BBO Discussion Forums: strange hand, and missed game - BBO Discussion Forums

MPs. I don't know what the opposition were doing on this hand (I'm not sure they did either)



Double dummy 3♠ is the limit of the hands, but South kindly led her ♦A and another, solving all problems in that suit, and even with the 5-0 break I easily made 10 tricks. We had a discussion about it afterwards and partner said she interpreted my bid as showing at least six spades and a good hand, which is what I was trying to show. She didn't think she had quite enough to bid game, basically she wanted one more potentially useful card. I'd have probably gone for it but I would have been wrong theoretically. This was worth 93%, I was the only one to make 10 tricks thanks to the awful lead. What do you think of the EW bidding given the inteference?

You post a lot of hands and ask a bunch of questions which makes me believe that you want to improve at the game.

In all sincerity, you need to find better players to compete against.

What are your agreements about the 2♥ bid? Is it forcing?

NS seem to have a bidding style that I'm not familiar with - bypassing a six card club suit to bid the 5 card diamonds. Perhaps we can kindly presume that South judged the clubs to be of too poor quality to bid, although this should redirect to a pass instead of a 2♦ overcall. I also don't like North's 2♠ bid. North's own 5-card spade suit is completely misplaced, and partner has passed in first seat so game prospects (especially with just 3 diamonds in support) are non-existent.

If 2♥ is forcing I think East should have pushed to game on this hand, holding 16 points opposite a promised 9. Exchange just one small spade from North for a club from South and 4♠ can be made (double-dummy, admittedly). If 2♥ is not forcing the rest of the auction makes more sense, although in this case I think West was being too timid by passing 3♠.

DavidKok, on 2020-July-02, 16:15, said:

2♥ is not forcing in this situation because partner has passed, so she is limited to around 9-11 HCP, but it would be unlimited and forcing if partner was not a passed hand. I thought 3♠ would be forcing to game, and I didn't think my spade suit was quite good enough to blast 4♠ on my own. Having said that, partner has a problem if she wants to go to game but doesn't have spade support and doesn't hold a long (6+) heart suit, there is no space for her to ask about a diamond stop for 3NT. I'll have another think about this, as I am missing something somewhere.

Generally I don't like doubling cue-bids by the opponents, but here I think an X on 2♠ could be used to differentiate between invitational and GF hands. Absent prior agreements I think X should show 'points', and the direct 3♠ bid is therefore only invitational (after which I would bid 4♠ holding the West hand). That being said the East hand seems too weak to bid GF opposite a NF 2♥ (which should probably show more like 7-10 instead of your stated 9-11).

DavidKok, on 2020-July-03, 01:17, said:

A two over one response in competition can be made on as little as 7 HCP? I thought it should be similar as in the absence of an overcall, with the lower limit stretched to 8 HCP in the case of holding a very good suit like the West hand.

AL78, on 2020-July-03, 02:24, said:

8-11 is the normal treatment, although I like to stretch (which in this case means open on most 11-counts with a nice heart suit, and by negative inference the 2-level bid is limited to 10 points maximum). This allows for a bunch of 7-counts to enter the bidding, although it is not completely standard.

Some people also play 'negative free bids', which lowers the range considerably. But this is a treatment that needs discussion, it is certainly not standard.

Furthermore I'd like to mention that bidding over an opponent's 2-level overcall is not at all the same as bidding in an unobstructed auction, and in principle your expectations should also be different. After an auction like (P)-P-(P)-1♠-(2♦)-? it is more probable that you are looking for the right partscore than if there was no 2♦ bid, and accordingly I think it is clever to enter the bidding with shapely hands on the lower end of your normal range for 2-level bids. In my view the West hand has some extras compared to a minimal 2♥ overcall, and I like the auction nige1 gives.

For what it's worth I think the 2NT overcall suggested by nige1 is poor, at this vulnerability. At best you've given the distribution away and warned the strong opponents to stay out of shaky contracts (the full auction at my table would go (P)-P-(P)-1♠-(2NT*)-3♥ (weaker than 3♣*, which would also show hearts)-(P)-3♠-a.p., with declarer sufficienctly informed of the poor spade break.

hrothgar, on 2020-July-02, 15:57, said:

It started with trying to work out why my results dropped significantly starting about four years ago, even though the standard of the opposition hadn't changed much, if at all. I started posting hands on rec.games.bridge before discovering this forum, with the aim of finding common factors that are harming my scores and that I can address. This forum has so far proved very useful in bringing up things to address. Since my bridge club moved onto BBO, my scores have increased by a good 5%, I can get mid 50's+% now when it was an effort to break 50% with the same partners last year, not sure why this has happened.

I used to play in county competitions with a different regular partner 15 years ago. The opposition strength was variable until we progressed far enough to get a very strong team, then we'd get battered and I'd have no idea why. I don't do competitive bridge (outside club bridge) any more.

AL78, on 2020-July-03, 06:30, said:

It may have happened because you are more ethical / high strung than many opponents, not because you got better. When our club moved onto BBO I noticed that several pairs were consistently doing better online than they did at the club, despite having no previous experience online - I suspect that good part of the explanation is that they habitually base their actions on the system and AI without exploiting UI and/or that they are more easily intimidated face to face than they are on BBO.

Let's go through the auction:-

P from N: I would strongly consider opening this hand 1♠, planning to rebid 2♥ over 1NT or 2♣, or to pass 2♦. It is risky at these colours though, such as after an auction like 1♠ - 2♣; 2♥ - 2NT - (X). On this hand though it would have presented an interesting bidding question to East.
1♠: impeccable!
2♦: this is a really terrible bid. Much better would be 2NT to show the minors. Passing so as not to reveal the distribution under the assumption that the opps will win the auction is also a good idea.
2♥: whether 2♥ or X is the correct call here depends on system and partnership agreement. It is also worth mentioning that East can effectively play West for holding precisely 5 hearts after 2♥ as almost every hand with 6 ♥ and <4♠ would have opened.
2♠: arguably the worst call in the entire auction although both N-S bids would get votes for that. Even looking at the hand I am not sure what it means. The lack of alert suggests natural but the play of the hand makes me think it shows ♦. Some pairs use it to show both - without an alert though it is hard to say. And whatever the agreement, N almost certainly does not hold the right hand for it.
3♠: Funnily enough I play this 3♠ rebid the same way as you suggest - GF with 6+♠. Weaker hands with long spades therefore have to start with a [competitive] X. You will find though that some others do this differently though, so it is something that a regular pair have to talk through at some stage.

I would also like to agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment of Richard (hrothgar)'s statement earlier. You really need to be playing against opps that at least have a semblance of understanding the game. Otherwise you can never draw any inferences from their bidding or play, which is a key aspect of player development. To that end, I will conclude with some questions for you. You were East I believe - how did you evaluate your hand during the auction? What are the good and bad aspects, and was it the same on both rounds of bidding?

Zelandakh, on 2020-July-03, 10:13, said:

The 2♠ bid by North was self alerted as a cue bid, so I presume it was supposed to show a good diamond raise. I was surprised by the bid, as between my 16 and partner's 8+ HCP, at least one of the opponents doesn't have their bid, and I trust my partner.

As for your questions:

First round: A good opening hand, worth opening 1♠ and jumping to 3♠ next time if partner doesn't support.

Second round: If anything downgraded it a bit, looks like if have ♦AQ over my KJ. Despite this, if we have a spade fit, I still think 4♠ should be a reasonable shot, as the lead will be coming up to me. NS bidding doesn't make sense, I believe my partner has her bid, at worst she stretched it with an eight count.

Good aspects: Good HCP strength for a 1 opening, a decent spade suit playable opposite a small doubleton, I hold the master suit. I will have the lead coming up to my tenaces if I get to play in spades, unless the lead is a heart.

Bad aspects: My hand doesn't fit very well with partner, xx is not a great holding opposite her suit. Having AQ over my KJ, and likely the club king over my AQ will reduce the trick taking potential of my hand with all the minor finesses failing. Having said that, the NS bidding doesn't make sense so heaven knows where missing honor cards outside diamonds will be located.

I think East's 3♠ bid should show a minimum with long spades. It should say that I won't let opponents play 3♦, so I might as well bid it now so that opponents don't get to exchange more strength information.

With strength, your options are double, diamonds (their suit), or game.

Opposite a partner that was a passed hand, it should be 100% passed.

Now I think it's not completely unreasonable to devalue your hand at this point - every single one of your tenaces looks worse - but it is pessimistic.

AL78, on 2020-July-03, 11:25, said:

Good answers! If you had all of this in your head during the auction then you are already (at least) a step (or three) above the average beginner. What I wanted to highlight here is the way the value of honours changes according to the suit and the overall value of a hand changes during the auction. First of all let us look at the black suits. Both suits are 6hcp with an AQ but that spade suit is so much more valuable than the clubs. The diamonds start out essentially neutral.

But look how a round of bidding changes things! First of all, what is going on? As you noticed, there is something slightly off here. In my view, by far the most likely explanation with bridge-playing opps is that South holds a weak 2 in diamonds and chose not to open either because they did not have one available (Benji, Multi or the like) or because they hold a 4 card major. This leaves plenty of values left over for North to have their cue. The second most likely explanation, aside from just bad bidding, is that North holds a good distributional raise, most likely with a spade void. Either way, it looks like not only are the diamond honours poorly located but also that partner has diamond shortage and there is an above average chance of spades splitting badly. The result is that the hand is significantly less valuable on the second round than it was on the first, to the point where it is probably no longer worth a game force opposite 8+.

akwoo, on 2020-July-03, 12:36, said:

This is one of the other ways of playing I was mentioning. There are actually many different options, inter alia:-

1. 3♠ GF; X with comp or INV
2. 3♠ comp; X with INV+
3. 3♠ INV; X with comp or GF
4. use a conventional 2NT
5. use transfers

Ignoring the last two options for a moment, as those are highly advanced methods, #3 has a theoretical advantage in terms of constructive bidding but is the weakest tactically if the opps continue; #2 has a tactical advantage in terms of competitive bidding but has issues constructively if the opps sacrifice; and #1 has the advantage of simplicity, since our bids barely change from the uncontested auction. So I do recommend #1 for B/I players. Advanced+ players should know enough to make up their own minds on the subject.

Zelandakh, on 2020-July-03, 16:46, said:

I find it easy to do this during the auction. My view of the hand changes whenever partner or the opponents bid. It is a bit like when playing the hand, you sometimes have to change plan when the distribution of one or both of the opponents hands is not as expected, or when defending, observing partner's plays and discards gives clues as to where their 8-10 HCP lies.

I'm not a beginner, I am a very average/mediocre club player, by that I mean if I turn up at a local club with a regular reasonable partner, I can usually finish in the middle of the field or better (although the last couple of years I have performed worse than prior years).

AL78, on 2020-July-04, 15:25, said:

With all due respect, you two bid the hand fine. You'd be better served, by not worrying about missing a game that should be set unless the terrible player to your left makes a horrible lead.

What if you or PD had taken the push to game, and South actually knew how to play bridge and you were off 1? Would we be seeing an ATB problem for overbidding?

neilkaz, on 2020-July-05, 09:21, said:

I'd have probably dismissed it as one of those things. It is not so much missing a game I am worried about, it is more whether bidding three of my suit means something similar compared to if there was no interference. It turns out it is not obvious.

My question was more about whether the bidding our way was sound and whether my 3♠ showing a decent opening hand was reasonable. The replies have made me realise it is another competitive situaion where partnership discussion is needed as to what directly (re)bidding suits means compared to going through a cue bid or double.