Interesting bridge evening

[AL78]

Not so much about a hand, as about the whole evening. Played in the club Christmas evening (bridge plus food) yesterday evening, aggregate scoring.

 

Did well the first two rounds, then the massive bias set in. Went the following eight rounds playing just one contract. Had game after game bid against us, then found no more than half the room had biud it on some of them. Got a cold slam bid against us that less than half the room bid (and one went off in, despite 13 tricks being available).

 

We were on -2140 points hal;f way through and second to last. On the last two rounds, the bias relented and we crawled backl to third place with -1090.

 

At the end of the evening:

 

NS scores:

 

+3730, +3080, +3070, +2160, +2100, +2070, +1630, +930, +800, +190, -360

 

EW scores:

 

+340, -580, -1090, -1160, -1550, -1650, -1900, -2360, -2710, -2940, -3800

 

My average HCP count: 8.73

 

This is one reason why partner and I have sruggled in the cross-imped monthly competition this year, because we seem to get poor hands disproportionately often, and as a result, are frequently at the mercy of the opponents bidding games and slams not commonly bid around the room.

 

Comment from one player "I'm going to avoid sitting in the same seat as you in future, you seem to attract the poor hands." :lol:

[dsLawsd]

Tragically funny! The usual secret at IMP Pairs is to defend for your life. But total points seems to skew things too much against accurate bidding opponents. That situation seems to argue for using some kind of Howell movement to keep the pairs moving.

 

Some software somewhere should analyze this further! And may 2020 bring you better hands or "worser" opponents!!

[hrothgar]

Couple questions / comments:

 

1. What percentage of the total number of boards that were in play did your partnership end up playing? You say that you averages 8.73 HCPs for the evening. I have to believe that a whole bunch of other folks were also dealt those same cards.

 

2. If you and your partner are consistently getting bad scores because the opponents are reaching good games and slams that the rest of the field isn't finding, then you're probably not being aggressive enough in the bidding. I'm guessing that you need to preempt more or take more sacrifices. (You can have an occasional bad night because you got unlucky, but if this happens all the time then you're probably doing something wrong)

[AL78]

Couple questions / comments:

 

1. What percentage of the total number of boards that were in play did your partnership end up playing? You say that you averages 8.73 HCPs for the evening. I have to believe that a whole bunch of other folks were also dealt those same cards.

 

2. If you and your partner are consistently getting bad scores because the opponents are reaching good games and slams that the rest of the field isn't finding, then you're probably not being aggressive enough in the bidding. I'm guessing that you need to preempt more or take more sacrifices. (You can have an occasional bad night because you got unlucky, but if this happens all the time then you're probably doing something wrong)

 

1. Yes, the other EW pairs were dealt the same cards, that is why almost all the EW scores were negative. Together we declared eight times (partner 5, me 3). My partner had slightly above average HCP overall (10.23).

 

2. I don't think my lack of pre-empting aggression is the problem, though I will look into it and put a few hands up where opps bid game/slam not commonly bid around the room.

[AL78]

Having looked through the X-IMP pairs evenings there are few examples of significant swings out that were caused by opponents bidding games/slams not bid around the room, the swings were our fault (I can't remember what went wrong). I have found one good example of an evening where getting a good score would have been a struggle. Here are two hands from the same X-IMPs evening:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s982hj42dqt93cqt3&w=sakqjht7d74ca8764&n=s3haq98dj8652ck95&e=st7654hk653dakcj2]399|300[/hv]

 

EW bid to 4S. -5.2 imps for NS. Two other pairs making 4♠, the other two pairs stopped in a spade partscore.

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=st9862hkt73d84cqj&w=shaj8dqjt962ck964&n=skj754h954dk73ct8&e=saq3hq62da5ca7532]399|300[/hv]

 

EW bid to 6NT just making for -8.8 imps for NS. The other scores were 5♣+2, 6♣+1, 3NT+3, 3NT+1.

[AL78]

A different evening:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqhk95dqjt6cak862&w=sk4hq8732d75cq754&n=saj963haj4dak4cj3&e=st8752ht6d9832ct9]399|300[/hv]

 

We were EW this time. NS bid to 6NT making for -7.8 IMPS to us. Two pairs bid the slam, three pairs stopped in 3NT.

[AL78]

The Christmas party:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa5ht84dcaqj97652&w=sjt98hq532dk93c43&n=sq2hakjdqjt875ck8&e=sk7643h976da642ct]399|300[/hv]

 

NS bid to 6♣ making for -1370 added to our aggregate. Four other pairs made a slam, the other six stopped in game.

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqt2hk7d84caq9752&w=sj93hjt85dakt6cj4&n=sa5ha942dj7532ckt&e=sk8764hq63dq9c863]399|300[/hv]

 

Another -600 on our aggregate score. Only one other pair out of 10 found the game, one EW got +800 when NS ended up in 5DX-3. Why couldn't we have played against that pair? :lol:

[akwoo]

Meh - this is what happens when you play pairs in fields where half the pairs aren't very good. Playing X-IMPs or total points just makes it worse.

 

You're probably coming out first well more than 1/n of the times (n being the size of the field) - and you're probably not remembering the good results when the opps gift you something. It's part of playing pairs.

[FelicityR]

I saw a sign in one of our village shops that I hadn't noticed before while walking the dog yesterday evening: SHUT HAPPENS

 

I can only sympathise with if you are 'shut' out of the bidding by the opponents' bidding and then them getting good results: SHUT HAPPENS AT THE BRIDGE TABLE TOO :)

[AL78]

I saw a sign in one of our village shops that I hadn't noticed before while walking the dog yesterday evening: SHUT HAPPENS

 

I can only sympathise with if you are 'shut' out of the bidding by the opponents' bidding and then them getting good results: SHUT HAPPENS AT THE BRIDGE TABLE TOO :)

 

I can accept it happening occasionally, it is just odd that it happens as frequently as it does (i.e. it doesn't happen occasionally, it happens frequently), sometimes to the point where we would have to play near perfectly on the other boards just to get a slightly above average result.

 

The only thing partner and I can do is work on where we are dropping tricks on the card play, declaring and defending.

[Vampyr]

Aggregate scores or IMPs in a pair game is just a crap shoot. At least the game whose scores you gave wasn’t a single-winner movement with an arrow-switch! I don’t know whether this is a bigger randomiser than an IMP Howell, which I have also had the misfortune of playing in.

[AL78]

Aggregate scores or IMPs in a pair game is just a crap shoot. At least the game whose scores you gave wasn’t a single-winner movement with an arrow-switch! I don’t know whether this is a bigger randomiser than an IMP Howell, which I have also had the misfortune of playing in.

 

Almost all the X-IMP evenings are single winner events, which makes it really annoying if you are on the wrong side of the slam hands. You are right in that there is a lot of randomness, but the strongest pair in the room somehow manage to overcome this and regularly finish top, or in the top three at least. I'll have to do a card comparison and see what they are doing that my partner and I are not.

[AL78]

I nearly forgot this ridiculous hand:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saq72h53dj764ckq3&w=sk983haj94dak3ca9&n=s654hkq76dt2c8542&e=sjtht82dq985cjt76]399|300[/hv]

 

This was against the strongest pair playing 5 card majors, strong NT (I think, one of the only pairs playing a strong NT). I can't remember the auction but South opened 1♣ I think, my partner doubled, and we ended up in 2♦ just making for -10.4 imps out. Everyone else is opening the South hand a weak NT and getting into a terrible mess, going hundreds down. The winners that evening got +1700 and 15.4 imps for taking NS down in 3♥X. You have to laugh. :lol: