bleurose51, on 2020-September-24, 17:03, said:
I am no expert but one thing I have noticed about almost ALL of pilowsky's posts is that you seem to be SO focused on results and almost not at all on how to bid/play properly. Missing the "ultimate" possible result doesn't mean you haven't bid correctly. In many bridge hands, there simply is no perfect way to bid (and in some cases play).
Almost every post of yours has some quirky thing and then you say something like "and I went down 1" or "how do I get to the "right" contract 4H" except you ignore (or seem to ) that maybe down 1 is just fine or maybe 4h isn't the right contract. (To be fair in this one you did add "how would you get to 4H... or would you?" ).
For me I certainly don't think I would. I would say in this hand (as several others have said) I would NEVER want to assume that 22 pts and a 7 card trump suit will make game. We know that on average it WON'T. So why do you want to get to a contract that depends on a specific lead and a specific lay of the hearts, and a perfect split in diamonds, etc.?
Especially if you are going down in TWO :-)
Maybe you should focus on how to make TWO on this hand (or even THREE) than on bidding FOUR.
Sorry, not trying to be overly critical, but it is something I have noticed in most of your posts (the focus on the best possible result and not necessarily on the best reasonable result) and I have not said anything before this. Again, I think your posts are interesting to read and I enjoy them, but I'd love to move you towards thinking about reasonable results if you are going to look at results at all.
Best of luck.
Thank you so much for taking the time to read my posts. On this particular hand I was as surprised as you were that it was possible to make 4
♥. Like you, not being an expert, (and also like you, having signed up for the prime area for practice) I enjoy playing and hands working out how best to deal with them.
This particular hand came about because I manufactured some hands where North had a weak hand with a 5 card heart suit and I had 15-17 HCP points. So, I already knew that the bidding sequence would probably go the way it did, and I expected to have a tough time making 2
♥.
The first time that I played it my result was 2H-1. I was not surprised until I looked at the double-dummy and the PBN and realised that it was a makeable contract.
That's when I stepped through the file and worked out what it is that I did wrong. Sometimes this process can take me several goes. I used to do the same thing when I solved Chess problems - In a way, all games are the same.
I think this is more important in matchpoints where overtricks are critical.
On the other hand. at IMP's where being in game is critical, I wondered if the real experts would see something here that I hadn't. So that was the reason for the post. In this regard, cyberyeti's comment is very helpful.
I think that I have a very long way to go before I'll be making either the over-tricks or getting into the game contracts and making them; but it is great to have the Forum to get advice.
thank you partner
.
++++++++++++++++++++
Pilowski's 1N opener and his 4♥ rebid are idiosncratic. As CyberYeti writes, the South hand is too strong for 1N. Nevertheless, IMO, 4♥ is a reasonable contract. Orthodox play goes something like this: The most dangerous opening lead is a ♠ but after winning with ♠A, you can cash ♥K, finesse ♥J and cash ♥A. Then play ♣AJ hoping for a 2-2 break or a singleton honour. Now you can claim 10 tricks: 1 X ♠, 4 X ♥, 1 X ♦. and 4 X ♣. There's no need to risk any ♦ finesses.