[helene_t]

You don't need to be sure that they go down. You are allowed to gamble a bit. Doublung is dangerous but sometimes passing is more dangerous.

[mikl_plkcc]

I have realised another major problem.

I have bid a contract, e.g. 3NT. The dummy comes down. I count the tricks the contract seems hopeless. I then start cashing all the winners in a hope that the opponents will misdefense. Sometimes it will work, but most of the times I will end up down 2 or down 3, when the best (or most straightforward) line of play will get me down 1. Then I lost a lot especially when vulnerable (and that will get me a 0 in matchpoints).

Or I'm trying a line of play which relies on a certain card held by a certain opponent, but their play suggests otherwise. Then I continued to play the original line of play and get down 2 or worse, while it would be down 1 on the best line of play, and get a 0 at matchpoint again.

For example, I bid 3NT without 25 HCP hoping that a certain suit will run. Unfortunately, I failed to run the suit. I ended up down 4 as I already took all the winners before I tried to run the suit (I couldn't afford to lose the lead before running it if I wanted to make the contract as I had weakness in another suit) but, if I didn't attempt to run the suit, I could probably held the contract to down 1.

[smerriman]

If you're playing IMPs, taking an unlikely line to make a contract is usually correct, because the gain if it works dwarfs the loss if it doesn't. There are situations where the chance of making is too low compared to how much you lose if you try, but they're pretty rare.

Matchpoints is an entirely different game. Whether or not you make the contract is irrelevant; your goal is solely to score better than other tables. So you'd never play for an unlikely lie of the cards if it would lead to a 0.

[helene_t]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-16, 15:47, said:

I have realised another major problem.

To be honest, most of your problems are the kind of problems which decent players still have after decades of practice. Maybe this is just a very strong club and getting -20 IMPs on an average club night is what most players would be happy with?

[mikl_plkcc]

I played matchpoints at another club yesterday and got an extremely poor result, with lots of 0 including stretching to 3NT and getting down 2 or worse for multiple times, doubling their contract then misdefended (I forgot to count a certain suit and discarded the setting trick at the critical point), etc.

I doubled twice yesterday. One was when they stopped at 2, I balanced and pushed them to 4, I doubled and they got 9 tricks, but the DD was 7 tricks and other tables got 7 or 8 tricks only in the same suit, the other was they suggested weak bidding with no game contract, we pushed them from 2 to 4, DD was 9 tricks and every other table got 9, but I misdefended and let them got 10.

And my expectation this year, after having a break from the game for multiple years, is just to get to the break even point (50.00% MP or 0.00 IMP) in a typical English club.

[Bad_Wolf]

OK this is what I tell my students.

To be competitive (in a club field)...

"All you have to do is not have any silly bidding errors". You don't need to be an expert declarer or defender. No, simply no bidding cock-ups board after board, hand after hand.

So, simplify your methods as far as possible, or further! Dump all the conventions you can. After Stayman transfer and blackwood the rest are frills.

[mikl_plkcc]

Bad_Wolf, on 2025-March-17, 15:00, said:

OK this is what I tell my students.

To be competitive (in a club field)...

"All you have to do is not have any silly bidding errors". You don't need to be an expert declarer or defender. No, simply no bidding cock-ups board after board, hand after hand.

So, simplify your methods as far as possible, or further! Dump all the conventions you can. After Stayman transfer and blackwood the rest are frills.

Sorry but my biggest problem is that my NT play cocks up board after board, hand after hand, to the extent that I stopped bidding 3NT with dodgy stoppers (for example, holding Ax or Kxx in the opponent's suit) and lose a lot of IMPs when I stop at a 3 of a minor "to be safe" and the field bid 3NT and makes, or when I have the values to bid game and bid 5 of the minor, get down 1, and 3NT makes.

Back to the matchpoint game I played last Sunday, my (non-regular) partner let me off by lying on her hand shape:

---

First, she misled me by bidding 2♥, which should show 6 instead of 5. Then, she misled me that she was short in ♠ by the double, and forced me to show my long suit. We ended up 3NT-4 instead of defending their 2♠ which would go down. She told me that she had to force me to bid something because she had 19 HCPs, however, my view is different that if it is obvious that there is no fit, she should let them play and set them, and it is my responsibility to balance if I have some strength, that she can pass for penalty afterwards.

[jillybean]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-18, 09:21, said:

Sorry but my biggest problem is that my NT play cocks up board after board, hand after hand, to the extent that I stopped bidding 3NT with dodgy stoppers (for example, holding Ax or Kxx in the opponent's suit) and lose a lot of IMPs when I stop at a 3 of a minor "to be safe" and the field bid 3NT and makes, or when I have the values to bid game and bid 5 of the minor, get down 1, and 3NT makes.

Back to the matchpoint game I played last Sunday, my (non-regular) partner let me off by lying on her hand shape:

---

First, she misled me by bidding 2♥, which should show 6 instead of 5. Then, she misled me that she was short in ♠ by the double, and forced me to show my long suit. We ended up 3NT-4 instead of defending their 2♠ which would go down. She told me that she had to force me to bid something because she had 19 HCPs, however, my view is different that if it is obvious that there is no fit, she should let them play and set them, and it is my responsibility to balance if I have some strength, that she can pass for penalty afterwards.

You can only work on your own game.

[mycroft]

Newer players play NT badly. (Experienced players play NT badly too, but not quite as much more badly than suits as newer players).

Some of that is because newer players bid NT on hands they shouldn't - "Misfits do not play well in NT" - but a lot is because NoTrump Is Hard. Without the safety of a trump suit (and the "have I pulled trump yet? Is there a reason why I can't pull trump now? Okay, pull trump" manifesto) it is easy to lose control and let them run their suit. The lure of "cashing tricks" and "taking tricks" when one doesn't know what to do is also hard to ignore - and that is a big reason newer players lose control in NT (It's funny watching higher-level NT play where both sides are avoiding taking tricks for the first little bit, but when they do it, it's usually right!)

Maybe it's a MPs vs IMPs thing, but I find more of the people in this category are afraid of 1NT rather than 3NT, because there's just much less "control" on offer, and because at least at MPs, the question of "what's the actual contract" is frequently both more critical and harder to answer. I find that playing a weak NT for a while will either break you of that fear (or stop you playing bridge at all. This is not *really* a serious recommendation, but when it works, it really works :-).

But as Oswald Jacoby is quoted in Watson's "Play of the Hand", "I am the best player of bad contracts in the world. That's because I've been in so many of them." The only way out is through.