BBO Discussion Forums: Low HCP slam - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Low HCP slam

#21 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-June-27, 08:58

View Postrhm, on 2012-June-26, 02:40, said:

Whatever your convictions are, I am sure that even at world championship level a sizable minority would not open this hand.


There is just no way this is true. Try to find instances of people passing 12 counts in world championships (in recent times). You will be hard pressed to find more than even 1 I'm sure. Let alone such a good 12 count. I can not stop you if you don't want to open this hand but saying a sizable minority would fail to open this hand in a world championship is just false.

Also if you want to play minorwood or kickback you should use your space more efficiently. Why would you make 5D your bid to confirm all the keycards and try for 7? Presumably 4H would be your queen ask, that leaves 4S and 4N and 5C, none of which can be to play when partner has 4 keycards. If you did this you would not have to do things like bid 5H over 5D without the HK in hopes that partner will bid 5S. Sometimes lying about the HK will mislead partner into bidding 7 himself, when he has something like x QJxxx Ax Qxxxx. Admittedly this is not that likely of a layout, but there is no need to risk things like this happening when you have so much space.
0

#22 User is offline   billw55 

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

Posted 2012-June-27, 09:58

I am usually satisfied to reach the small slam on low-point hands like this. Since you stopped in game, this would already be a big improvement. Also, consider that 7 or 7NT is not as good if north holds either red queen instead of the club queen, which is a difficult thing for south to work out in the auction. Perhaps 7 is the most realistically biddable grand, but I still won't cry over missing it.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#23 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,092
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2012-June-27, 13:45

View PostJLOGIC, on 2012-June-27, 08:58, said:

There is just no way this is true. Try to find instances of people passing 12 counts in world championships (in recent times). You will be hard pressed to find more than even 1 I'm sure. Let alone such a good 12 count. I can not stop you if you don't want to open this hand but saying a sizable minority would fail to open this hand in a world championship is just false.

I wonder whether we are looking at the same North hand. What I see is a minor suit oriented hand with a singleton king in a major. Many Bridge player (including me) believe that is a downgrade not an upgrade.
Please feel free to enlighten me what is so "good" about this 12 count. If I type the hand into the Rubens Kaplan evaluator (known to be reasonable for suit contracts) it comes back with 11.2
(Kaplan claimed his elevator should show 13 for an opening bid and 12.5 would be an optional one if you had the majors. Admittedly this was somewhere in the nineties)

Quote

Also if you want to play minorwood or kickback you should use your space more efficiently. Why would you make 5D your bid to confirm all the keycards and try for 7? Presumably 4H would be your queen ask, that leaves 4S and 4N and 5C, none of which can be to play when partner has 4 keycards. If you did this you would not have to do things like bid 5H over 5D without the HK in hopes that partner will bid 5S. Sometimes lying about the HK will mislead partner into bidding 7 himself, when he has something like x QJxxx Ax Qxxxx. Admittedly this is not that likely of a layout, but there is no need to risk things like this happening when you have so much space.

As you said 4 would be queen ask. 4 suggests spade as a possible trump suit and 4NT is defined as a suggestion to play after minorwood while 5 would be forcing opposite 4 key-cards and a sign-off otherwise.
So from responder perspective 5 is safe, but only 5 is an unambiguous grand slam try confirming all key cards.
Admittedly in this case it is hardly possible that opener has only one key card and when responder is assured of such a positive reply, different agreements thereafter might make more sense.
I prefer to keep it simple and avoid expensive misunderstandings in potential slam auctions. I have been hurt too often.
My agreements are uniform over all minorwood replies (4NT in particular is always a suggestion to play, this allows to invite a minor suit slam without giving up game in notrumps). It has served me well.

Rainer Herrmann
0

#24 User is offline   billw55 

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

Posted 2012-June-27, 14:05

View Postrhm, on 2012-June-27, 13:45, said:

I wonder whether we are looking at the same North hand. What I see is a minor suit oriented hand with a singleton king in a major. Many Bridge player (including me) believe that is a downgrade not an upgrade.
Please feel free to enlighten me what is so "good" about this 12 count. If I type the hand into the Rubens Kaplan evaluator (known to be reasonable for suit contracts) it comes back with 11.2
(Kaplan claimed his elevator should show 13 for an opening bid and 12.5 would be an optional one if you had the majors. Admittedly this was somewhere in the nineties)

I got the feeling that Justin was talking about what actually happens in world class events, rather than the theoretical merits of the hand.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
0

#25 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,092
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2012-June-27, 15:13

View Postbillw55, on 2012-June-27, 14:05, said:

I got the feeling that Justin was talking about what actually happens in world class events, rather than the theoretical merits of the hand.

This exact hand (K,K743,A92,QT743) was not played in a world class event. Justin claimed the South hand to be "such a good 12 count". I do not see why.
Justin's partner in the Bermuda Bowl Grue, not known for having strong opening bid requirements, playing Precision with Cheek against Levin Weinstein, passed third in hand at favorable vulnerability the following hand:

Q4,K63,QT82,AT94.

This hand is different but by standard evaluation methods quite comparable in strength. I would call it a good 11 count.
This was in the first quarter of the last Vanderbilt final. The match was even at that point.

Rainer Herrmann
0

#26 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-June-27, 18:01

Rainer, surely you get that when you open light you pass sounder in third/fourth? Didn't Roth-Stone open extremely light in third seat since they opened so sound in first seat? These 2 things go hand in hand. It is extremely misleading to say that grue is not known for strong opening bid requirements but passed a balanced 11 in third seat! You often make similarly misleading comments like this, I wonder if you are actually failing that much at logic or if you do it intentionally.

FWIW I can promise you Grue would open that hand at any vulnerability in first or second seat, and would pass at any vulnerability in third or fourth seat, that is standard for our style. What would be the point of opening this hand, a 2344 11 oount, in third seat when your partner will never have 11 and will very rarely have an unbalanced 10? If you played SOUND openers though, there would be a lot more reason to open it, your partner might have TWELVE points in fact and passing out 23 HCP would be ridiculous. So you see, SOUND openers might open this hand, but light openers would never do so. Do you understand how these go hand in hand now? Of course, you probably always did.

I do not understand what someone who plays extremely light openings NV passing a 4432 11 count in third seat with a doubleton spade has to do with your assertation that a sizable minority of players in a world championship would pass with K Kxxx A9x QTxxx. As much as you try to deflect from this, that will never be true in 2012 lol.
0

#27 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,092
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2012-June-28, 04:03

View PostJLOGIC, on 2012-June-27, 18:01, said:

Rainer, surely you get that when you open light you pass sounder in third/fourth? Didn't Roth-Stone open extremely light in third seat since they opened so sound in first seat? These 2 things go hand in hand. It is extremely misleading to say that grue is not known for strong opening bid requirements but passed a balanced 11 in third seat! You often make similarly misleading comments like this, I wonder if you are actually failing that much at logic or if you do it intentionally.

FWIW I can promise you Grue would open that hand at any vulnerability in first or second seat, and would pass at any vulnerability in third or fourth seat, that is standard for our style. What would be the point of opening this hand, a 2344 11 oount, in third seat when your partner will never have 11 and will very rarely have an unbalanced 10? If you played SOUND openers though, there would be a lot more reason to open it, your partner might have TWELVE points in fact and passing out 23 HCP would be ridiculous. So you see, SOUND openers might open this hand, but light openers would never do so. Do you understand how these go hand in hand now? Of course, you probably always did.

I do not understand what someone who plays extremely light openings NV passing a 4432 11 count in third seat with a doubleton spade has to do with your assertation that a sizable minority of players in a world championship would pass with K Kxxx A9x QTxxx. As much as you try to deflect from this, that will never be true in 2012 lol.

Of course I understand if you play light openings that you need not protect your game chances by opening light in third or fourth position. But this is not the point.
As I understand the modern trend in opening lighter in first and second position is not driven by improving your constructive bidding, but by competitive and obstructive tactics. Do these not apply any more when you are favorable in third position? Fact is that in the other room the hand was opened and Grue lost the board.
The whole idea that you should have half the strength needed for game to open the bidding is what drove the old school in Bridge. (Kaplan, Goren etc)
I respect of course that you have much better hands on experience at high level Bridge than me.
But on this forum it seems to me that many panelists seem to compete for the dubious honor, who is prepared to open the greatest rubbish hand.

The trend has certainly gone to lighter openings, particularly in the Anglophone world.
It is my impression that for example the Italians still do not open as light as you do and there are exceptions like Rubin-Granovetter.
There seems also agreement (except on this forum) from pure logic that somewhere this trend must be counterproductive.
Rodwell claimed in an interview he gave to Glen: "I don’t think opening a hand like Jx Axxxx Kxxx Qx with 1H is winning bridge."
I sometimes have the impression he and particularly Meckstroth do not follow their own convictions.
I have a collection of 149 deals from Pavlicek where Meckwell opened 1 in one room, while the other room passed.
The overall net result was inconclusive. It still makes for interesting analysis.

It is rare that 12 HCP hands are passed nowadays. It is probably losing Bridge in today's competitive world.
However, I still believe in down- and upgrading and I would not argue with anybody, who would downgrade K,K743,A92,QT743.
I said I would open it, but only just and I would not feel very comfortable. I am aware that Grue would certainly open it.
This does not prove it is a long term winning decision, particularly when your one level openings are not limited.

Rainer Herrmann
0

#28 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-June-28, 13:20

This is getting off track. I simply took exception to your statement of:

"I am sure that even at world championship level a sizable minority would not open this hand. "

I am quite sure that this is false. The world championship level would be the least likely place to find people who would pass this hand. To say that you are sure that a sizable minority would pass this hand at this level, well, I am saying I am sure that that is not true.

Your example hand of this happening is grue passing in third seat with Qx Kxx QT8x AT9x (when Grue is a player who would open Qx Kxx QT8x AT9x at r/w in 2nd seat). I am saying that this is not a valid example hand as it is in third seat, and many players who open light in 1st and 2nd seat pass sounder in third seat, specifically with garbagey 10-11 counts with short majors.

I don't know what else you want me to say. Obviously 3rd seat is different than 1st/2nd seat, but I doubt you will find an example of someone passing a 12 count in third seat either lol. If you think that Grue passing a 2344 11 count in third seat is evidence that a sizable minority would pass K Kxxx A9x QTxxx r/w in 2nd seat in a world championship event, well I disagree that those 2 things are related or that it that one could reasonably consider that evidence.
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