gap encourage bid

[el mister]

[hv=pc=n&s=s83hj4d642ck98653&n=sakjhk2dq9753ca72&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1np2sp2np3cppp]266|200[/hv]

 

MP Pairs game, 2♠ is a transfer to clubs from me, which pard encourages, and I subside in 3♣ to nicely wrongside the contract and go one off [it makes from the other side].

 

Actually scored OK, but I'm trying to better understand the consequences of these gap encourage sequences - it was pretty unhelpful here, but is that down to the initial transfer being poor? Would 3N be wild here? My hand is a bit of a horror but the clubs have decent chances to run from my POV.

 

----------------

Edited to fix hand diagram

[The_Badger]

I read somewhere that you should bid vulnerable games when there is a 40%+ chance of succeeding, and naturally a 2-2♣ split [40%] would help you possibly make game.

 

The problem is that any savvy opponents will automatically recognise after the a ♥ lead and return (not guaranteed though) that if the ♣s are going to split 2-2 due to the bidding (I'm assuming 2NT indicates 3 card ♣ support) they will false card so as declarer you are left in doubt whether to play for the drop or possible finesse if an honour drops.

 

I don't think 3NT especially in a pairs game is such a bad bid, shooting for a few tops, but it is well into Meckwellian territory of squeezing 9 tricks from less than 25HCPs.

[Tramticket]

Sorry, I don't get this. This is pairs.

 

Pass. Don't even contemplate a club contract. If you happen to make nine tricks then you will score well.

[Cyberyeti]

Sorry, I don't get this. This is pairs.

 

Pass. Don't even contemplate a club contract. If you happen to make nine tricks then you will score well.

 

1N can lose the first 7 or 8 quite easily opposite the 17 count partner has, it could easily be worse, also you only have 4 top tricks, it is no bed of roses, I'd rather be in 3♣.

 

Also to badger: Game is not 40%, you need to be given a trick on the lead with a heart or spade (or take a finesse) and then need a 2-2 break, plus the chance that they lead a diamond and a heart switch whistles through. Admittedly a major suit lead is likely. The real problem is that the 40% figure is for TEAMS not PAIRS and assumes you're going down one, here, a heart lead from 5 or 6, you're going down at least 2 and possibly 3 or 4 or even 5 if the clubs don't split and that adjusts the required odds significantly.

[el mister]

Sorry, I don't get this. This is pairs.

 

Pass. Don't even contemplate a club contract. If you happen to make nine tricks then you will score well.

Do you mean pass one or pass two NT? Maybe both....

[The_Badger]

Also to badger: Game is not 40%, you need to be given a trick on the lead with a heart or spade (or take a finesse) and then need a 2-2 break, plus the chance that they lead a diamond and a heart switch whistles through. Admittedly a major suit lead is likely. The real problem is that the 40% figure is for TEAMS not PAIRS and assumes you're going down one, here, a heart lead from 5 or 6, you're going down at least 2 and possibly 3 or 4 or even 5 if the clubs don't split and that adjusts the required odds significantly.

 

I agree with everything you say, Cyberyeti. But maybe I should have explained the expression "I don't think 3NT especially in a pairs game is such a bad bid, shooting for a few tops" in Badgerspeak.

 

When my most-experienced partner and myself were young guns on the bridge circuit, we usually had a feeling with about 6-8 boards to go (in a 24 board pairs tourney) how we were fairing. If things were going ok, but not brilliantly, we switched into a different mode where the bidding became a bit more aggressive, trying to create some 'tops' out of nothing. This sometimes worked, and sometimes we ended up further down the field. In our young eyes, coming 18th was no different than coming 4th, but coming 1st was our objective and that's what we were trying to do.

[Tramticket]

Do you mean pass one or pass two NT? Maybe both....

 

I would pass 1NT. Making 3♣ scores 110 and requires 9 trick. Making 2NT scores 120 and requires 8 tricks. You have to score two tricks better in clubs to improve on a NT contract. Your hand is semi-balanced with no singletons. My judgment is that sticking in 1NT will score better more often at pairs.

[Tramticket]

1N can lose the first 7 or 8 quite easily opposite the 17 count partner has, it could easily be worse, also you only have 4 top tricks, it is no bed of roses, I'd rather be in 3♣.

 

It could easily be worse, I agree. My feeling is that it will be better more often.

[johnu]

I read somewhere that you should bid vulnerable games when there is a 40%+ chance of succeeding, and naturally a 2-2♣ split [40%] would help you possibly make game.

 

You can only hope for a 2-2 split if opener has 3 clubs. How do you like your chances of running clubs when partner has a doubleton?

[johnu]

1N can lose the first 7 or 8 quite easily opposite the 17 count partner has, it could easily be worse, also you only have 4 top tricks, it is no bed of roses, I'd rather be in 3♣.

 

I thought this was a debatable point so I ran a simulation opposite a 15-17 HCP opening 1NT. Surprisingly, double dummy, both 1NT and 3♣ only make about ~40% and go down the same number of tricks at about the same rate too. So it's basically a tossup which contract is best.

 

1NT usually is more difficult to defend so if I had to choose I would pass out 1NT.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 the convention pays off, when responder can bid 3NT due to the fact,

that the encourage bid makes it likely that the suit runs.

To have this interference you need to agree, that the encourage bid

showes a top honor.

I am not sure, if Hx is enough, or if you need to have Hxx, other may

comment on this, ..., Hx may be enough since this may mean at worst the

suit runs on normal breaks with a finesse on, i.e. in 34% of the cases.

 

With the given hand responder cannot assume clubs runs, he needs the Ace

with opener, exchange the King with the Ace, ... and gambling 3NT is not

out of the question, although it is a gamble, ... but a 6-3 fit in clubs

is not out of the question.

 

#2 Finding a minor suit slam is also simplified, since we are

discussing this in the context of a strong NT system, this is also not

irrelevant.

 

#1 and #2 are more important, than ending up in 3m from the wrong side,

and having the strong hand on the table, although the MP scoring will mean,

that the neg. case gets more relevant.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: I believe I remember there exists something like 2-under transfers, this

may give you the adv. and mitigating the neg., the cost being it may be very

unusual / complicate, but trying to locate it, I failed.

[Cyberyeti]

I thought this was a debatable point so I ran a simulation opposite a 15-17 HCP opening 1NT. Surprisingly, double dummy, both 1NT and 3♣ only make about ~40% and go down the same number of tricks at about the same rate too. So it's basically a tossup which contract is best.

 

1NT usually is more difficult to defend so if I had to choose I would pass out 1NT.

 

Interesting, when you simulated 3♣, did you adjust the sim for who declared it which varies on whether the 1N opener has a fit ? or didn't it matter.

 

Also in 1N double dummy, you will take the spade finesse only when it works, this is more likely to be irrelevant in 3♣.

[GrahamJson]

A minor point is that I believe it is now more usual to play that completing the transfer shows a fit whilst bidding the intermediate step denies. This has a couple of advantages the main one being that with a weak hand with 55 in the minors you can respond 2NT. If partner has diamonds he will bid 3D, and you have found a fit. Without a diamond fit partner bids 3C which you can then pass, and hopefully this will be a fit.

[The_Badger]

You can only hope for a 2-2 split if opener has 3 clubs. How do you like your chances of running clubs when partner has a doubleton?

 

"MP Pairs game, 2♠ is a transfer to clubs from me, which pard encourages" in el mister's original post.

 

"I'm assuming 2NT indicates 3 card ♣ support" in my original post, and yes that is usually the meaning of an 2NT acceptance bid, not that just opener has a maximum NT opener. And usually that 3 card ♣ support must include at least A or K.

[johnu]

Interesting, when you simulated 3♣, did you adjust the sim for who declared it which varies on whether the 1N opener has a fit ? or didn't it matter.

 

I would have had to run 2 sims based on fit or not fit which I didn't do. IIRC, the NT opener made about 2-3% more 3♣ contracts. Not a big difference, but casinos can make a living on a couple of percent advantage.

[vbartone]

For 4-suit transfers, in the minors consider reversing the responses by opener.

So over 1N-2S, 2N DISCOURAGES, and 3C encourages (same over 1N-2N. Reversing these responses became popular in NYC in the '70's.

 

There are more advantages to using the reverse responses. First and foremost is right-siding the contract when partner has a fit/maximum and responder has no bid. This is the more likely scenario depending on what you call a fit/maximum. At IMPS, it may be more important to show a fit with a minimum so responder can bid 3N w/ xxx Ax xx KQxxxx.

 

Additionally, it allow you to "transfer" to diamonds when responder has x-x-5-5 in the minors. With 3+ diamonds he would bid 3D. If he bids 3C, you can PASS knowing you have found an 8-card fit! So now you can use the direct 1N-3M more constructively (such as 6-card minor, any side 4+ card suit, GF).