BPO-001-A

[Chamaco]

I ran a quick simulation assuming the follwing constraints:

a. 1st to 3rd seat have <12 hcp

b. 1st to 3rd seat have at most 4 controls (no one has 2A and a K)

c. 1st to 3rd seat have more than 7 losres

d. 3rd seat does not have a 5 card major (most players would open in 3rd seat with about 10 hcp and a 5cM)

 

The results seem to justify in most cases the 1D opener, as often the 3S partscore will be down. (BTW, my vote was for pass.... :) )

 

 

I might post the simulation in case anyone is interested

[Echognome]

To me this is a field question. How do I rate the auction to go at other tables? Do I believe most of the field will open this hand in fourth? If I believe yes, then I might open 1♦ to hope for my average or better in terms of playing the hand or defending. If I pass (my choice), then I'm hoping that those that opened didn't fair well for some reason or another. That's my risk. That's my gamble.

 

I also know that my regular partner is quite aggressive on opening, so at most he would have is a flat 11 count.

[P_Marlowe]

1D.

 

You have a normal opening, so just do it,

the rule of 15 (Pearson Points) was designed

for borderline decisons.

A 2D or 3D bid would not have occurred to me,

because you have another place to play: hearts.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[pclayton]

Indeed. 2♦ is something of a panic bid. it doesn't do a real good job locking them out of their spades, and 2♦ should be a hand that wants to invite 3N opposite the right 10 count. This 6-4 doesn't look right. Give me: xx, QJx, KQJxxx, Ax and 2♦ is easy.

[mike777]

In Master Solver club BW, one should assume expert field. Example Blue Ribbon Pair finals.

[Free]

I also voted 2♦. 1♦ doesn't make much sence imo, since 2♦ describes my hand a lot better. Pass is my alternative.

[olegru]

In Mike Lorence book I read Pierson Count rule to determine if you should open on

4th:

Count your HCP and add one point for each spade in your hand. If your total is at least 15 points then open - otherwise pass.

If follow this rule, we have to pass. But...

[luke warm]

pearson points are for hands that are close (say a 4234 11 count), some think this one is an opener in any seat and they may be right... i passed because i'm not prepared to bid 3D on it

[inquiry]

Again, I am going to use problem "A" as the test case. This his how I plan to share with you the result of the voting. The only difference, is I will inlclude the votes by the members at the end of the lines shown in the voting column. The panels composite votes will be added the actual contest hand thread which is currently locked.

 

[hv=d=w&v=a&s=s4hqjt6dkj9865ckq]133|100|Scoring: MP

BPO-001-A

Note: Some problems will be matchpoint, some will be imps, this is matchpoints. After three passes to you, what do you bid?

 

West North East South

Pass Pass Pass ?

[/hv]

 

Votes, scores, Panel, Members

1♦      100       6   

Pass    70       3   

2♦        20       0   

3♦         0       0   

 

In any other seat than fourth, this would be a clear 1♦ opening bid. The question is, in fourth seat, does it remain an opening bid? This is a judgment call and was interesting to see if our panel will apply “Pearson Points” to this fourth seat. When this hand occurred, I held south and due to my lack of defense (not even one ACE) and only 13 pearson points, I passed. But, I knew this was very, very close. So I picked this as a problem hand for our panel. The insufficient Pearson Points are more than made up for by the great distribution. If playing at IMPS, I would have opened, but at MP the lack of defense swayed me to pass. But this wasn’t posted to get support (or condemnation) for my choice. Instead, as the moderator (and future problem selector), I need to know the panels feeling for future hands that might include a light fourth seat opening (clue to the theme of this question set).

 

What are Pearson points? It is the sum of your hcp (4, 3, 2, 1 scale) and spade length (one point for each spade). Many people suggest opening in fourth chair only with 14 or more or only with 15 or more “pearson points,” especially at matchpoints. This hand has only 13 pearson points but strong distribution and good red suits. It seems ideal to test the waters on this key question.

 

Agreeing that applying Pearson Points at matchpoints were the young guns, Justin Lall Jlall who said “Game is still in the picture as pard could have xxx AKxx Qx xxx for instance, a run of the mill 9 count which produces a game. So at IMPs I would feel compelled to open. However this is matchpoints, so the concern is whether or not opening will generate a plus score more often than not. With a singleton spade and not much in way of defense, I think the opps are more likely to outbid us in a spade partscore so I will just pass”. This was echoed by Luis Argerich (luis) who added, “Pass should be automatic specially at MPs. Either they have spades or we have a vulnerable missfit, in both scenarios it should be wise to pass. Should I credit Person? Maybe”

 

Note that both of these players mentioned specifically the type of game being played, “this is matchpoints”, and “specially at matchpoints”. If you are not considering the type of contest you are playing in before your bid, these answers will show you some of the things you should be considering. Cascade (Wayne Burrows), echoed there logic on why pass, without mentioning the MP aspect: “We need too many prime cards from partner to make anything and there is too much chance that we will be out bid successfully in spades”

 

The majority voted for opening 1♦. Fred was busy preparing for the Cavendish, so he apologized for not making comments for his choices (he chose 1♦ here), as did ritong. Some of the majority were hesitant in their choice to open this hand, but felt compelled to give a go anyway. Roland Wald (walddk) expressed concerns over the spade shortness and that he might be out bid in spades, but added “This hand has too much potential to pass…. (if we are) outbid in spades…. hopefully face an awkward trump break. If opps don't interfere partner won't insist on spades since he didn't open a weak 2. I have an easy rebid with a goodish 6-card suit.

 

Speaking most effectively for the majority, who ignored the idea of “Pearson Points” who choose to open 1♦ was Beverly Kraft (Kraft), who said, “I can't see any reason not to treat this hand normally as game is still possible even facing a PH. Passing this one out because my spades and high cards don't add up to the required number would not occur to me. Ignoring Pearson points on this hand was also the point of Philippe Cronier’s (phicroreponse: “in spite of my singleton ♠ and my only having 12 HCP, I've enough distributional strength to fight against spades.”

 

None of the panel voted for any of the “preempts” in diamonds, and in fact, most didn’t even mention the possibility. But when they did, it was to point out that 2♦ (and 3♦) opening bids would be bad. Gabor Nagyivan (ng), from Budapest, Hungary when voting for 1♦ commented that “2♦ opening was dangerous with 4 hearts/. Kraft was more forceful, correctly (imho) noting “I know many who would open 2♦ to discourage further competition. Thankfully, I don't have to play with them.”

 

With commentators who state their mind so clearly, this interactive panel voting is going to be a lot of fun!!!

 

So the final vote on this one was six of the nine experts voted for 1♦, the other three for pass. The only other votes mentioned by the panel was in the form of don’t do it comments. I guess I would like to promote pass, as I not only agree with justin, luis and wayne on this one, I think their arguements are more convincing. However, a 2-1 majority for 1♦ simply can not be ignored. Usually, I will not say what happens on hands, but since this one I played, (well I passed it out), I will tell you. We got 55% for pass out. We can make 4♦, they can make 3♠. Most people were buying the contract in spades, but if you persist in diamonds you score big. And I will also tell you, sitting there with eyes glued to my laptop screen for 12 painful minutes (first board was played fast), made me wish at the table that I had bid. At least I could have been playing cards. In final analysis, THAT may be the strongest arguement for opening this hand online. :o

[Guest Jlall]

Good problem

[luke warm]

*great* problem... i agree with you, ben, i hope beverly and others continue to 'call it like they see it'... i'm sure some of my bids will undergo some scathing remarks, and frankly i look forward to it

[mike777]

Pass

 

55% may be the highest score I ever got on a MP hand.

 

If my partners see this they will never want me to bid.

[luke warm]

hahahahahahaha

[Chamaco]

Well done !

Thanks very much to Ben, Elianna and all the panelists ! :-)

[whereagles]

LOL.. I told you we could never agree on the scores. I think giving 2D 20% is horrible.. lol.

[han]

First hand, and it is already very stimulating. Keep it up!

 

 

My choice is pass btw.

[Fluffy]

Still in the darkness, are we suposed to assume expert opponents and field?.

[luis]

Upside down world :-)

Justin and Me passing with the majority opening and this happened in TWO problems of this set... The world might end soon....

[Guest Jlall]

you know how conservative we are luis :)

[mikestar]

For opening in 4th seat, I use PP as follows:

 

With 16, I open no matter how horrible my hand is.

With 15, I open unless the hand is seriously flawed.

With 14, I open if the hand is very good.

With 13, I only open if it is flawless.

 

This hand is not flawless, with no aces and that doubtful QC. I'd pass. I suspect that this was only 55% because Ben had company passing it out.

 

I once passed out void KQxxx KJxx KQxx (the x's were all quite small--add a couple of 9's and even I wouldn't take so extreme a position) for a cold top--could have been a cold bottom fairly easily, but they figured to have at least nine spades and nearly half the points.

[nemernick]

bid 1D. If part respond ♥ I bid 1NT. If part. bid 1♥ I passing he's respond

[pigpenz]

2♦ showing intermediate values in pass out seat

[JLOGIC]

I still would be tempted to pass this (would depend on opps etc). Am I just underestimating my potential here with 4 hearts and a high card majority? It seems like every time they compete in spades it's bad. I guess this is too pessimistic, we rate to go plus if we buy it, and why shouldn't we buy it? It also lets our play edge/bidding judgement edge factor in. Again, it's a bidders game jlall!