[the hog]

"At pairs. however, partners should be allowed to flout system for what they deem to be good reason."

I wouldn't play with anyone who believes that it is a possibility to pass a forcing 2S bid, when you have no idea what level or strain you be should be playing at. Surely the pass is worth a zero.
Fwiw I would bid 3C.

[han]

What do you know, I agree with the Hog. If my partner thinks it is good bridge to pass 2S here, I would seriously look for another partner.

[mgoetze]

gwnn, on 2010-December-03, 11:40, said:

why does pass get 7 points? because we're signing off when we have no idea how high we belong or because we have no idea what strain we belong to?

Well, I think it's the lowest rating nige1 has ever given...

[gwnn]

being more to the point...

nige1, on 2010-December-03, 19:44, said:

however, partners should be allowed to flout system for what they deem to be good reason. If it works they can accept accolades for good judgement.

and what is that good reason?? and why does it get 7 points?

passing is idiotic because you don't know what strain you belong to and you don't know what level you belong to!

[lexlogan]

(Before looking at other replies) if partner has only 5 spades and less than 4 hearts, he must have 3 cards in a minor. If he has 6 spades the 6-1 fit may be playable; if he has something in hearts 3NT may be good. I count 5 club tricks, a heart, likely at least 2 diamonds, and extra chances in diamonds, spades, or from partner' fit for one of my suits. I'm going to force to game with 3D.

[lexlogan]

pass = -10

[nige1]

gwnn, on 2010-December-03, 11:40, said:

why does pass get 7 points? because we're signing off when we have no idea how high we belong or because we have no idea what strain we belong to?

kenberg, on 2010-December-03, 12:34, said:

Our agreement is that 2♠ shows five spades, and says nothing whatsoever about strength. With that agreement in place, I regard pass as life threatening.

the hog, on 2010-December-04, 04:25, said:

"At pairs. however, partners should be allowed to flout system for what they deem to be good reason." I wouldn't play with anyone who believes that it is a possibility to pass a forcing 2S bid, when you have no idea what level or strain you be should be playing at. Surely the pass is worth a zero.

han, on 2010-December-04, 05:13, said:

What do you know, I agree with the Hog. If my partner thinks it is good bridge to pass 2S here, I would seriously look for another partner.

mgoetze, on 2010-December-04, 05:59, said:

Well, I think it's the lowest rating nige1 has ever given...

gwnn, on 2010-December-04, 12:25, said:

being more to the point... and what is that good reason?? and why does it get 7 points? passing is idiotic because you don't know what strain you belong to and you don't know what level you belong to!

lexlogan, on 2010-December-07, 15:37, said:

pass = -10

When a player presents a bidding problem, it is often because he fears that he made the wrong call. If so, he may seek feedback on how egregious others consider his error to be. Marks can help this relative assessment. (A range of zero to ten seems adequate. Mark the bids that you consider may work. The call deemed best gets 10. Give marks of five or less to calls that you considered but on reflection decide will rarely work).

Marks are a crude guide. Manifestly, they reflect the idiosyncrasies and misconceptions of the marker. I rated Pass as fourth on my list. With a forgiving partner, I judged the pass of 2♠ to be worth some marks, because it is quite possible that 2♠ is the best match-points contract. Certainly, If you need a top, it may be worth a gamble. If it doesn't work, you can apologise unreservedly.

What if you know that partner will never play with you again, if you pass, even when it works?
That brings different considerations to bear, including whether you, yourself, want to continue this partnership

[Free]

nige1, on 2010-December-07, 20:02, said:

A range of zero to ten seems adequate. Mark the bids that you consider may work. The call deemed best gets 10. Give marks of five or less to calls that you considered but on reflection decide will rarely work.

For good calls you can make a clear difference and how much better you think one call is over the other. But can you give an example about the difference between a score of 3 and a score of 1? Seems we only need useful scores from 10-5 or 0, nothing in between there.

[nige1]

Free, on 2010-December-09, 04:28, said:

For good calls you can make a clear difference and how much better you think one call is over the other. But can you give an example about the difference between a score of 3 and a score of 1? Seems we only need useful scores from 10-5 or 0, nothing in between there.

A lot of fuss about putting the cat out? Maybe. But if you like one call much more than another, then you may want to give them widely different marks.. A range of marks is also useful when many calls are in the frame and you want to rank them in order of your preference. In magazine polls, as on BBO, many different calls may be proposed.

Amusingly, in magazine polls (as here) a player may claim there is only one possible call
But his long-term partner occasionally chooses a different call as the only call
Bidding improves and fashions change, so when polled later on the same hand, the same player may give another different answer

[gwnn]

if partner is minimum (in the sense that we can't make game), there are three different strains that we can play:
♠
♣
♦

suppose the "partner is minimum" is 50% and the three strains are 40-30-30 (I'm being generous) and if 2♠ is best, 3♠ would have made 40% of the time also.

in this case the anti-partnership action of passing will "work out" 50%*40%*60%=12%!!!!!

your 7 makes it sound like it will work out a bit more often, don't you think?

[han]

I don't agree that a call which might work out well sometimes should be given a decent grade. For example, 1NT - 3NT - 4NT might work out really well sometimes. If you have a nice 17-count, partner bids slam with a maximum 3NT call and the cards lie well then one can easily imagine that slam will make. However, we all know that this auction is a sign of a really bad bridge player. I feel the same about passing 2S on this auction. There is nothing about that hand that suggests passing and pass violates partnership understanding. Nobody but a very poor player would seriously consider passing. I can't imagine giving pass a high grade, I consider 7 points ridiculous.

Say we have an average 10-count and partner opens 1NT. Is passing an option at MPs? Not to any good bridge player, yet it will do well a reasonable amount of the time. How many points is pass worth? As no good player would consider pass as an option, I think it deserves no points.

[kenberg]

On passing: There have, not often, been times when I pass, put down dummy, and say something like "I hope that your bid wasn't totally forcing". Usually this will be in a somewhat complex undiscussed auction where my hand is looking progressively worse as the auction goes on. Here, we had discussed the rebid of 2♠ and decided we would play it as showing five spades with any strength. I simply will not be passing once I have had such a discussion and made such an agreement. If passing is right, that's just too bad.

On scores: I just take it as a manner of speaking. When I had a kidney stone the doc wanted me to rate the pain on a scale of 1 to 10. Who knows? 12? But if someone says one action rates a 9, another an 8, another a 2 I take this as saying the first two are both plausible, he slightly prefers one to the other, and the third is out to lunch. If the 2 were changed to a 3 or a 1, the meaning would be the same. I suppose -10 is the equivalent of "You are joking with this suggested action, are you not?".

[whereagles]

I would bid 3♦, on grounds that if pard didn't bid 3 or 4♠ 2nd round, he is likely to have a couple of minor-suit cards.

The real danger is if he has some 55 majors, but I'm willing to take that risk.

[nige1]

gwnn, on 2010-December-09, 05:27, said:

if partner is minimum (in the sense that we can't make game), there are three different strains that we can play: ♠ ♣ ♦
suppose the "partner is minimum" is 50% and the three strains are 40-30-30 (I'm being generous) and if 2♠ is best, 3♠ would have made 40% of the time also. in this case the anti-partnership action of passing will "work out" 50%*40%*60%=12%!!!!! your 7 makes it sound like it will work out a bit more often, don't you think?

If you bid 3♣ you may able to stop there. I gave 3♦ top marks, however, expecting partner to treat that as forcing, Hence a comfortable part-score was virtually ruled out. I still think passing 2♠ might work but awarding it fourth place and seven marks now seems overgenerous.