BBO Discussion Forums: JTA = "Judge the Actions" - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

JTA = "Judge the Actions" Let's just assess, not "blame"...

#1 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2012-April-19, 08:49



Matchpoints. AH lead. -590 for N/S.

Please assess what you think went wrong when, or if this is just normal bad luck.
0

#2 User is offline   billw55 

  • enigmatic
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,757
  • Joined: 2009-July-31
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-April-19, 08:56

East-west actions are normal.

North overbid. South quite properly expected more defense from north, but even then his double may be a little pushy. Clearly more blame to north though.

It could have been -690. True west can hardly believe south holds both top clubs, but there is nothing to lose and nothing else to try.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#3 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,754
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2012-April-19, 09:42

This whole auction works better if south just shows a good heart raise. Either 2N or 3S over 2S depending on your agreement.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

#4 User is online   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,026
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2012-April-19, 10:02

I agree with both earlier replies

I understand the urge to bid with the N hand, and I wouldn't criticize either 2 or 3. The problem is, as Bill observed, that S will expect a better hand.

However, I also agree that S's double was needlessly aggressive. He is not protecting a 4 contract, and he isn't going to get rich, unless W is a known lunatic. Even at mps, turning 50 into 100 on this sequence is unlikely to be important, while turning 420 into 590 is usually going to cost a bit more.

Part of the problem was that S may have felt he had underbid. If he expected a more normal 2 overcall, as Bill suggests, then S was maybe trying to make up for his ultra-conservative 3.

Had he been able to bid, say, 3 (playing transfer advances) or 2 to show an invitational raise, he could then pass somewhat happier, since partner would have been able to take him for real values and still passed 4.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

#5 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2012-April-19, 11:07

Despite it not having much to do with the final result, I would say 3 by south was the worst bid rather than 3 or 4.
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
0

#6 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2012-April-19, 13:59

south´s 3 is wrong, and that´s why he felt the urge to do something more. He had to do something more the round before.

IMO 2 is a very bad bid, but I know my style is not mainstream.
0

#7 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2012-April-19, 15:01

I think North's 2 is OK. It has too much playing strength to pass and too much defence for a preempt, so that makes it a 2 bid.

I assume that South didn't have a good raise available, since he didn't use it. If NS play everything as natural in this situation, it's not clear what South is supposed to do other than bid 3. Double conceals the heart support, and 3 or 4 is an overbid.

That leaves 3, which presumably has a rather wide range in this partnership. Having bid 3, South then had a problem on the next round: because he was at the top of his range, it was quite possible that NS had a game on and that 4 would turn out to be a save. Hence I can understand why South doubled. I'm sure West would have bid exactly the same way with AKJ10xx x Kx Qxxx, in which case 4 would be a common contract and an extra 50 would be quite valuable.

I'd blame poor methods rather than either of the players. It's obviously better to use 2NT as a good raise in this situation.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#8 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2012-April-19, 16:12

I disagree that 4 would be an overbid. Even opposite that north hand, and with the club off, and with hearts 4-0, they can make 4.
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
0

#9 User is offline   quiddity 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,099
  • Joined: 2008-November-21

Posted 2012-April-19, 16:32

 lalldonn, on 2012-April-19, 16:12, said:

I disagree that 4 would be an overbid. Even opposite that north hand, and with the club off, and with hearts 4-0, they can make 4.


though it only makes because hearts are 4-0..
0

#10 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2012-April-19, 17:14

Well it's not quite that simple. But regardless, I believe you have missed the point. If 4 might make opposite a hand that many people don't even think is good enough for an overcall, then perhaps it's what the hand is worth.
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
1

#11 User is offline   quiddity 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,099
  • Joined: 2008-November-21

Posted 2012-April-19, 18:09

 lalldonn, on 2012-April-19, 17:14, said:

Well it's not quite that simple. But regardless, I believe you have missed the point. If 4 might make opposite a hand that many people don't even think is good enough for an overcall, then perhaps it's what the hand is worth.


I got the point, I just thought it was funny that you mentioned 4-0 hearts as if it were a bad thing.
0

#12 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2012-April-19, 18:27

It sounded like a bad thing :)
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
0

#13 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-April-19, 18:35

 lalldonn, on 2012-April-19, 18:27, said:

It sounded like a bad thing :)

Hi Josh :)
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#14 User is offline   lalldonn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,066
  • Joined: 2012-March-06

Posted 2012-April-19, 18:38

Hi Han!
"What's the big rebid problem? After 1♦ - 1♠, I can rebid 1NT, 2♠, or 2♦."
- billw55
0

#15 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2012-April-19, 22:34

 gnasher, on 2012-April-19, 15:01, said:

I assume that South didn't have a good raise available, since he didn't use it.


This is precisely right. The available options showing heart support were 3, 3, and 4.


 gnasher, on 2012-April-19, 15:01, said:

It's obviously better to use 2NT as a good raise in this situation.


Do you recommend this only in this auction, in any (1y)-2x-(2y) auction, or even more broadly (and if so, please specify)?
0

#16 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2012-April-20, 02:06

it is recomended when the cuebid would commit to the 4 level
1

#17 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2012-April-20, 03:37

 bd71, on 2012-April-19, 22:34, said:

Do you recommend this only in this auction, in any (1y)-2x-(2y) auction, or even more broadly (and if so, please specify)?

As a minimum, I recommend it in any auction where you don't have any other cue-bid available below three of partner's suit. (1y)-2x-(2y) is the most common example of this, but there are a few others:
(1) 2 (2)
(1NT) 2 (pass)
(1) 2[nat] (pass)

There's a good case for extending this to other sequences, but the value in doing so varies according to the sequence:
- After (1x) 1y (2x) or eg (1) 1 (2) you have only one cue-bid available, so it's beneficial to add 2NT to let you distinguish 3- and 4-card raises.
- When responder has bid a new suit between the opened suit and the overcalled suit, you have two cue-bids. Using 2NT lets you show a 3-card raise, a good 4-card raise, a mixed raise and a weak raise.
- When he's bid a new suit below the opened suit there are three (one of them below the two-level). Adding a fourth one isn't especially useful.
- When he's passed or bid 1NT there are two (one below the two-level). Using 2NT gives you a third raise, but you're less likely to need it than in some other sequences.

One approach is to make rules based on the number of cue-bids you have available. I've been persuaded that it's easier just to play 2NT as a raise in all these sequences, except specifically when we've overcalled in a minor and we have at least one cue-bid available.

Having decided which bids show a raise, you need rules for what they mean. I suggest something like:
- With one artificial raise available, it shows any good raise and a jump raise is mixed (or weak if you prefer).
- With two artificial raises available, the lower is a good 3-card raise, the higher is a good 4-card raise, and a jump raise is mixed.
- With three artificial raises available, the lowest is a good 3-card raise, the middle a good 4-card raise, and the highest a mixed raise.
- With four or more artificial raises available, the lowest is a good 3-card raise, the next lowest is a good 4-card raise, the highest is a mixed raise, and anything else is a splinter.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#18 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,754
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2012-April-20, 03:43

 gnasher, on 2012-April-20, 03:37, said:

As a minimum, I recommend it in any auction where you don't have any other cue-bid available below three of partner's suit. (1y)-2x-(2y) is the most common example of this, but there are a few others:
(1) 2 (2)
(1NT) 2 (pass)
(1) 2[nat] (pass)


You forgot the most common:

1H (2S) ?

and similar.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

#19 User is offline   dkham 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 181
  • Joined: 2008-December-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 2012-April-20, 04:57

I would have overcalled 3 as North, which probably stops South doubling.

Can someone explain to me how 4 makes? In the case for example when defence begins with two top spades.
0

#20 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,754
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2012-April-20, 05:46

You just have to avoid losing more than two diamonds, accomplished by leading past the Kx to the J and A, then duck to the K.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users