To bid or not to bid part 2

[bluenikki]

Anyone can make up hands to fit what they want to do. Bridge is a game of probabilities, and the odds are that partner does NOT have a magic layout.

 

I am not a fan of double dummy simulations in most situations. We don’t (at least I don’t) play double dummy but even more importantly such simulations are heavily dependent upon the constraints. However, this sort of situation likely does lend itself to a simulation.

 

You’d have to design the constraints to exclude hands where partner would have bid, and for what rho considers a 1S opening.

 

You’d also need to look at each hand and decide how the auction would go were you to overcall, and that’s very difficult to do once one knows the cards: there is a tendency to let one’s prior beliefs influence one’s views.

 

However, such an approach is infinitely better than sitting down and coming up wupith hands that make one’s preferred bidding work well,

 

You did not say you probably don't have a game.

 

You said you were "very unlikely" to have a game.

 

Yes a 7-hcp must be carefully constructed. That does not mean a 10-hcp must. On the contrary.

[PhilG007]

Are you suggesting that further developments might bring you in at the THREE level?

 

I'm suggesting caution. I 'm suggesting not putting your head on the block and maybe

suffering a whacking penalty.. "Fools rush in........"

[Cyberyeti]

You did not say you probably don't have a game.

 

You said you were "very unlikely" to have a game.

 

Yes a 7-hcp must be carefully constructed. That does not mean a 10-hcp must. On the contrary.

 

I don't know about Mike but a 10 count 5431 with no points in the 1 we open, also in 1st seat we open an awful lot of hands at the 2 level, indeed at other vuls we would open the actual hand in this post.

[mikeh]

I don't know about Mike but a 10 count 5431 with no points in the 1 we open, also in 1st seat we open an awful lot of hands at the 2 level, indeed at other vuls we would open the actual hand in this post.

We don’t open balanced 10 counts. We will sometimes open distributional 10 counts, but vulnerability, location of the hcp, and so on, all play a role.

 

As for the comment that implies that we will frequently have games opposite random 10 counts, that made me laugh out loud when I read it. Can we have a game opposite some less-than likely 10 counts, with which we would not have opened? Of course, but bidding on the assumption that this is sufficiently likely to offset the risks reflects the sort of ‘reasoning’ that makes lotteries so successful, for those selling the tickets.