Game try or not?

[mw64ahw]

Playing with a pick-up partner in a conservative group this hand occurred.

Assuming the following MAFIA auction, given North doesn't overcall with a weak 5 card suit, do you make a game try and if so what sort?

[hv=pc=n&w=saqj54htd2ck65432&n=sk92hkj7da8743cj7&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1sp2sp?]266|200[/hv]

Outcomes at the various tables were

N 1NT - This was me although I inadvertently reverted to a NT takeout rather than a standard takeout X after a 1♣ opening. I'm not sure why partner passed!

N 4♦X

W 3♠

 

If you have the tools and want to discuss further South could have opened with a Muiderberg 2♥

[DavidKok]

It's confusing to see the West and North hands at the same time. I would have opened 1♣ with West, fully prepared to bid spades twice (up to 4♠) to show this hand. I'd have liked to have about a queen extra, but shape first.

 

Over a Muiderberg 2♥ I'd bid 2♠ - not strong enough for 3♣ into 3♠ or for 4♣ ('Wereldconventie'/Leaping Michaels).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I am making a game try, you have 65, ..., hopefully I can show club

values or ask for help in club.

 

If South opens 2H (showing hearts + a minor?), I would go with 2S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[sfi]

I've long thought that 5/5 hands should never make a game try. You need specific cards and/or shape and game tries are simply too clunky to sort out the right level. With those hands, I think you either pass or bid game.

 

Here I bid game.

[AL78]

I'd make a game try, a long suit trial bid in clubs. The thing that puts me off bidding game immediately (pretending I can't see the North hand) is that I hold two red singletons, the opps hold over half the HCP, yet they have said nothing. That to me increases the chance the hands do not fit together well (i.e. partner holds useless honors in the reds and a club shortage).

 

I'd bid 2S over a Muiderberg 2H.

[LBengtsson]

It's confusing to see the West and North hands at the same time. I would have opened 1♣ with West, fully prepared to bid spades twice (up to 4♠) to show this hand. I'd have liked to have about a queen extra, but shape first.

 

Over a Muiderberg 2♥ I'd bid 2♠ - not strong enough for 3♣ into 3♠ or for 4♣ ('Wereldconventie'/Leaping Michaels).

 

agree. length before strength. if this hand was not a opener but a overcallers hand I would look at it as 5/5 given weakness in ♣ suit and be confident to use Ghestem here. as a opening hand, bidding the 5M ♠ suit first as that is what you told just changes the shape from 6♣/5♠ to 5♠+/4♣+ depending on your rebid.

[Winstonm]

I need a 9-card fit to make game a decent bet so I would not bid again over a single raise.

[mikeh]

The silence of the opponents, when we have minimal high card/defensive values and partner can’t do more than 2S suggests a smooth pass.

 

Why you showed north’s hand is a mystery. What possible relevance does it have with respect to the decision opener has to make, other than (by showing the spade holding) you might bias people into bidding, since we now ‘know’ that spades split, the finesse works, and partner’s values are outside of spades, thus a little more likely (than when we lack this information) to help us in clubs.

 

I assume this is mps, if only because MAFIA is a hopeless method at imps, where accurate shape bidding matters and minor suit contracts have significant utility. So making a game try is even less attractive than it would be at imps.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&w=saqj54htd2ck65432&n=sk92hkj7da8743cj7&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1sp2sp?]266|200|mw64ahw 'Playing with a pick-up partner in a conservative group this hand occurred. Assuming the following MAFIA auction, given North doesn't overcall with a weak 5 card suit, do you make a game try and if so what sort? Outcomes at the various tables were:

N 1NT - This was me although I inadvertently reverted to a NT takeout rather than a standard takeout X after a 1♣ opening. I'm not sure why partner passed!

N 4♦X

W 3♠

If you have the tools and want to discuss further South could have opened with a Muiderberg 2♥

+++++++++++++++++++++

In A f2f game, IMO, it's ethically OK to take advantage of RHO showing you his hand.

At IMPs, 4♠ seems to accord with the odds.[/hv]

[mw64ahw]

Both 4♠ & 4♣ makes as does 3♦ for NS

 

In retrospect I think the direct 4♠ is the correct bid although a reverse help/long suit game try will be fruitful with East having AQ9

 

I think if I was happy to bid 4♠ directly over the raise I would also be tempted with leaping Michaels (assuming partner understanding) based on distributional strength over a 2♥ opening

 

I included the North hand as an explanation for my 1NT bid (which strangely ended up being a top as I made +1 against the odds)

 

And MAFIA or not - still open for debate

[DavidKok]

It's a classic debate - you hold 6m5M, which do you open? I have my own partnership agreements on them and like them a lot - they focus on "do you have a sensible bid over the opponents' 4oM?". If you hold spades this is almost never an issue.

[johnu]

A quick and dirty simulation showed that 4♠ made a little under 40%. 4 card spade support and/or a maximum 2♠ response brought the make percentage above 50%. At matchpoints, you want 50+% to bid game. At IMPs, IMP odds favor bidding less than 50% vul, but this hand could get ugly with a bad split in the black suits.

 

I would make a long suit game try in clubs.

[mw64ahw]

A quick and dirty simulation showed that 4♠ made a little under 40%. 4 card spade support and/or a maximum 2♠ response brought the make percentage above 50%. At matchpoints, you want 50+% to bid game. At IMPs, IMP odds favor bidding less than 50% vul, but this hand could get ugly with a bad split in the black suits.

 

I would make a long suit game try in clubs.

Makes sense and gets you closer to the 63% DD probability I have.

[mw64ahw]

It's a classic debate - you hold 6m5M, which do you open? I have my own partnership agreements on them and like them a lot - they focus on "do you have a sensible bid over the opponents' 4oM?". If you hold spades this is almost never an issue.

Yep - if you switch from one approach to another it means a revamping of whatever partnership agreements you have which would be my issue if I moved to showing the ♣s first which incidentally was how I started playing even when 55.

I now like having certainty on major suit lengths, but it would be interesting to consider whether a 7 card ♠ fit at the 2 level performs better or worse than say an 8/9 card fit in ♣ at the 2/3 level. The plus side in MAFIA is that when you have a longer minor suit the likelihood of a major 8 card fit increases.

When opener is non-Minimum or responder has a limit+ hand I'm less likely to end up in the wrong contract.

[DavidKok]

I'm more than happy to give up ever playing this hand on the 2-level if instead partner knows what to do on the 5-level.

[mikeh]

Yep - if you switch from one approach to another it means a revamping of whatever partnership agreements you have which would be my issue if I moved to showing the ♣s first which incidentally was how I started playing even when 55.

I now like having certainty on major suit lengths, but it would be interesting to consider whether a 7 card ♠ fit at the 2 level performs better or worse than say an 8/9 card fit in ♣ at the 2/3 level. The plus side in MAFIA is that when you have a longer minor suit the likelihood of a major 8 card fit increases.

When opener is non-Minimum or responder has a limit+ hand I'm less likely to end up in the wrong contract.

I don’t understand this last point.

 

It is precisely when either or both opener and responder have some extra values (such that games or slams are in the picture) that accurate shape bidding is so important

 

Game and slam bidding are more important at imps than at match points, because the swing from being in the wrong contract is much larger than being in the wrong partial.

 

I think it impossible, on a theoretical as well as practical basis, to ever accurately describe 5M 6m hands if one starts with the major. So you open, say, 1S and partner bids 1N. No matter how many times you then bid your minor, you are never showing a longer minor…you bid the minor twice, if you are permitted to do so, and you could be 5-5 or 6-5 or 6-6 etc.

 

You open a minor and bid your major twice…bingo! You’ve shown 5-6 (or wilder, but definitely 5M and longer minor)

 

It’s even more compelling when partner responds 2/1.

 

Even if you beIieve that 1S 2D 3C doesn’t promise extras, good luck finding your 6-2 or most of your 6-3 minor suit slams (or games)

 

I may well be mistaken but I don’t recall seeing any WC pair playing MAFIA.

 

At mps, the method makes considerably more sense.

 

A major contract taking 9 tricks out scores a minor contract taking 10 tricks. At imps there is no difference in score but the gain at mps may be immense.

 

Also 1M has a significant preemptive effect

 

Plus if one finds a raise right away, in the major, the defence is often left in the dark about opener’s shape and may misdefend.

 

I’m an imp player at heart as are, from what I’ve seen, the majority of the best players in the world. Plus trying to play two very different methods, when I play virtually no matchpoints, isn’t worth it.

[Gilithin]

I think it impossible, on a theoretical as well as practical basis, to ever accurately describe 5M 6m hands if one starts with the major.

Impossible? Not at all - it's perfectly possible when using a relay method. But natural bidding assumes bidding naturally, so of course if you choose to bid your hand unnaturally, it is automatically going to be a distortion.

 

I may well be mistaken but I don’t recall seeing any WC pair playing MAFIA.

Auken-Welland perhaps? There are also some Moscito pairs around who I think can be described as WC but I cannot remember the names. As before, relays help.

[mikeh]

Impossible? Not at all - it's perfectly possible when using a relay method. But natural bidding assumes bidding naturally, so of course if you choose to bid your hand unnaturally, it is automatically going to be a distortion.

 

 

Auken-Welland perhaps? There are also some Moscito pairs around who I think can be described as WC but I cannot remember the names. As before, relays help.

Certainly relay helps, but generally speaking responder needs a gf hand in order to relay. Plus I suspect that including 5-6 M-m hands would significantly raise the level of the auction when showing that shape

 

I’ve played relay. Starting, as we did, with 1D in response to 1C, kept the auction much lower, on the wild shape hands, than did our 2C response to 1M. I know some pairs respond 1N to 1M as their gf relay, but that saves very little space.

 

I may be mistaken but I don’t think Aiken -Welland, undeniably WC, play MAFIA.heck, they include 5332 hands, long major, in their 1C opening!

[mw64ahw]

I don't understand this last point.

I think I was trying to say there can be misfit hands whichever way you open if there is no GF response and that when responder isn't weak or opener has more than a minimum then there's not much difference between 2♠ & 3♣. (I play a 'Gazzilli type' 2♣)

Yes if you open 1♣ there is an easy 2♣ rebid, but that may underscore 2♠ with a 5-2/3 fit. I think that when responder is weak its swings and roundabouts, but when responder is GF it shouldn't be an issue with either approach with good continuations.

[Gilithin]

Certainly relay helps, but generally speaking responder needs a gf hand in order to relay. Plus I suspect that including 5-6 M-m hands would significantly raise the level of the auction when showing that shape

Your earlier point was that showing the 5-6 shape was more important in game and slam auctions than for partials so yes, I was assuming we have enough for game. The level is much less than you might think - if you treat 5-6 as a single hand type you basically just raise a single hand type by 1 step. In a symmetric structure using 2♠ for 2-suiters, that might use 3♠ to show a 6-5 hand. Including a step for 5-6 would raise this to 3NT instead.

 

 

I’ve played relay. Starting, as we did, with 1D in response to 1C, kept the auction much lower, on the wild shape hands, than did our 2C response to 1M. I know some pairs respond 1N to 1M as their gf relay, but that saves very little space.

One step makes really quite a lot of difference, say from 55 hand types up to 76. The difficulty is always getting the extra space for the relays without killing your part score bidding.

 

I may be mistaken but I don’t think Aiken -Welland, undeniably WC, play MAFIA.heck, they include 5332 hands, long major, in their 1C opening!

I don't have a copy of their system but my understanding was that they generally open a 4 card major before a 5 card minor and I am all but certain they open a 5 card major before a 6 card minor. Treating all 5332 hands as balanced seems quite reasonable to me in such a framework.

[Gilithin]

I think I was trying to say there can be misfit hands whichever way you open if there is no GF response and that when responder isn't weak or opener has more than a minimum then there's not much difference between 2♠ & 3♣. (I play a 'Gazzilli type' 2♣)

Yes if you open 1♣ there is an easy 2♣ rebid, but that may underscore 2♠ with a 5-2/3 fit. I think that when responder is weak its swings and roundabouts, but when responder is GF it shouldn't be an issue with either approach with good continuations.

What you wrote is that when Opener has extras and Responder does not have an immediate GF, you are more likely to end up in the correct contract. What everyone else is trying to point out to you is that on such a hand Opener will bid 1♣ followed by 1♠ and 2♠ giving an extremely good picture of their hand, making it unlikely that the wrong contract will be reached. Meanwhile after a 1♠ opening Responder will never believe that the clubs are longer so the chances of ending in the wrong strain increase greatly. There are compensations to opening the major first on some auctions but this is not one of those.