Feel Lucky Punk?

[PhilG007]

This is an important concept.

 

If we were playing rubber bridge, we might just be content with taking our game and getting on to the next hand. From a game theory perspective this may be a bad idea but it's human nature sometimes to quit while your ahead.

 

IMPs is completely different and your outcome is dependent on the other table. There's nothing certain about what the other table is doing and we may have to bid 6D just to tie the board. All we can do is make the best choice possible and let things take care of themselves.

In IMPs there is also the matter of the sanctity of the contract. In MPs you can take risks for overtricks but in IMPS the first

priority is the fulfilment of the contract. Once that has been achieved,then overtricks are a bonus.

[PhilG007]

OK I'll bite. How do you propose to remove the guesswork out of whether 5D is the limit?

Are you suggesting that there is a 'fail-safe' bidding method? If so,why not share it with

us here(?)

[Zelandakh]

Are you suggesting that there is a 'fail-safe' bidding method? If so,why not share it with us here(?)

You are the one that stated "Guessers are losers." Jack is saying precisely the opposite, that he is unaware of any bidding system that can remove the guesswork from decisions such as this one. Or were you just pointing out that you are a loser?

[Jinksy]

Of course I mean this with the greatest respect Sasha and I don't mean it in respect to this hand particularly, but I never understand comments like "it feels too risky to push on" when surely it's just as risky to NOT push on.

 

Sure (and no need to stand on ceremony :P) - I just meant that as 'it looks to me as though slam is odds against', though it looks as though I'm in the minority.

 

What (still) gives me pause is that P knows we could have all sorts of hands with support and keycards, yet didn't try 4♦, which presumably we play as forcing, and costs almost nothing. To me that suggests a hand that's bidding 5♦ more as a two-way shot than with confidence that we'll be making even game - eg the hand Zelandakh gives above, or something like xx xx Jxxxxxx xx.

[billw55]

What (still) gives me pause is that P knows we could have all sorts of hands with support and keycards, yet didn't try 4♦, which presumably we play as forcing, and costs almost nothing. To me that suggests a hand that's bidding 5♦ more as a two-way shot than with confidence that we'll be making even game - eg the hand Zelandakh gives above, or something like xx xx Jxxxxxx xx.

Yeah that is possible. Indeed while eagles did not give the full hand, it sounds like p may have been too good for 5♦. Still, opponents had not bid game, so a "two way shot" is not entirely applicable.

[PhilG007]

You are the one that stated "Guessers are losers." Jack is saying precisely the opposite, that he is unaware of any bidding system that can remove the guesswork from decisions such as this one. Or were you just pointing out that you are a loser?

I guess we are all losers...in our own unique way None of us are perfect But hubris is a powerful thing :rolleyes:

[billw55]

hubris is a powerful thing

This is too funny for words.

[PhilG007]

This is too funny for words.

That is entirely your opinion

[diana_eva]

That is entirely your opinion

 

Mine too :)

 

PhilG people posting here are pretty good, as I was hoping all those challenges you lost will have proved. You'd be better off trying to understand what they are saying and making constructive comments if you want to add something.

[Zelandakh]

I guess we are all losers...in our own unique way None of us are perfect But hubris is a powerful thing :rolleyes:

Given that I self-rate a level below you, I guess I have a funny way of showing my excessive arrogance. So what exactly did you mean by the phrase "Guessers are losers" with respect to a situation in which, by your own admission, a guess is unavoidable? This is sadly a classic case of mini-trolling. You made a stupid statement that you thought sounded like a clever put down. Someone asked about it and you then attibuted to them precisely the stupidity that your comment had displayed. And then you wonder why you get a negative reaction for such tactics.

 

Sorry, but it is just rubbish. Whether the original statement was a clever piece of trolling or plain stupidity I cannot say. I rather hope it was the latter. If you tell us that it was not stupidity then the community might well consider you "fair game" for the foreseeable future (those that do not already). So I am interested in your response to my earlier question. Are you capable of admitting the mistake?

[Phil]

In IMPs there is also the matter of the sanctity of the contract. In MPs you can take risks for overtricks but in IMPS the first

priority is the fulfilment of the contract. Once that has been achieved,then overtricks are a bonus.

 

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

 

Because your response has nothing to do with my post.

[PhilG007]

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

 

Because your response has nothing to do with my post.

Sure I read it. Is it a convention on these forums that we all have to be agreement?

[PhilG007]

Given that I self-rate a level below you, I guess I have a funny way of showing my excessive arrogance. So what exactly did you mean by the phrase "Guessers are losers" with respect to a situation in which, by your own admission, a guess is unavoidable? This is sadly a classic case of mini-trolling. You made a stupid statement that you thought sounded like a clever put down. Someone asked about it and you then attibuted to them precisely the stupidity that your comment had displayed. And then you wonder why you get a negative reaction for such tactics.

 

Sorry, but it is just rubbish. Whether the original statement was a clever piece of trolling or plain stupidity I cannot say. I rather hope it was the latter. If you tell us that it was not stupidity then the community might well consider you "fair game" for the foreseeable future (those that do not already). So I am interested in your response to my earlier question. Are you capable of admitting the mistake?

What I meant about "guessers are losers" is that it is one thing to take a finesse on a 50-50 chance as a palooka would do

or locate the critical card by means of deduction and card reading as a master would do. A master NEVER guesses!

[gwnn]

No, a master NEVER guesses because they follow the "queen lies over the jack" maxim. :P

[PhilG007]

No, a master NEVER guesses because they follow the "queen lies over the jack" maxim. :P

Even in "pre-dealt" hands(?) :lol:

[diana_eva]

PhilG do you even remember what the OP is about? Stop trolling with platitudes that have nothing to do with what is being discussed here. Reread the original post to refresh your memory, then scroll back to your own replies and try to figure out if there's any connection between these.

[gwnn]

Even in "pre-dealt" hands(?) :lol:

You tell me. I usually follow the philosophy of "The Opposite" as espoused by Dr. Costanza.

 

edit: I know I'm too late but I'd always bid 6D here and I wouldn't apologize. Cascade once explained that 2NT hands often seem to have a larger relative amount of controls (aces and kings) than more average hands but that is simply because, well, you need to get to 20 somehow. Still, this does really really seem like a great hand.

[sfi]

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?

 

Because your response has nothing to do with my post.

 

You seem to be asking for special treatment. There's no evidence thus far of the behaviour you are looking for.

[PhilG007]

You seem to be asking for special treatment. There's no evidence thus far of the behaviour you are looking for.

Not asking for special treatment Just asking to heard...if anyone will listen(!)

And reply without being diatribic.

[Zelandakh]

What I meant about "guessers are losers" is that it is one thing to take a finesse on a 50-50 chance as a palooka would do

or locate the critical card by means of deduction and card reading as a master would do. A master NEVER guesses!

So you would consider fred a palooka? Here is an example (with 2 cards difference) of a world class player guessing in a reasonably common situation. In the bidding players have to guess even more frequently. It is simply part of the game.

[PhilG007]

So you would consider fred a palooka? Here is an example (with 2 cards difference) of a world class player guessing in a reasonably common situation. In the bidding players have to guess even more frequently. It is simply part of the game.

I read the article. And your point is(?) This is ABC stuff that you learn in

bridge kindergarten. I cut my teeth on deals like this :rolleyes:

[Phil]

Sure I read it. Is it a convention on these forums that we all have to be agreement?

 

Not but the whole purpose of the reply function is to respond to someone else. Failing that, you are using someone else's post as a reference point.

 

Yours does neither.

 

By the way if you would not have responded I would have been confused but my own statement is kind of obvious.