[Winstonm]

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 12:20 PM, said:

You have been goaded into it by yours opponents action. That doesn't make bidding wrong, it just means your opponents found a good time for their action.

Despite the fact most people aren't bidding, I think if you don't (at least at imps) you are REALLY missing the boat. It is not very difficult for both sides to be cold for game opposite completely innocuous hands for partner! Give partner something like Axxx AJxxxx x Qx and one side or the other is likely cold for game, or maybe partner has Axx of spades and Qxx of clubs and they could beat you on a spade lead but lead a stiff, club, etc. Make partner's hand a little better and, given the distribution (heart void) the opponents likely have it's very possible both sides make game.

My question is: considering the 5D bid, how much more frequently will partner hold an unbalanced rather than balanced or partly-balanced hand? If it strongly suggests partner will also be unbalanced then bidding on is surely right.

I simply not sure how accurate that presumption is. Hands like KJx, AJxxx, xx, Kxx and the like will do much better defending.

[jdonn]

So you are forced to guess at the 5 level in a high pressure situation, and naturally assume partner has the weakest possible hand with the flattest possible shape? You know what they say, extreme pessimism is winning bridge. I suppose if they open 3♠ on my right and I'm 1444 with a 17 count I should pass because partner is probably 4333

Btw the 5♦ bid does indeed make it more likely than otherwise that partner is unbalanced.

[Jlall]

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 11:46 PM, said:

Btw the 5♦ bid does indeed make it more likely than not by a lot that partner is unbalanced.

fyp

[pooltuna]

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 11:09 AM, said:

It's pass that I don't understand. I bid 5♥ and don't find it that close a decision but I would much sooner double than pass!

Yep I vote with the Nite Owl in Cat's clothing

[hanp]

I ran a double dummy simulation with 400 deals.

I gave north 5+ hearts and 11+ points or 6+ hearts and 10+ points. Spades shorter than hearts and clubs or diamonds at most as long as hearts.

I gave east 8+ diamonds, no other restriction.

South has this hand.

5D made 20% of the time. 5H made 37% of the time. One of the two games made 51.2% of the time.

Partner is unbalanced (not 5332) 92% of the time. Dropping the requirements on east (but still giving us the same hand and using the same specifications for north) this number is 77%. In other words, the chance that partner is balanced drops from 23% to 8%.

[Jlall]

I think 5D making only 20 % is low, probably because the requirement of 8+ diamonds and any hand is not a reasonable one to me for a 5D overcall I guess.

[hanp]

Yeah I know.

I thought a bit about better requirements for a white against red 5D overcall but gave up.

[Phil]

hanp, on May 3 2010, 08:14 AM, said:

I ran a double dummy simulation with 400 deals.

I gave north 5+ hearts and 11+ points or 6+ hearts and 10+ points. Spades shorter than hearts and clubs or diamonds at most as long as hearts.

I gave east 8+ diamonds, no other restriction.

South has this hand.

5D made 20% of the time. 5H made 37% of the time. One of the two games made 51.2% of the time.

Partner is unbalanced (not 5332) 92% of the time. Dropping the requirements on east (but still giving us the same hand and using the same specifications for north) this number is 77%. In other words, the chance that partner is balanced drops from 23% to 8%.

I think a sim here is tricky to apply, however if you want to crunch numbers:

- I hope its 11-21 (+/-) or whatever instead of "11 +".

- How often is pard cracking 5♦ and we get the chance to bid 5♥?

- How often is pard kicking 5♥ in to 6. (GL with that one).

[hanp]

Phil, on May 3 2010, 09:59 AM, said:

- I hope its 11-21 (+/-) or whatever instead of "11 +".

How many hands do you think this mattered? If your answer is 0 or 1, perhaps you realize why I didn't bother.

As for your other comments, I didn't draw conclusions from my simulation and I am not planning to. I posted the simulation because Winston wondered how the 5D call affected the chance of partner being balanced. This is something that can be simulated quite well.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 11:09 AM, said:

It's pass that I don't understand. I bid 5♥ and don't find it that close a decision but I would much sooner double than pass!

exactly. And for those who play fp, isn't the traditional fp approach that pass then 5♥ is a slam try??? If I played fp here, which I don't 'cos I am not a lemming, then that's surely even more reason to bid 5♥ (or double) immediately.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 11:46 PM, said:

So you are forced to guess at the 5 level in a high pressure situation, and naturally assume partner has the weakest possible hand with the flattest possible shape? You know what they say, extreme pessimism is winning bridge. I suppose if they open 3♠ on my right and I'm 1444 with a 17 count I should pass because partner is probably 4333  :angry:

Btw the 5♦ bid does indeed make it more likely than otherwise that partner is unbalanced.

Josh,

If we take my qualifyiers one at a time I said: A) My question: B) If C) I (am) simply not sure and D) I'm not saying you are wrong...

Hardly the makings of pessimistic dogma. You may not have noticed I didn't criticize your action nor did I argue that pass or double was right.

[jdonn]

Winstonm, on May 3 2010, 05:41 PM, said:

jdonn, on May 2 2010, 11:46 PM, said:

So you are forced to guess at the 5 level in a high pressure situation, and naturally assume partner has the weakest possible hand with the flattest possible shape? You know what they say, extreme pessimism is winning bridge. I suppose if they open 3♠ on my right and I'm 1444 with a 17 count I should pass because partner is probably 4333 

Btw the 5♦ bid does indeed make it more likely than otherwise that partner is unbalanced.

Josh,

If we take my qualifyiers one at a time I said: A) My question: If C) I (am) simply not sure and D) I'm not saying you are wrong...

Hardly the makings of pessimistic dogma. You may not have noticed I didn't criticize your action nor did I argue that pass or double was right.

It's just indecisive pessimistic dogma. And I generally assume when someone chooses a bid in a bidding problem then they believe that bid is right.

I am glad you did not criticize the clearly correct action.

[Winstonm]

Quote

And I generally assume

Ah, the George Patton self-reinforcing jerk syndrome.

[hanp]

I don't think 5H is clearly correct at all.

I also don't understand mikeh when he says that we should bid 5H immediately if pass was forcing, or else double. That's double or 5H part looks like a contradiction to me. I would pass playing forcing passes and pass if partner doubles. Not that I play that pass is forcing.

[mikeh]

hanp, on May 4 2010, 05:56 AM, said:

I don't think 5H is clearly correct at all.

I also don't understand mikeh when he says that we should bid 5H immediately if pass was forcing, or else double. That's double or 5H part looks like a contradiction to me. I would pass playing forcing passes and pass if partner doubles. Not that I play that pass is forcing.

I can't write out every branch of my thinking, but that doesn't mean you get to invent my argument and then criticize it.

I think that 5♥ is slightly better than double: by enough that 5♥ is always my call here. I think playing fp is silly, and I wouldn't do it. But if i did, then I think that making a fp is very bad....to the point that I would prefer 5♥ or even double. I don't think this is the hand for a fp: what's partner ever supposed to do? Partner can't possibly expect this degree of trump support so he often won't embark on 5♥ when it's best to do so. And if he doubles, and we bid 5♥ it's a slam try, so we have to pass. Thus we will almost never bid to 5♥ when it's right, if we make a fp....and, believe it or not, the reaon I advocate an immediate 5♥ is that I think bidding to 5♥, though possibly wrong, is probably right.

Therefore, I would not make a fp. Of course, this is a tempest in a teapot since both you and I wouldn't play fp...you seem to be posting right now more in a 'I think mikeh is stupid' mode than anything constructive

[hanp]

I agree that we are arguing about something that isn't that interesting because neither of us would agree to play forcing passes here. I still don't understand what you wrote though,but perhaps you could take it as a compliment (or at least, not as an insult) that I react to your posts because when most people write something that doesn't seem right I certainly won't bother to comment.

I understand why you think that 5H is the right call, whether playing fp or not. I am not as confident, I find these kinds of decisions extremely difficult.

What I don't understand is that you would rather double than pass, playing forcing passes. It seems to me that (again, assuming fp) partner would more often pull over a pass than over a double. I agree that it would be very good if partner pulled so I would rather pass than double...

[Jlall]

hanp, on May 4 2010, 05:56 AM, said:

I don't think 5H is clearly correct at all.

I'm sure jdonn said that tongue-in-cheek lol

[jdonn]

I did use a smiley. Universal language?

[Jlall]

Also I love the new hanp-mikeh warz. GOGOGOGO.

[hanp]

Sigh.