Jump to content

1H-Pass-4H mega quiz


Recommended Posts

It's time for the results. I have decided to use aggregate scoring, so you are scoring against each other rather than with the other table. It looks as though anything under -3000 is a cracking total. But first a few awards ....

The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinsky and Eagles123. They both stepped into the breach 14 times. Quite remarkable given that the lowest number was 4. Eagles also had the equal fewest passes with gordontd.

The "flexible double" award goes to WesleyC, who kept his options open on 12 hands.

And the "take a plus" award goes to Remnart, who resisted temptation on 14 hands.

Now the scores ....

 

1. AQT7343K7KQJ2. Pass -650, 4S -100, Dbl -100

The opponents can make 5 on a finesse, but in practice they sold to 4, and you will get there via an overcall or a double.

 

2. KQT7554AKT2K5. Pass +50, 4S +450, Dbl +450

Again, either positive action gets you to 4, so the passers lose out again.

 

3. AQJ9434973T94. Pass -650, 4S -1100

In practice, the 4 overcall led to -1400 in 5, but that's because partner had not bought the best-selling new bridge book "Know your partner's overcall style," and competed over 5 with T85J92KQJ5K83. I have credited partner with a pass, but by the same token LHO did not have an automatic 5 bid, so I have gone with a compromise score of -1100.

 

4. KT652-AK642A94. 4S +200, Dbl +200

Whichever action you take, you should go plus against 5.

 

5. Q76Q63AK84AK4. Pass +100, Dbl -200

I think pass is obvious. Your hand screams defence, and you know partner will remove a double. Partner was very suitable: KJT93J59J8653, SO 4 had a play, but defending was right this time.

 

6. A8756AKJ74K94. Pass -420, Dbl -690 (I am assuming Gnasher's 4S overcall is a typo) Partner had balanced junk on this occasion.

 

7. 653QJ3AKJT976-. Pass +50, 5D +300

Ron Smith passed. It's not clear how well you do if you overcall. Partner has KQT2Q8432A642, but if he has read "Know your partner's overcall style," he will take the money over 5.

 

8. AK74ATJT5AK84. Pass -620, Dbl -200

Taking the money does not work this time. Declarer should make 4. In practice it was butchered, but I am not crediting the passers with a plus, since he went down on a somewhat different auction. Double gets you to 4 one off.

 

9. AK953K882AKT8. Pass -420, 4S +100, Dbl +100

Any positive action pushes them to 5 one off.

 

10. AKJ9732T742J4. Pass -450, 4S -1100

4 gets stretchered. I thought I liked overcalling 4 as much as anybody before this thread, but I would leave this one alone. We have defence, and you have to respect the vulnerability a bit.

 

11. A53TAJT953A87. Pass -420, 5D -800, Dbl -800

This looks like a defensive hand. It's possible that double leads to -590, but only if partner stands it with T86493Q76T643. You might end up being brutalised in 4.

 

12. K87432-A4T7643. Pass +50, 4S +420

4 was an extremely popular choice amogst the quizzers, and Versace also chose that action at the table.

 

13. AK864Q72A7243. Pass +100, 4S -100

You catch partner with five spades and a few bits and pieces, yet bidding was still wrong. They could have made 4, but with no real clues, declarer wandered a couple off.

 

14. AQJ72QT286543. Pass -450, 4S -100

The points go to the brave here. Trendafilov passed at the table.

 

15. KQ98748J6AK75. 4S -800

The better your hand, the worse the dummy will be. :(

 

16. KT9-Q9754AK764. Pass -420, 4NT +50, Dbl +450

I have sympathy for the 4NT bidders. Double works because partner has five spades and a hand that might of overcalled. The oppo ended up letting through 5 on a misdefence.

 

17. AQJ9542T3T982. Pass -650, 4S -500

The overcall wins a few imps. It looks pretty borderline to me.

 

18. AJ94342AKJ6Q4. Pass -420, 4S -200, Dbl -590

Both tables doubled and conceded 590. I think the 4 overcallers would have done very well. Although it could be double for two down, I don't think it would.

 

19. KQ74463AKT976. Pass -650, 4S -500, 5C -500, Dbl -100

Double gets you to 4 one off, but comes with risks of its own. I presume all the 4 overcallers plan on running to 5, and that goes for 500 because spades are 4-1.

 

20. AK943K2JT9842-. Pass +100, 4S +500, Dbl +300

After a 4 overcall, a wild auction in which both sides diagnosed a double fit ended in 7X down three despite 4 being the limit. Four hearts is down two on club ruffs.

 

21. KT743JQTAQJ84. Pass -420, 4S -200, Dbl -200

Helgemo passed. In another match Fitzgibbon doubled and got to 4.

 

22. AK732Q75AKT98. Dbl +100, 4S -200

You go plus if you double, but at the colours I think 4 is right. Levin overcalled 4, but ran to 5 when it went p-p-x, so shelled out 500.

 

23. AT722KQ6KQT63. Pass +50, Dbl +300

Double looks clear, because you have quite a lot of offensive potential, and there is usually more to gain than lose. 4 was booked to fail, but the opponents misjudged at multiple tables and went on to 5.

Thanks PhilKing. c. -3820 :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5. ♠Q76♥Q63♦AK84♣AK4. Pass +100, Dbl -200

I think pass is obvious. Your hand screams defence, and you know partner will remove a double. Partner was very suitable: ♠KJT93♥J5♦9♣J8653, SO 4♠ had a play, but defending was right this time.

Its surprising to find partner with Jx H here since we hold Qxx of hearts. Was 1H limited maybe ? Also I think ill score +11 often enough for the -4/-5.

 

7. ♠653♥QJ3♦AKJT976♣-. Pass +50, 5D +300

 

Ron Smith passed. It's not clear how well you do if you overcall. Partner has ♠KQT♥2♦Q8432♣A642, but if he has read "Know your partner's overcall style," he will take the money over 5♥.

look like like a normal NV takeout X to me.

 

 

17. ♠AQJ9542♥T3♦T98♣2. Pass -650, 4S -500

 

The overcall wins a few imps. It looks pretty borderline to me.

Pass wouldnt even cross my mind, 7S and I still have some hope partner got a stiff H or they take the push to 5H. I dont see how you can pass this one but bid on 10

 

10. ♠AKJ973♥2♦T742♣J4. Pass -450, 4S -1100

 

4♠ gets stretchered. I thought I liked overcalling 4♠ as much as anybody before this thread, but I would leave this one alone. We have defence, and you have to respect the vulnerability a bit.

It's possible that double leads to -590, but only if partner stands it with ♠T864♥93♦Q76♣T643. You might end up being brutalised in 4♠.

This look like an auto stand to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again for such a great post. After thinking about a few of the hands overnight, I went back and redid the quiz this morning (without reading any of the analysis). The second time through 3 of my choices changed (B2 X -> 4S, B9 X -> 4S, B21 X -> P) so I might've lost the flexible double award :(.

 

I think it would be valuable to put together a double dummy analysis of the hands in order to provide more general insight (rather than just a table result from 1 arbitrary full deal). However, in order to do that I need some help coming up with a range for 1H, P and 4H both in standard and limited openings (and also how much each call would vary based on the vul).

 

The main part I could use some input on is determining what hands partner is going to act with (especially with a 1S overcall) and what hands constitute a 4H bid playing limited openings, because the style of these bids varies a huge amount even between top players.

 

Any thoughts on what criteria might be suitable (or perhaps someone already has Deal 3.19 tcl script for a similar situation)?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that simming would be valuable, but somewhat tricky to get agreement. Would also probably be super useful to start a shared library of common hand types (like 1H openers, non-overcalls, 1H-4H hands in limited openers, etc.). One thought I've had on some of these lines (primarily interested in trying to sim opponents actions overcalling 1NT) is that to model a pool of opponents it may be that hands that meet pattern A are 100% in our space. Hands that meet pattern B are 70% in our space. Hands that meet pattern C are 50% in our space. Hands that meet pattern D are 20% in our space. By which I mean, if some - but not all - folks act on certain hands then they should still be in our sample space, but not with full weight. An easy way to sim this is to count the number of deals attempted, and if you want to get something only 20% of the time then do the equivalent of {dealnumber % 5 != 1} reject.

 

On scoring this project, likely it would make more sense to do IMP scoring against other players frequencies. So I said 4S on board 1. Rather than give me -100 give me 0 IMPs for everyone who said 4S or X and give me +11 IMPs for everyone who passed. Similar for all the players. My raw score was -2870, although if you take my answers on all except pass on board 3 instead of 4 it would drop me to -2420. But to tell how good/bad/etc. that all really is without some sort of IMPing. I guess unless we were supposed to bid as MP in which case MP against the other answers (I was thinking IMP in the bidding).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My score: -650 +450 -650 +200 -200 -690 +300 -200 +100 -1100 -420 +420 +100 -450 -800 +450 +650 -420 -500 +500 -420 -200 +300 =-3230. Ugh I'd like to see more of an IMP score but I don't feel like trying to calculate that. I know my score looks bad but I think the other team has the advantage on a lot of these hands. And on some of these, I'm not sure if the credit was even given to what was actually the best choice on average.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people would like imp averages, then put in the work and do it!

 

I don't think simming these things is a great idea. It depends on what people bid 4M with (I bid a lot, and that is better against opps who are more likely to have 5 trumps and weaker hands for 4M...). Even if you sim it there is a lot of judgement in what happens after that. The tighter they bid 4M, the more they can bid, the more accurately LHO can bid over that, and then a lot of it is what partner does, which depends on what you do, etc.

 

Sometimes there is just a fun excersize. Trying to simulate this stuff is still worse than experience right now imo. And partnership and understanding the opps range (the more they bid 4M the less you should bid, etc) is very important. Of course its a small sample size but it's a fun excersize. FWIW I am guessing I was one of the worst in this (-4kish), that doesn't make me think that I am really bad at competitive bidding, this was a fun excersize, and it was also instructive (Some of the close decisons I was "out there" relative to the field, so I should rethink what I did there, etc).

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its surprising to find partner with Jx H here since we hold Qxx of hearts. Was 1H limited maybe ? Also I think ill score +11 often enough for the -4/-5.

 

 

This was a Roy Welland situation, so the raise was wide ranging despite the 1 not being limited.

 

You should rethink your answer on this one. Not because I say so - look at who from the forum passes on this hand. For instance, karlson only passed four hands but this was one of them, and he passed board 10 as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3. AQJ9434973T94, amber.

15.KQ98748J6AK75, amber. L.

 

I also do not understand passing 3 but bidding on 15

Really?

Which hand would you rather like to have opposite an average dummy declaring 4 doubled or not?

What is your problem?

 

Rainer Herrmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done Rainer and Karlson. Good job.

 

@Phil King: We really appreciate the work you have done for us which was very educational and fun. Thanks bro! http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif Please don't let this be last. I loved it despite my bad score. Keep them coming when you have time please.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people would like imp averages, then put in the work and do it!

ximp poster

1229 karlson

966 Mbodell

903 foobar

834 Gordontd

707 Rhm

582 mikeh

567 Poky

454 NickRW

441 cherdano

438 Jinksy

406 BenLessard

392 Zelandakh

338 manudude03

331 PhantomSac

260 Nige1

157 cyberyeti

-19 WesleyC

-35 gnasher

-68 PaulG

-81 wanoff

-121 y66

-144 eagles123

-153 eilidh

-179 AyunuS

-235 JoeFortune

-341 gwnn

-566 helene_t

-649 Remnard

-882 KurtGodel

-1002 Hanoi5

-1390 MrAce

-1554 gszes

-1586 wbartley

 

 

I have ignored the 4S bid by Gnasher which PhilKing assumed was a typo.

 

I have ignored those bids that were posted after PK revealed the "solutions".

Edited by helene_t
  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about aggregate scores?

totalpoints poster

-2460 karlson

-2870 Mbodell

-2910 foobar

-3170 Gordontd

-3190 Rhm

-3460 mikeh

-3620 gnasher

-3670 NickRW

-3690 cherdano

-3740 Zelandakh

-3780 Poky

-3810 Jinksy

-3840 PhantomSac

-3850 BenLessard

-3860 Nige1

-3950 manudude03

-4110 WesleyC

-4120 cyberyeti

-4130 PaulG

-4250 wanoff

-4440 eagles123

-4460 eilidh

-4530 AyunuS

-4670 JoeFortune

-4710 y66

-5010 gwnn

-5080 helene_t

-5300 Remnard

-5630 Hanoi5

-5680 KurtGodel

-6450 MrAce

-6530 wbartley

-6600 gszes

 

 

Justin already noticed that he and Arend would be compatible partner's. Here you can see how we cluster based on number of agreements.

Rplot02.jpeg

Edited by helene_t
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks helene. I am actually surprised - I thought I would be right at the bottom after going for 1100 twice. :angry:

No matter how stupid your decisions, you'll always have some company ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you perhaps add something for crazy things like "always 4S with 5+, double with 3-4 spades" or "always pass"? Or completely random decisions from the reasonable options? I wonder how much better my competitive decisions are compared to those of trained monkeys.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got mine in before PK posted the results and think I did pretty well, aggregate of just under -3000. It's too much work for me to try cross-imping :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...