[ArtK78]

Yesterday, in the first round of a regional swiss team event, I picked up:

Txx
AJTxx
---
AJTxx

I decided to open 1♥ at favorable vul. LHO overcalled 2♦, which went Pass - Pass back to me. I thought that this was odd, as it meant that partner probably had values and, therefore, he wanted to penalize 2♦. So, I reopened with a double and sure enough it went All Pass.

Partner had approximately this hand: Kxx xx AKJ9xx xx. And, to make this even sillier, dummy had Qx of diamonds.

Declarer had a good hand - most of the remaining honors - but only 108xxx of diamonds. The net result was that we defended effectively for 1400 opposite air.

At the other table, our teammates achieved a triumph. The bidding started out the same! But 2♦ was passed out and then misdefended, so the loss was "only" 300 opposite air. Win 15 IMPs.

I ask you - is this really top-level bridge?

[gszes]

i just lost my lunch hehe both tables eh be careful the
company you keep ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2013-June-24, 13:36, said:

I ask you - is this really top-level bridge?

No, in top level +1400 would be a push

Seriously though, I wonder if this sort of thing is spreading in mid-levels in part due to the proliferation of conventional doubles. It gets harder and harder to penalize anyone when doubles mostly mean something else. And so bidders can stick their necks out further and further. Besides which, the entry is only twenty bucks or so.

[ArtK78]

billw55, on 2013-June-24, 14:15, said:

No, in top level +1400 would be a push

Seriously though, I wonder if this sort of thing is spreading in mid-levels in part due to the proliferation of conventional doubles. It gets harder and harder to penalize anyone when doubles mostly mean something else. And so bidders can stick their necks out further and further. Besides which, the entry is only twenty bucks or so.

$26, but whose counting?

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2013-June-24, 14:33, said:

$26, but whose counting?

Call it $20 for fooling around and $6 for the hospitality spread.

[Fluffy]

I see sick bids here and there, and I keep collecting penalties, the most sick bids however are my reopenings with double against overcalls.

[wank]

obviously it's not 'top level bridge' which is why 2 people overcalled on 108xxx

[ArtK78]

wank, on 2013-June-24, 16:05, said:

obviously it's not 'top level bridge' which is why 2 people overcalled on 108xxx

Well, it was represented to be. LOL.

[JLOGIC]

Some people are bad, it's not shocking. I doubt theres ever been a time where there wasn't a group of people who would overcall any 13 count with a 5 card suit at the 2 level, regardless of suit quality, since they don't understand the risk involved.

[Zelandakh]

JLOGIC, on 2013-June-24, 17:09, said:

Some people are bad, it's not shocking. I doubt theres ever been a time where there wasn't a group of people who would overcall any 13 count with a 5 card suit at the 2 level, regardless of suit quality, since they don't understand the risk involved.

You are too young Justin! Back in Culbertson's day, the idea of biddable and rebiddable suits was even more prevalent than the idea of 5 card majors is now. From memory, a 2 level overcall required a rebiddable suit, so anyone who read Culbertson's bidding materials (and who did not back then in America?) would have avoided this. Of course, noone bothers with terms like this any more, since a suit of ♦432 is absolutely fine for a 1♦ opening; and similarly 65432 for a major. So it is not surprising that players extend this to overcalls without thinking about it very much.

[Free]

A few boards back the guy didn't overcall with T8xxx-AKx-AKx-xx which resulted in a poor score. As a result of that his partner told him to overcall 1♠ next time. The next time however he was sitting at your table and happened to have ♦ instead of ♠, but with the advice of that earlier hand in mind he just made a simple overcall because the situation looks the same to him. That's what you can get from trying to teach your partner something

[ArtK78]

Free, on 2013-June-30, 14:08, said:

A few boards back the guy didn't overcall with T8xxx-AKx-AKx-xx which resulted in a poor score. As a result of that his partner told him to overcall 1♠ next time. The next time however he was sitting at your table and happened to have ♦ instead of ♠, but with the advice of that earlier hand in mind he just made a simple overcall because the situation looks the same to him. That's what you can get from trying to teach your partner something

Well, this may have happened on the previous day. But this was one of the first boards in the first round of a Swiss Team event. And, yes, the hand was a good hand - only the suit was T8xxx.

Maybe after a few more players are good enough to give these players the 4 figure negative scores they deserve, they will stop committing these overcalls. Note that my teammate, who made the same terrible call at the other table, got out for 300 - undoubled and underdefended.

Last night, I played with my regular partner in three BBO ACBL games. In the first one, at IMP scoring, we had a +1100 and a +1400 (nonvul!). In the second game, at matchpoints, the best I can come up with was a +180 (2♦x making). In the third game, back at IMP scoring, in one round we had a +1100, +800 (nonvul!) and a +650. Why include the +650? Our opps were so rattled from the first two results that they allowed us to play in a vul 4♠ cold for 10 tricks (making 11 when they did not cash out) instead of their playing in hearts cold for 10 tricks nonvul. In one round we won nearly 30 IMPs.

It seems to me that players are going for bigger numbers in the IMP games than in the matchpoint games. You would think that it would be the other way around.

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2013-July-01, 08:31, said:

(funny stuff)

It seems to me that players are going for bigger numbers in the IMP games than in the matchpoint games. You would think that it would be the other way around.

I suspect this is simply because IMPs is the default on BBO. Matchpoint games draw far fewer players. Probably, many or most of these players, having made the effort to seek out matchpoints, know a little more about it. Whereas the the random reckless players are just landing in IMP games by default.

[Cyberyeti]

ArtK78, on 2013-July-01, 08:31, said:

It seems to me that players are going for bigger numbers in the IMP games than in the matchpoint games. You would think that it would be the other way around.

Well -200 vs -140 is not a disaster at IMPs it is at pairs, I'm actually in some auctions a lot more aggressive at IMPs.

[Free]

Some people think their opps won't double a part score that easily when playing imps, so they are 'safer'. As a result, some of these guys intervene even more aggressive. At the same time it is true that part scores won't be doubled for -1, so a doubled part score usually goes down quite a few. Result: bigger numbers