Which of the two? A recent Vugraph hand
#1
Posted 2005-September-19, 01:29
A 10 3
J
A J 10 4
A J 8 6 4
LHO deals and passes, pard passes too and RHO opens 1D.
I guess that double or 1NT is not an option
for most of us (but I may be wrong), so there are
but two options:
2C or pass.
What do you choose?
ns
#2
Posted 2005-September-19, 01:40
#3 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-September-19, 01:40
#4
Posted 2005-September-19, 01:43
Roland
#5
Posted 2005-September-19, 01:47
At MPs I would bid 2♣ though. The 1♦-(2♣) auction often seems to get opponents to land in the wrong partial.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#6
Posted 2005-September-19, 02:05
Note also that pard passed, so he probably doesn't have 6 hearts (would have opened a weak 2). Another hint that 2♣ is safe.
#7
Posted 2005-September-19, 02:28
Since partner is a passed hand I"ll pass at MP also.
#9
Posted 2005-September-19, 04:37
I will post a follow-up question shortly.
nikos
#10
Posted 2005-September-19, 04:44
Unlucky? Perhaps. But your length in ♦ suggest the two other players won't have many ♦, so they have more room for more ♣. If partner has them, great. If LHO has them, well, I guess we all know.
#11
Posted 2005-September-19, 05:52
Petko
#12
Posted 2005-September-19, 05:55
I don't consider this a particularly close decision
#13
Posted 2005-September-19, 14:26
Let's see what happened at the table, the semifinal of
the Indonesia tourney last week (Sweden v IndoSeniors)
Sacul passed as West, and when North bid 1S
and South rebid 2H Sacul was forced to pass
again. This was (unexpectedly?) passed out.
So, while cold for 5C, EW sold out without uttering a word; to add insult
to injury, 2H made with an overtrick.
But Sacul needn't worry; at the other table, Sylvan also passed as West,
North again bid 1S and now South rebid 2D. West had to pass again and
this became (less unexpectedly) the final contract. The defence was generous,
so Manoppo was allowed to make 2D and the net result was a 2-imp swing.
In the other match, both Wests thought that passing was far risky (as I
believe) and they bid 2C; at one table the result was 5clubs doubled+1,
at the other 500 from NS's 4Sx-2.
Yes, I know that one hand proves nothing at all, but it seems to me
that passers got what they deserved. After all, when I have the majority
of high cards and a 10-card fit I expect to declare contracts, not to
defend at the two-level! And if it is risky to bid 2C at my first turn,
isn't it much riskier to bid (3C?) over 2H?
ns
#14 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-September-19, 14:30
#15
Posted 2005-September-19, 14:41
#16
Posted 2005-September-19, 14:50
If i desperate need IMPs, i would try to crete a swing via 3♣.
#17
Posted 2005-September-19, 15:05
#18
Posted 2005-September-19, 15:10
This hand is rather funny. Look at Gerben's example and then what actually happened. Night and day! Both auctions are totally plausible, and yet the results are wildly different. Anyone that states any action is 'clear' here, doesn't understand the game.
All I know is there are risks involved with passing as well as bidding. The fact that pard is a passed hand greatly mitigates the chance of scoring 11 tricks. Although, for the passers, how much better does the suit need to be? Do we need the ♣9? the ♣10? Against Gerben's layout, the possession of these doesn't help that much, and 2♣ still takes a bath.
Lots of guesswork involved, but clearly passing carries its own set of risks, as well as bidding.
#20
Posted 2005-September-19, 20:00
Say we have 4 clubs and righty tells us he has 4 diamonds exactly (be aware that this "exactly" clause increases the effect: go back and look at the 8 card example and you'll see that the effect is basically doubled if righty had told us "I have exactly one diamond").
Let's compare the chances he that he has 2 clubs or 4 clubs (I'm just simplifying the conditions by only allowing these two possibilities).
If we have 4 clubs and 4 diamonds, he's odds on to have 2 clubs by odds of 80:49 (that is "2 clubs":"4 clubs").
If we have 4 clubs and 2 diamonds, he's odds on to have 4 clubs by odds of 49:44 (that's "4 clubs":"2 clubs").
So, giving us more diamonds makes it likely that RHO has fewer clubs by a fairly large amount it seems (a more complete analysis would be better, but I'm apparently lazy). That in turn implies that more diamonds in our hand means pard is more likely to have support, and also that LHO is more likely to have a stack (just not for Gerben's stated reason).
Andy
[Edit: One should notice that restricting things to the case where RHO has exactly 4 diamonds is really making it so more diamonds in your hand means more room in LHO & pard's hands, which isn't really true, and this is inflating the effect. In the toy model in my last post, this effect and the real effect have exactly the same -- hence the comment above about doubling. I should really check to see how they compare in the real case, as they needn't be the same size there too.]

Help
