought you passed 2♥ after finding a fit and your pd showed 15-17. I am sure you will agree that in this context passing 2♥ would be absurd.Welcome to the "stepped on my ....." club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted November 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 I think I owe an apology to Jinsky. When I wrote what I wrote in this topic I thought this was a 15-17 NT. I still believe we should bid game, but making another bid than 4♥ is not as absurd as I said it was, vs weak NT. My bad bro, Sorryhttp://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif I really thought you passed 2♥ after finding a fit and your pd showed 15-17. I am sure you will agree that in this context passing 2♥ would be absurd. No worries, and yeah, I agree :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellSpyder Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 I had a similar decision last night, holding ♠J852 ♥KQJ42 ♦975 ♣7 opposite a 15-17NT (imp scoring, love all). Like OP, I tried 2♣(Stayman) and heard 2♠ from partner. Would people just blast this one as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 >>> ♠J852 ♥KQJ42 ♦975 ♣78 losers opposite 6 from the 1NT hand, so in principle I'd say shoot game, yes. Thing is, the low controls increase loser count to 9, so it's not that clear. Do it at teams, but maybe invite at MPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2014 Report Share Posted November 25, 2014 IMO, whatever the holding for Responder at IMP's, his decision to invite, not-invite, or blast should be the same as at Matchpoints. He makes the straight value-based call, and the person being invited is the one who takes form of scoring into account. If both partners are taking the form of scoring into account, there seems to be too many 5-7 Imp donations. When the other team has done the same thing, a push at minus is still a 5-7 Imp opportunity cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.