How do people jump straight to slams

[pescetom]

When you know you have a double fit (here ♥ and ♠), then the law of total tricks implies that opponents also have a fit (here ♦), if they aren't already aware of that fit, then we might be able to pre-empt them out of finding it. Cue-bididng etc might allow opponents to compete. Anyway, the information from further exploration might be less useful to us than to them. In such contexts, Hugh Kelsey labelled a slow approach "Daisy Picking". Hence, here, there is a case for fast arrival in a likely game or slam.

Does the law of total tricks have anything to say about a double fit rather than our longest fit in a single suit? Knowing that we have a double major fit I can see that it is probable that the opponents have a minor fit, but I think that holding these suits and these hands it still makes a lot of sense to exploit our slow arrival systems to the full, and good luck to the opponents if they want to compete in their minor - at most they are going to stop us finding the right level of slam, which a resort to fast arrival is going to reduce to guesswork anyway.

[nige1]

Does the law of total tricks have anything to say about a double fit rather than our longest fit in a single suit?

AFAIR, yes. A double-fit increases ODR (offence/defence ratio).

Knowing that we have a double major fit I can see that it is probable that the opponents have a minor fit, but I think that holding these suits and these hands it still makes a lot of sense to exploit our slow arrival systems to the full, and good luck to the opponents if they want to compete in their minor - at most they are going to stop us finding the right level of slam, which a resort to fast arrival is going to reduce to guesswork anyway.

With this North Hand, 7♥ is an excellent contract. Had North a similar shape but fewer points, then 7♦ might have been a cheap sacrifice against 6♥. In general, it's a matter of judgement but, on some hands, not necessarily this one, it's sensible to jump to slam.

[akwoo]

Does the law of total tricks have anything to say about a double fit rather than our longest fit in a single suit?

 

Yes - having a second fit adds one to total tricks, with the caveat that, when total trick count gets above 20 or so, it's quite frequent for one side to have "12 tricks (on a friendly lead)" but be off 2 aces off the top.

[akwoo]

One is that he claims to be unable to count to 9 tricks....

 

or he is an unfortunate person utterly lacking talent for a game he enjoys. In the former case, he bores me. In the latter case, I feel a little sorry for hm.

 

There was a post on bridgewinners a while back about a hand from a just declare tournament - where you were in 3N, with 13 clear tricks off any lead (though you have to be a little careful not to block a suit), and 20% of players didn't take 13 tricks.

 

And about the last comment - by your estimation, most of my club, or just about any club, lacks talent for bridge. There's a reason that I average about 60% in BBO free daylongs, and about 45% in the Sunday forum daylongs.

 

Please - respect the skill of the average player for what it is - which is that it is miles better than someone who always cashes aces off the top at defense, even if it's still miles worse than the skill of expert or world class players.

[akwoo]

I minimize those chances by playing well. You?

 

Apparently you've never played in a field so weak that preempting is always a bad idea, and any sort of sacrificing worse, because opponents will always find ways of either missing their game or setting themselves? (Okay, admittedly, this wasn't a sanctioned game, and I was playing in it only as a favor to fill out a table.)

[diana_eva]

Apparently you've never played in a field so weak that preempting is always a bad idea, and any sort of sacrificing worse, because opponents will always find ways of either missing their game or setting themselves? (Okay, admittedly, this wasn't a sanctioned game, and I was playing in it only as a favor to fill out a table.)

 

A bit off topic but years ago there was a weekly BBO juniors tournament, and then some regular BIL tournaments. I played the juniors tourney (wild bidding, crazy preempts, as you can imagine) and hopped straight to the BIL game. On the last hand I had a pretty big score and a tough decision on whether to bid grand slam or not with an enormous hand and very basic slam investigation tools with my beginner partner. All of a sudden it dawned on me that these aren't juniors, nobody's going to be in grand here. So I settled for the small slam. It was something like 90%, only two or three people bid slam at all, while a good chunk of the field didnt even reach game. I think it was the first time in my bridge life when I realized it matters what the strength of the field is.