[han]

I believe you Jason, when it comes to monkeys I always believe you.


(not sure what I had to do with it but this was such an open door)

[Apollo81]

cherdano, on Feb 11 2008, 09:14 PM, said:

This is a MSC problem (November 1983). In a panel of 32, there were 9 votes for 3♣, 5 (!) votes for 3♦, 6 votes for 3♥, 10 votes for 4♣, and one vote for 5♣.

Put an ! next to 3♣ too. That is a HUGE underbid with this hand. I can buy 4♣ as being right though.

[pclayton]

I usually buy the arguments from the moderator in the MSC. I think that they consider the problem a lot more carefully than the panel. I probably have this hand in my mental database if its from a 1983 BW.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Feb 12 2008, 08:34 AM, said:

lol wish I played in 1983

1st duplicate game was Thursday, January 3, 1980 with my Mom. I was 16 and a junior in high school.

We didn't do so hot.

By 1983, I was in deep immersion and reading everything I could get my hands on.

[jdeegan]

I can attest to one difference between 1983 and 2008. In those backward days we were still more worried about getting doubled and going for a telephone number than we were worried about balancing ahead of time to prevent being stolen from. Opponents did open quite as light, so missing a game on this kind of bidding was very rare.

When I was analyzing this hand in 2008, I was thinking, to the contrary, that pard may have been a bit pushy, hence my conservatism with a 3♣ call. I was concentrating more on constructing his/her minimal passes over 1♥ rather than considering possible maximum ones.

[Karma]

jdeegan, on Feb 13 2008, 09:04 AM, said:

I can attest to one difference between 1983 and 2008.  In those backward days we were still more worried about getting doubled and going for a telephone number than we were worried about balancing ahead of time to prevent being stolen from. Opponents did open quite as light, so missing a game on this kind of bidding was very rare.

ummm, did you miss a word and meant to write "Opponents did NOT open quite as light"?

5 years ago I was reading Bergen's book(s) on bidding and pre-balancing. This seems like a good application.

If the auction goes 2♥ P P, what would you do in balancing seat with 1=4=3=5 shape and moderate values? I, for one, would pass with the expectation that 2♥ will make and any other action will be suicidal. The only way our side gets into the auction is for partner to balance in direct seat.

What if partner has a moderate hand with 5=1=5=2 shape or similar but with bad suits that aren't worth a direct overcall? eg. KTxxx Q KTxxx Qx
Max Hardy had a way to deal with this hand, but I don't. Neither suit is good enough for a direct overcall or as a lead directing bid.
However, this hand is ideal for a direct balance and 3 ♦ is a safe contract. (3♣ safe too).

[han]

Karma, if you don't want to pass with K10xxx Q K10xxx Qx over 1C then that's fine but don't expect any serious bridge players on this planet to do the same.

[655321]

han, on Feb 18 2008, 05:07 PM, said:

Karma, if you don't want to pass with K10xxx Q K10xxx Qx over 1C then that's fine but don't expect any serious bridge players on this planet to do the same.

ummm, did you add a word and meant to write "Karma, if you want to pass..."

[han]

Yes I did.