[wyman]

Sorry!! Problem 1 already posted in another thread. No need to reinvent the wheel. Thanks Phil for pointing this out.

2) w/w MP

P - (1D) - P - (1N)
??

Do you X with:
Q9xx / AQxx / Kxx / 97

What if it was:
K9xx / AQxx / Qxx / 97

[Phil]

1. I think we need to increase our pool of players in BBF. Already on record for a low diamond.

2. I don't bid on either but easy to see how it might be right. I'm probably too conservative in these low-level "non" fit auctions.

[rogerclee]

I would x, pretty surprised Phil, who I thought was even more aggro than me about competing at nv MP, would pass.

[Fluffy]

all white this is a 2♦ bid

[kfay]

Fluffy, on May 10 2010, 01:26 PM, said:

all white this is a 2♦ bid

[mohitz]

Definitely X with the second one. With the first one, also perhaps

[gwnn]

I think the second one is worse for doubling than the first one, queens in opponent's suits are almost never good, kings can be OK. the Ace can be in RHO's hand and then we're fine but for the Q to be good we need either AK in RHO or the K/J in CHO hand, not very good.

[pooltuna]

wyman, on May 10 2010, 12:31 PM, said:

Sorry!! Problem 1 already posted in another thread. No need to reinvent the wheel. Thanks Phil for pointing this out.

2) w/w MP

P - (1D) - P - (1N)
??

Do you X with:
Q9xx / AQxx / Kxx / 97

What if it was:
K9xx / AQxx / Qxx / 97

The auction is completely wrong as it should be 1♦ (P) P (1NT) and no I don't reopen with a double

[mohitz]

gwnn, on May 11 2010, 12:31 AM, said:

I think the second one is worse for doubling than the first one, queens in opponent's suits are almost never good, kings can be OK. the Ace can be in RHO's hand and then we're fine but for the Q to be good we need either AK in RHO or the K/J in CHO hand, not very good.

I look at it the other way - K9xx in spades is better than Q9xx in spades.

[nigel_k]

K9xx of spades and Qxx of diamonds is better than the other one when defending. The difference between the two is much less when declaring so the first hand is a better one to act on. I would X on both but it is close.

[mohitz]

Interesting. I thought the more concentrated values we have in majors, the better it is to bid on since, they might be useful in offense but not in defense.

I think a simulation might be helpful here. Btw, are there any guides and/or code to assist in doing a simulation. I might try.

[gwnn]

If we're declaring it's not so important *which* trump honours we have, just how many. So changing Q of spades to the K is not a big improvement, but changing Q of diamonds to the K is.

[andy_h]

I think you must open the first hand especially 1st seat nv at matchpoints.

[bluecalm]

I open both. If I can't open them I double with both. I think passing 1NT at MP's is terrible.

[BunnyGo]

If I could ask about the continuation to this auction as it happened. What do you do here?:

P-(1♦)-P-(1NT);
X-(P)-2♣-(X);
?

[mikeh]

I am comfortable passing both hands and don't think it close. However, I'd be happy playing a 1N range that treated these as openers, since my hand would be limited, which it wouldn't be if I opened 1♣ (I prefer 1♣ with 4=4=3=2) or 1♦.

As it is, having passed, I double 1N w/w or w/r at mps and under no other circumstances.

One of the theoretical justifications for weak 1N openings is that when the values are relatively even, between the two sides, the pair that gets to 1N first usually wins. This means that we are slated, usually, for a poor board if we pass out 1N. Doubling may turn a poor board into a terrible one, but will often turn a poor board into a good one (or at least closer to average).

Of course, if LHO has a big hand, we may be heading for disaster either because he can set up a penalty or because they will be able to play the hand double-dummy. But this is a game of frequency of gain/loss, not size.

[mikegill]

I think it's losing bridge to pass a 4-4 majors 11-count 1st all white at MPs. Now I've given myself a guess, so I guess I would double and since letting them play 1N at all white matchpoints just sounds like a terrible idea.

[655321]

I would have opened both hands NV, but I wouldn't say that passing was wrong. Agree with double of 1NT now.

Now I could easily be talked into redoubling, on the assumption that the opponents have got it right, and therefore anything else (2♦, 2M in a 4-3) is likely to be better than 2♣X. This could be very wrong if 2♣ was our last reasonable contract though!

[andy_h]

Oh yeah definitely open both. Thought the second one was a ten count and was wondering why it should be opened. Although I'm not a light opener myself, some good players have suggested to me that it is paramount to open these hands NV at matchpoints and the first seat status makes it even better. Reasons, not just confined to these ones only, were that it's good to initiate the bidding to put the opponents on defensive bidding and locating your fit quickly. Both hands have two four card majors so I'm happy to open them.