Balance or No Balance

[eagles123]

[hv=pc=n&w=s8hkq82dqj3cakq85&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=pp1c1dpp]133|200[/hv]

 

It's MP

 

Thanks

 

Eagles

[mike777]

I will try 1h

[mgoetze]

I think you meant to ask "1♥ or 2♥?", right?

[billw55]

No way no how, no time never, do I defend one of a minor at matchpoints.

[wank]

No i don't. It's very likely the opps' hand in spades, very possibly in game.

[wank]

Bill defending one of a minor at mps is great if it's the opps' hand. 1 of a minor doesn't score much. You need to decide whose hand it is rather than relying on blind rules like that.

[tobtwo]

1H seems automatic

[billw55]

No i don't. It's very likely the opps' hand in spades, very possibly in game.

 

Bill defending one of a minor at mps is great if it's the opps' hand. 1 of a minor doesn't score much. You need to decide whose hand it is rather than relying on blind rules like that.

If the conditions of the problem included "opponents are bumbling fools" then I might worry about them making game. Absent that, I assume they are competent enough to not pass out 1♦ with game on.

 

Yes, sometimes if I balance, they may end up improving their plus score by landing in a spade partial instead of a diamond partial. But I think this will be a minority of the time.

[NickRW]

Seems to me this is pretty much a gamble. Assuming p and rho don't have an ace stuck behind one of their cards, lho seems to have a hand nearly as strong as mine. We rate to have a plus score somewhere in clubs, hearts or possibly 1NT. They rate to have a fit, more likely in spades than diamonds I think. So we have a choice of going quietly for what will probably be -70 or competing for a small plus our way at the risk of being -110. Of course, their 2♠ contract could be one off. And maybe we get too high for -50.

 

It is all a bit imponderable. I have no reason to assume that the field will have bid differently thus far and I think the field will bid 1♥ now. So I go with the field, for the simple reason that I rate to avoid a bottom that way.

[wank]

Something like ajxx a akxxxx xx with lho, xxxx jxx xx xxxx with p, kqxx xxxxx xx xx with rho is an easy game (5s actually) for the opps (despite my only giving them an 8 card fit and perforce a 4-1 trimp split) where they've bid entirely normally.

 

With our opening we promised more values than lho did with his overcall. Our partner was perforce in a better place to act but didn't with 1 of either major available. His average strength is a lot lower than rho's - with our diamond holding we know partner doesn't have a penalty pass .

[mikeh]

No way no how, no time never, do I defend one of a minor at matchpoints.

Then you are missing some really good opportunities to score well.

 

It is an error to assume that the opps are never allowed to play in a bad contract, which is what your 'rule' amounts to.

 

I suspect that what you meant was that you would only rarely allow the opps to play in 1m, and that in making that decision, you will look at your hand and listen to the auction, including any passes.

 

Here, I am not really worried about them bidding and making game. It is possible, and contrary to your later post, such wouldn't mean that the opps were incompetent. It would merely require RHO to be maximum for his pass of 1♦ and LHO to have a big overcall, shortish in hearts, and not quite good enough to double and then bid diamonds.

 

All methods have seams. For all methods there are hands that are at the extremes of actions, and games are missed, and slams are missed, when both partners are max, or pairs get too high when both pairs are min for their chosen action, and incompetence, tho often present at the bridge table, doesn't necessarily enter into it.

 

Here, we have an interesting decision, whether at imps or mps. Obviously game for them is a disaster at imps, but even letting them find 170 as opposed to 70 or 90 or 110 isn't wonderful. It comes down to looking into the tea-leaves and deciding who has the spades....if partner has 4, game for them is unlikely. If he has 5, spades for them is unlikely....however, equally, hearts for us won't likely play well when partner's longest suit is spades.

 

I'm passing. I have mentally tossed a coin and on this day am willing to bet that passing will lead to a smaller minus score than would bidding.

 

If I were to bid, at mps, it would be 1N. Yes, this shows 18-19, which I don't quite have, and it suggests a balanced hand, but it also makes it almost impossible for them to find spades, at the risk of our missing hearts. Fortunately, I'm not bidding 1N anyway :P

[PhilKing]

No way no how, no time never, do I defend one of a minor at matchpoints.

 

I have almost the opposite view - if it is reasonable to pass them out in 1m, I will do so.

 

On this hand, it is blindingly obvious they have a better spot. Who do you think has the spades, partner?

 

I have no reason to assume that the field will have bid differently thus far and I think the field will bid 1♥ now. So I go with the field, for the simple reason that I rate to avoid a bottom that way.

 

I think we should try and get most of our edge from bidding and playing differently from the field.

Edited February 27, 2015 by PhilKing

[billw55]

I have almost the opposite view - if it is reasonable to pass them out in 1m, I will do so.

 

On this hand, it is blindingly obvious they have a better spot. Who do you think has the spades, partner?

Maybe. Why not? Because he did not bid them, or maybe double? Well, neither did either opponent.

 

Also, the chances of our side having a fit is pretty good. Why should I give up so easily on a heart or club contract? Or maybe we push them to 3♠, going down on the 4-1 break. Aren't there some good things that can happen by balancing, besides a couple bad ones?

[mikeh]

So I go with the field, for the simple reason that I rate to avoid a bottom that way.

 

If we are worse than the field, we need to get better. If we are as good as the field, we need to get better. If we are better than the field, we need to use that skill to make the best decision, even or especially when that decision is anti-field.

 

There is no point being better than the field if all we are trying to do is to go with the field.

[helene_t]

Who says we are with the field anyway? Maybe partner has a marginal 1S bid which would have shot out opps spades fit.

[Phil]

I pass but I doubt I feel as good about it as some of the others.

 

- defending 1m p p is different than this auction since my LHO has diamonds. I love to defend the former auction and BillW should too.

 

- I'm not crazy about the vulnerability for defending. +50/+100 doesn't rate to be good as +90/+110.

 

However, bidding doesn't point to getting us to a better spot either. Even if they don't find spades many bad things can happen to 1♥ or 2♣. And if they do find spades, we are trading a 70% board for a 30% one.

 

If I were to bid the call I like is 1N. It scores better than others and doesn't have the issue of the diamond ruff. However it's not really clear that clubs are running or that partner even has a fit.

[PhilKing]

Maybe. Why not? Because he did not bid them, or maybe double? Well, neither did either opponent.

 

Also, the chances of our side having a fit is pretty good. Why should I give up so easily on a heart or club contract? Or maybe we push them to 3♠, going down on the 4-1 break. Aren't there some good things that can happen by balancing, besides a couple bad ones?

 

We know that if partner has the spades he has a very bad hand. This is not the case for RHO - he could have spades and a reasonable hand.

 

♠KTxxx

♥Axx

♦x

♣xxxx

 

opposite:

 

♠AQxx

♥xx

♦AKxxxxx

♣-

 

And we reopen them into a grand slam.

 

The bottom line is that I just don't think we will show a profit here by reopening when we have no defence to an alternative higher-scoring strain. Nothing is impossible, but bidding hearts, catching a fit and the weather turning out sunny seems distinctly unlikely.

[billw55]

I think I am learning something in this thread. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[mikeh]

Nothing is impossible, but bidding hearts, catching a fit and the weather turning out sunny seems distinctly unlikely.

Hmmm....so you'd be more willing to bid during the summer months?

[PhilKing]

Hmmm....so you'd be more willing to bid during the summer months?

 

I think you mean the summer month - I am from England.

[billw55]

About the opponents hands. Suggestions above for overcaller include:

 

♠AJxx ♥A ♦AKxxxx ♣xx

♠AQxx ♥xx ♦AKxxxxx ♣--

I would have considered both of these as double and pull if needed. If they were polled, I would have expected comments to include a lot of "don't want to lose spades".

 

Also for righty:

♠KTxxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣xxxx

... with which I would not pass, rather make a nonforcing 1♠ advance.

Thoughts?

[mikeh]

Traditionally, at least in NA, the teaching was that a simple overcall would be limited in high card strength. Even today I see inexperienced or bad players write on their convention card things like overcalls show 8-15.

 

More recently, and by that I mean over the last 30 plus years, it has become widely accepted by many strong players that a double should promise at least some support for unbid suits OR be a very, very strong playing hand...whether in notrump or one's own suit.

 

Kokish became the best known promoter of these approach, probably because of his relationship with the Bridge World, and assisted, obviously, by his status as arguably the best bridge coach of our times, and one of the leading theorists.

 

I think AJxx A AKxxxx xx is a close decision. For me, the answer starts with thinking about how I would feel if the auction were to go, for example, [1♣] x [3♣] 4♥.

 

I'd be distinctly uncomfortable here, since I have no reason to assume that partner has 6+ hearts. I also have no reason to assume that 5♦ will be a playable spot.

 

Arguments such as not wanting to lose the spade suit don't resonate with me. While the OP hand does suggest that we may in fact be losing the heart suit should opener pass us out, a lot of players are bidding hearts here! And opener WILL be reopening on a lot of hands....wouldn't we all reopen with 3=4=1=5 13 counts?

 

It is rare in today's game to be passed out at the 1-level and while that can (and would here with many of us) happen, that is merely a risk factor to be balanced against what happens if it is partner who tries to insist on hearts in a competitive auction.

 

I am prepared to bid spades at virtually all levels...I'd be thinking if the opps blast to 4♥ before I get a second turn, but that has to be wildly unlikely....if LHO makes a weak jump shift and gets raised, I might do it and would definitely do it at imps.

 

However, on the first hand you reference, I think it to be close and wouldn't criticize a double as 'wrong'.

 

The second hand...yes, in my view a double on AQxx xx AKxxxxx void is wrong. There is virtually no risk that this hand is being passed in 1♦ and what risk there is will often be associated with our not having any better place to play. It would be an unusual parlay for no other player bidding over our 1♦ overcall AND the hand belonging to us at the game level.

 

As with virtually all bridge bidding decisions, it is a basic error to focus exclusively on how our actions might work or, from the other perspective, on how they might go wrong. It is essential to recognize both aspects of any decision, and to balance them against a similar analysis for alternative actions, including understanding how partner is likely to interpret our actions (since he isn't looking at our hand).

 

We see this problem, of focussing too narrowly on issues, all the time, most commonly with people who want to open 2♣ on inappropriate hands.

[PhantomSac]

About the opponents hands. Suggestions above for overcaller include:

 

♠AJxx ♥A ♦AKxxxx ♣xx

♠AQxx ♥xx ♦AKxxxxx ♣--

I would have considered both of these as double and pull if needed. If they were polled, I would have expected comments to include a lot of "don't want to lose spades".

 

Also for righty:

♠KTxxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣xxxx

... with which I would not pass, rather make a nonforcing 1♠ advance.

Thoughts?

 

Bidding 1D with AQxx xx AKxxxxx --- is totally normal, it will almost never go 1D AP. Doubling and bidding with a 13 count is often not going to end well.

 

I think bidding 1S with KTxxx Axx x xxxx as a passed hand is normal, I would never consider passing esp white as a passed hand.

 

You would probably find some support for Xing with AJxx A AKxxxx xx but doubling with underweight HCP hands and a stiff in a major is very dangerous, if partner bids a lot of hearts you have to go back to diamonds which could find you too high or overbidding your hand etc. I think most people would bid 1D, if the auction stays alive (which it is likely to) you will be well placed to double or bid spades later.

[billw55]

This is my new favorite bridge thread.

[PhantomSac]

Sry I crossposted with mike on my last post...coulda just said I agree with him.

 

Bill if you are bidding 1H because you think your hand is good enough to justify it (ie, it might still be your hand even when partner has spades and was not strong enough to bid 1S or X 1D), I think that is a reasonable view. Our hand is pretty good and partner could have some 5233 4 count where it is our hand for instance. But I think you should back away from your approach of bidding since you don't want them to play 1m at MP.

 

With this shape for instance you should basically almost always pass unless you have 17+ at least. And that applies to most hands that have 3 or 4 diamonds, you need significant values to balance. The same goes for something like 1444 if it goes 1x (where x is not spades) p p and you are w/r, you would need a lot of values to consider bidding because your partner didn't overcall 1S or make a takeout X so either the opps have spades or your partner doesn't have much values/has length in their suit (in which case you will do well defending as you have more trumps than them). Balancing too much just because is a common thing but it is not good. I also think people balance too much with Hx in LHOs suit but that is a different story.