[kiwinacol]

Hello all, I'm looking at a system (a variety of tWalsh) where the ability to play in a D suit at the 2L is abandoned in preference to strengthening description of possible major suit fits.

Someone may have access to data or a table that answers these questions please? How often is a contract played in 2D compared to other 2 level contracts? Where a 8+ D fit exists, how often is the contract not in D's?

many thanks, Ash.

[The_Badger]

Hello Ash,

Apologies for not being able to answer your question directly, but as an advanced player you recognise that the 2♦ auction bid is slowly going the way of the 2♣ auction bid, more conventional than final contract.

It's perhaps strange to look at opening bids, as opposed to auction bids, but a 2♦ opening bid has been well and truly hijacked for conventional purposes, so the propensity of ended up in a 2♦ contract has diminished over the years. In auctions too, 2♦ has become a more conventional tool. So just looking at these base facts, I believe you are statistically less likely to end up in a 2♣ or 2♦ contract when others are available.

The fashion for Inverted Minors too have also prevented 2♣ or 2♦ contracts from being played.

And with favourable shape and vulnerability, few opponents will leave a 2♣ or 2♦ contract to play, and will invariably balance knowing there is a good possibility of a 4-4 major suit fit for themselves.

Good luck with your bridge

[msjennifer]

A contract of 2D is possible theoretically,
A Flannery 2D opening is passed by his partner.An Acol strong 2D is passed.
A 2D multi opening is passed by responder.An inverted 1D-2D is passed out.A 2D transfer bid is passed by 1NT opener.
A Precision 2D opening is passed .So also if aBlue Club 2D opening is passed out. There may be a few more but in actual practise the opponents will always try to push you to three level.

[Left2Right]

The late Barry Crane is quoted as saying "Two diamonds is always the wrong contract... for one side or the other." You or the opponents have a NT or major suit contract available or they are letting you wallow in a part score when you have some game available.

This is probably part of the impetus to abandon the final two diamond contract in favor of something more lucrative.

[Stefan_O]

 kiwinacol, on 2016-August-07, 17:50, said:

How often is a contract played in 2D compared to other 2 level contracts? Where a 8+ D fit exists, how often is the contract not in D's?

Seems one would need some context to even start answering these questions...

Do you mean, double-dummy-analysis par-contracts?

Or if you are talking about real play... what data-samples?
World-champion matches or club-level competitions?
IMP or MP?
Or random deals played by 4 humans on BBO with zero at stake (where people frequently do the must ridiculous things -- then just closes or leaves the table when it goes to hell)?
Etc...

I would guess you may get quite different statistics depending on these input assumptions...

[Stefan_O]

Also, for you purposes, it does not seem very important how often 2D is played...

You should rather look at how often 2D is played AND it gives you a decent result AND there is no other contract you can land with a better or equally good result, shouldn't you?

[kiwinacol]

Hello to all who replied. Your responses were appreciated and made me realise my questions were too general. Stefan_O. If the sample or simulation is large enough I though your requirements wouldn't matter as much. I was thinking of tables I've seen sometime ago (and they were from the Far Eastern Championships) where the stats were for opening weak 1NT and short 1D, and Diamond contracts were compared. More than that I can't remember. The player was reflecting that they felt they had done OK with the Precision 1D opener, but in fact the data did not support that. Thanks all. Ash.

[kiwinacol]

Hello all, although I scanned Richard Havlicek's site I missed the appropriate stats area he provided. He replied the answer to my first question is at: http://www.rpbridge.net/9y37.htm, and my second: "A check of my major event database (80,138 results) showed: Spades longest fit, contract in another suit: 573 Hearts longest fit, contract in another suit: 730 Diams longest fit, contract in another suit: 2368 Clubs longest fit, contract in another suit: 2513 To be counted, the fit had to be clear longest (not tied) and all notrump contracts were excluded."

[Kaitlyn S]

 Stefan_O, on 2016-August-08, 15:10, said:

Also, for you purposes, it does not seem very important how often 2D is played...

You should rather look at how often 2D is played AND it gives you a decent result AND there is no other contract you can land with a better or equally good result, shouldn't you?

Don't you also have to figure in how horrid of a spot you have to play in when you want to play 2D and can't?

[Kaitlyn S]

 msjennifer, on 2016-August-08, 09:54, said:

A contract of 2D is possible theoretically,
A Flannery 2D opening is passed by his partner.An Acol strong 2D is passed.
A 2D multi opening is passed by responder.An inverted 1D-2D is passed out.A 2D transfer bid is passed by 1NT opener.
A Precision 2D opening is passed .So also if aBlue Club 2D opening is passed out. There may be a few more but in actual practise the opponents will always try to push you to three level.

Many of these are absurd. However 2D is frequently played in a partnership auction 1C-1D-1H-2D (or 1D-1H-2D!) where the opponents have no safety balancing and you may be on a misfit.

Other common auctions ending in 2D:

1S-1NT-2D
1S (1NT overcall) 2D
1H Dbl P 2D
1C 1S P 2D (NF)
1H 1S Dbl P 2D
I'm sure there are others.

[kiwinacol]

Thanks Kaitlyn, most of those sequences also don't apply. For the tWalsh I was considering transfers over 1C and what I might suffer (e.g. ability to rest in 2 diamonds and a lesser degree 2C's) if the majority of bids focused on the majors, at the expense of minor suit description. RP's data suggests less than 3 in 100 hands are played in 2C and 2D. This % includes both offensive and defensive bidding and makes me more comfortable with his slightly different tWalsh method. I also liked BCrane's quote from left2right "Two diamonds is always the wrong contract... for one side or the other."

[kenrexford]

The other night, partner opened 1S and my RHO doubled. I redoubled. My LHO bid 2C, passed to me. I bid 2D, the final contract. The whole table was amazed. LOL

[Stefan_O]

 kenrexford, on 2016-August-14, 04:38, said:

The other night, partner opened 1S and my RHO doubled. I redoubled. My LHO bid 2C, passed to me. I bid 2D, the final contract. The whole table was amazed. LOL

Didnt get it, sorry... what were they amazed about?

[FrancesHinden]

Most (many? some?) versions of T-Walsh and continuations allow you to play in 2D when responder has a weak hand with 5+ diamonds and opener has a weak NT. You usually can't find 2D in a 4-4 fit, but I've not found that to be much of a loss.

What exactly are you looking to play such that this is impossible?


[edited to remove the !Ds referred to below]

[Stefan_O]

 FrancesHinden, on 2016-August-14, 09:06, said:

...allow you to play in 2!D ...

Why do I see this annoying "!" in the bid denom?
(Noticed the same somewhere else, too...)

Is that some software-incompatibility between different browsers or what?

[Stephen Tu]

 Stefan_O, on 2016-August-14, 15:10, said:

Why do I see this annoying "!" in the bid denom?
(Noticed the same somewhere else, too...)

Is that some software-incompatibility between different browsers or what?

It's because in BBO program itself, and some other bridge forums, you use '!' before a C/D/H/S to put in a suit symbol. But here on BBO forum one needs to use

[cl][di][he][sp]

to do that. People do the ! out of habit from elsewhere. Could be argued that the maintainers of this forum should change the notation to allow the alternate way of entering suit symbol.

I actually don't like using suit symbols at all, it's harder to put in special characters when posting from mobile devices, and it makes it harder to search for specific auctions on the forum using google. I don't feel it significantly improves post legibility vs. just using C/D/H/S.

[Stefan_O]

 Stephen Tu, on 2016-August-14, 15:43, said:

It's because in BBO program itself, and some other bridge forums, you use '!' before a C/D/H/S to put in a suit symbol. But here on BBO forum one needs to use

[cl][di][he][sp]

to do that. People do the ! out of habit from elsewhere. Could be argued that the maintainers of this forum should change the notation to allow the alternate way of entering suit symbol.

I actually don't like using suit symbols at all, it's harder to put in special characters when posting from mobile devices, and it makes it harder to search for specific auctions on the forum using google. I don't feel it significantly improves post legibility vs. just using C/D/H/S.

I see, thanks.

Maybe least disruptive solution would be, BBO forum could accept both notations.
Would there be any conflicts/ambiguities from this?

[fromageGB]

1!D meaning 1♦ is of course not to be confused with 1C 1D! where the exclamation mark confers an artificiality, such as a bid showing hearts. This is another common and perhaps confusing usage.

[fromageGB]

Yes, certainly I imagine most treatments of twalsh allow you to end in 2♦ when you have a weakish hand with 5+ diamonds opposite a weak NT, and there are many ways of getting to 2♦ otherwise, but I think the OP is about giving up the option of playing in a 4-4 diamond fit at the two level in an unopposed auction for the sake of some perceived benefit. Is it worth it? For me, as it seems to be with Frances, it is. The figures in kiwinacol's post#11 indicate this may be common. If that 2♦ may be put to some other use, NT is often a superior or at least acceptable alternative contract.

[Zelandakh]

 Stephen Tu, on 2016-August-14, 15:43, said:

I actually don't like using suit symbols at all, it's harder to put in special characters when posting from mobile devices, and it makes it harder to search for specific auctions on the forum using google. I don't feel it significantly improves post legibility vs. just using C/D/H/S.

Perhaps that is because you are a native English speaker. Over here the suits are T/K/C/P, so 2C means 2♥ and not 2♣.