[virgosrock]

---

I hovered over 3H, showed 2+S and I wondered and wondered. In retrospect I should have but then 2NT......
Your thoughts?

vrock

[zhasbeen]

virgosrock, on 2017-November-14, 05:08, said:

---

I hovered over 3H, showed 2+S and I wondered and wondered. In retrospect I should have but then 2NT......
Your thoughts?

vrock

common vrock - you gotta pass; not even close. If I was in your seat I'd be hoping I could make 2 before I ever saw the dummy. You were a bit unlucky, however. Not a typical dummy GIB laid down, and Murphy's law was in full force. I swear I only looked at your hand and the bidding before I typed first 2 sentences.

Edit Addition to first reply above:

The more I look at GIB hand, the more interesting it becomes. He has 5 bad spot cards to go with his ace of spaces, no 2nd suit, and 18 hcp. Yet another variation of hand with 6 card major and no convenient rebid. You stand a good chance of never finding a spade fit, and you don't have a 2nd suit. I might rebid 2C with his hand as lesser of evils, but I guess 2NT is as good as anything. Spades aren't good enough for jump rebid to 3 and hand is too strong for 2.

I would pass with your hand, but "not even close" might be a little harsh. At vulnerable imps there might be some good players who would take a shot. Otherwise it's more of a clear pass--at least to me is. As far as you looking for hearts, it wouldn't cross my mind. I would think GIB would have bid them if he had 4, but you never know.

Lets have some more opinions.

[smerriman]

Definitely looks like something is wrong with GIB's definitions here:

3♣: Transfer - 6+ ♦, 2- ♠, 6 HCP
3♦: Transfer - 5+ ♥, 2- ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points
3♥: 2 ♠, 11- HCP, 10-12 total points
3♠: 2 ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points, likely stop in ♠
3NT: 5- ♥, 2- ♠, 8-11 HCP, 12- total points

3♥ should surely be aiming for a 4-4 fit, but the description doesn't even promise a heart.

[zhasbeen]

smerriman, on 2017-November-14, 21:44, said:

Definitely looks like something is wrong with GIB's definitions here:

3♣: Transfer - 6+ ♦, 2- ♠, 6 HCP
3♦: Transfer - 5+ ♥, 2- ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points
3♥: 2 ♠, 11- HCP, 10-12 total points
3♠: 2 ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points, likely stop in ♠
3NT: 5- ♥, 2- ♠, 8-11 HCP, 12- total points

3♥ should surely be aiming for a 4-4 fit, but the description doesn't even promise a heart.

So, does this mean you'd accept 2NT invitation with this flat 7, or would you pass?

[Stephen Tu]

smerriman, on 2017-November-14, 21:44, said:

3♥ should surely be aiming for a 4-4 fit, but the description doesn't even promise a heart.

I don't think there should be bid looking for 44 heart fit, to me 2nt should deny hearts in principle (bid 2h/3h with hearts). Gib is using transfers over this 2nt, I think 3h should show 3 spades and cater to the very weak raise hand.

[virgosrock]

zhasbeen, on 2017-November-14, 16:11, said:

common vrock - you gotta pass; not even close. If I was in your seat I'd be hoping I could make 2 before I ever saw the dummy. You were a bit unlucky, however. Not a typical dummy GIB laid down, and Murphy's law was in full force. I swear I only looked at your hand and the bidding before I typed first 2 sentences.

Edit Addition to first reply above:

The more I look at GIB hand, the more interesting it becomes. He has 5 bad spot cards to go with his ace of spaces, no 2nd suit, and 18 hcp. Yet another variation of hand with 6 card major and no convenient rebid. You stand a good chance of never finding a spade fit, and you don't have a 2nd suit. I might rebid 2C with his hand as lesser of evils, but I guess 2NT is as good as anything. Spades aren't good enough for jump rebid to 3 and hand is too strong for 2.

I would pass with your hand, but "not even close" might be a little harsh. At vulnerable imps there might be some good players who would take a shot. Otherwise it's more of a clear pass--at least to me is. As far as you looking for hearts, it wouldn't cross my mind. I would think GIB would have bid them if he had 4, but you never know.

Lets have some more opinions.

zhas i think you are missing the explanation of 3H. It shows two spades. Has nothing to do with hearts. My question is whether I should bid 3H which shows, again, 2 spades. Whether aggressive or not is a different matter.

vrock

[virgosrock]

smerriman, on 2017-November-14, 21:44, said:

Definitely looks like something is wrong with GIB's definitions here:

3♣: Transfer - 6+ ♦, 2- ♠, 6 HCP
3♦: Transfer - 5+ ♥, 2- ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points
3♥: 2 ♠, 11- HCP, 10-12 total points
3♠: 2 ♠, 6-11 HCP, 12- total points, likely stop in ♠
3NT: 5- ♥, 2- ♠, 8-11 HCP, 12- total points

3♥ should surely be aiming for a 4-4 fit, but the description doesn't even promise a heart.

smerriman, where do you find such detailed explanations? VERY curious. I have not seen such details in previous hyperlinks you have posted.

vrock

[zhasbeen]

virgosrock, on 2017-November-15, 05:31, said:

smerriman, where do you find such detailed explanations? VERY curious. I have not seen such details in previous hyperlinks you have posted.

vrock

Stephen, Merriman; what am I missing? I based my comments on the bidding sequence in the diagram, 1S-P-1NT-2NT. The 2NT shows 17-18 hcp, and invites 3NT. I looked at the square 7 and said it was a clear pass, and later tempered it, saying that I wasn't sure what top players would do vulnerable at imps. It still looks like a clear pass at MP.
I'm not following the definitions discussion (obviously). I just checked the 2NT definition to confirm that it was the 17-18 invite that I would normally assume.

The one answer I still haven't gotten is if you would pass the invitation or bid again. Assuming that you would pass at MP, I am curious if you bid again vulnerable at imps.

Jim "zhasbeen"

[Stephen Tu]

I haven't played enough with GIB to know how light it is bidding 2nt on to make a judgment. If I am playing with human 2nt is more 18-19 than 17-18 and it's auto-accept at any scoring IMO. Vul at imps I'm certainly going. On most hands partner has better spades and the SQ is a big card.

2nt is just a really stupid contract at IMPS. If 2nt was already going down, you only lose extra 1 imp for being in 3. While you gain 10 when you bid and make 3. So it rewards bidding very thin games. You are only truly happy passing 2nt when making exactly 2. So it has to be really wretched before I am going to pass when already in 2.

I open 1nt on 5332 17s unlike GIB, then west passes and I get to play ONE, where the calculus is different from where you are already in 2.

[zhasbeen]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-November-15, 11:54, said:

I haven't played enough with GIB to know how light it is bidding 2nt on to make a judgment. If I am playing with human 2nt is more 18-19 than 17-18 and it's auto-accept at any scoring IMO. Vul at imps I'm certainly going. On most hands partner has better spades and the SQ is a big card.

2nt is just a really stupid contract at IMPS. If 2nt was already going down, you only lose extra 1 imp for being in 3. While you gain 10 when you bid and make 3. So it rewards bidding very thin games. You are only truly happy passing 2nt when making exactly 2. So it has to be really wretched before I am going to pass when already in 2.

I open 1nt on 5332 17s unlike GIB, then west passes and I get to play ONE, where the calculus is different from where you are already in 2.

Assuming it shows a normal 17-18. Do you pass or go to 3 with responder's hand at MP? I'm going to pin you down if it kills me. (imagine a smile on my face rather than scowl)

"2nt is just a really stupid contract at IMPS. If 2nt was already going down, you only lose extra 1 imp for being in 3. While you gain 10 when you bid and make 3. So it rewards bidding very thin games. You are only truly happy passing 2nt when making exactly 2. So it has to be really wretched before I am going to pass when already in 2."

You don't mince your words, and your logic makes perfect sense. "You are only truly happy passing 2nt when making exactly 2." Believe it or not I've run this logic through my head many times, but more than 90% of the time it's while playing match points. At teams I wouldn't have been sure what to do.
Although I was introduced to bridge eons ago, there has only been a relatively short period in late 80's-early 90's that I played regularly. During that time it was still match points the great majority of the time.
I hope to play them a little more in the future...37% of the robot tournaments I enter are IMPS, a huge difference from regular play. It seems like a purer from of play. You bid the close games, and try to lock up a hand rather than worrying about overtricks.
I still play more matchpoints because they tend to attract bigger fields, and results on every hand can create big swings. In IMPS there are more break even hands, without a lot happening. Once you know you have an hand made you don't need to put so much energy into looking for an overtrick. However, every hand feels exciting in either form of scoring during live play.

Your feedback appreciated. I probably would have passed at IMPS too, but not quite so quickly. Next time I'll take a deep breath, bid 3, and hope I make it. Even though my defenses often go up when you commment, I pay attention to what you say and give it serious consideration.

[Stephen Tu]

I really don't know. It might be a pass at MP if playing it as 17-18. I'd have to run a computer sim to make up my mind really, I just don't have enough experience vs. this range. I don't consider a 17-18 range "normal", to me 18-19 is normal, GIB is using a weird range. I am playing the vast majority of my bridge in human offline tournaments. I don't really play any online or robot tournaments except for the forum challenges here, the only ACBL robot tournament I've played for years is the online national thing they did for the first time in July.

[Stephen Tu]

FWIW I did a computer sim fixing west hand and giving E some 5(332), and 18-19, 17-18, and 16-17 HCP. Double dummy, it looks like clear accept opposite first two ranges any form of scoring, well over 65% success rate. You have to dip down to 16-17 HCP before success rate falls < 50%. SQ is just a huge card, reasonably often partner comes down with AKxxx /AKJxx/AKTxx and you have 5 spade tricks. Double dummy might inflate things a little bit vs single dummy since you know when to drop J/finesse for the J, but then again the opps can lead the wrong thing also which can cancel that sort of thing out.

So I guess it boils down to whether partner is counting full point for his 5 cd spade suit to get to "17-18" or if it's 17-18HCP AND the 5 cd suit.

[zhasbeen]

The way I've played, 1H-1S-2NT, 1C-IH-2NT, etc promise 18-19. With 5H 3-3-2 and 16-17 we almost always open 1NT, less often with spades. Then it could go 1S-1NT-2NT with 17. With hearts a spade response could create rebid problems.
That leaves a gray area when opening 1S with 18 and NT shape and getting forcing NT response. With 19 you just raise to 3. I hadn't given it much thought...I guess I'd have to choose between inviting or raising directly to 3 with 18. It seems like no problem at IMPS--just bid 3.

With GIB I usually look at definitions and take it from there, sometimes with a big grain of salt.

[zhasbeen]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-November-15, 15:09, said:

FWIW I did a computer sim fixing west hand and giving E some 5(332), and 18-19, 17-18, and 16-17 HCP. Double dummy, it looks like clear accept opposite first two ranges any form of scoring, well over 65% success rate. You have to dip down to 16-17 HCP before success rate falls < 50%. SQ is just a huge card, reasonably often partner comes down with AKxxx /AKJxx/AKTxx and you have 5 spade tricks. Double dummy might inflate things a little bit vs single dummy since you know when to drop J/finesse for the J, but then again the opps can lead the wrong thing also which can cancel that sort of thing out.

So I guess it boils down to whether partner is counting full point for his 5 cd spade suit to get to "17-18" or if it's 17-18HCP AND the 5 cd suit.

I wonder about the simulations and what effect double dummy has. I'd be shocked if a poll of top match point players would accept the invite with that hand.

Btw, I'm not on the same level as the 2 guys I brought up in the the "GIB crappy lead" thread, although I do occasionally have a game with them. You probably figured that out. I seriously doubt if I'll ever catch up to them in this lifetime, but one was a partner was in early 90's. We won a couple sectional open pairs, had high finishes in a few others, and won consistently in club events. They have other partners for the bigger events.

[sfi]

zhasbeen, on 2017-November-15, 16:20, said:

I wonder about the simulations and what effect double dummy has. I'd be shocked if a poll of top match point players would accept the invite with that hand.

That's interesting, because I would be shocked if a majority passed. As Stephen said, the Qx in spades is huge - so much so that I would really want to show it along the way, either to cater for partner having 6 or to play game in the 5-2 fit when partner thinks it is right.

[virgosrock]

sfi, on 2017-November-15, 16:47, said:

That's interesting, because I would be shocked if a majority passed. As Stephen said, the Qx in spades is huge - so much so that I would really want to show it along the way, either to cater for partner having 6 or to play game in the 5-2 fit when partner thinks it is right.

sound words sfi. fully agree. Will avoid you if I see you on money bridge. LOL

vrock

[smerriman]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-November-15, 01:59, said:

I don't think there should be bid looking for 44 heart fit, to me 2nt should deny hearts in principle (bid 2h/3h with hearts).

Ah, OK. I was thinking of auctions like 1♣ - 1♥, where a balanced 18-19 points always rebids 2NT rather than jump shifting in spades (and responder then bids 3♠ to accept the invite and check for a 4-4 fit).

I guess 5422 isn't quite the same, but it feels like a lot of different ways of showing 2 or 3 spades, when you have an initial 2 spade raise, or a later pass, 3nt, 3 hearts, or 3 spades..

virgosrock, on 2017-November-15, 05:31, said:

smerriman, where do you find such detailed explanations? VERY curious. I have not seen such details in previous hyperlinks you have posted.

They're the descriptions that appear when hovering over the bid when playing with GIB. You can recreate the auction and see them at a bidding table.

zhasbeen, on 2017-November-15, 09:21, said:

The one answer I still haven't gotten is if you would pass the invitation or bid again. Assuming that you would pass at MP, I am curious if you bid again vulnerable at imps.

I wouldn't pass, but in this forum I'm not really interested in what I would/wouldn't bid, just that whatever I choose, GIB would understand it. If I had a couple of extra points I wouldn't know whether to bid 3♥ or not given the definition.

[zhasbeen]

Ok, I'll back off to surprised. The SQ is big, knowing that it will normally be part of a 5-card suit. Stephen's simulations have also got my curiosity up, although I'm not so sure the percentages would hold up in actual play. Forget about the hand in the handviewer diagram. To put it mildly, it is not the dummy you'd expect after hearing a 2NT invite and holding that 7 pointer.

I'm still a passer at matchpoints on the condition that opener has max of 18. It would be interesting to see how the Bridgewinners panel would vote.