[jdeegan]

Expert partner vs expert opps. Swiss teams. 8 bds per round. Second board. Both sides vul. North deals.

---

The bidding goes:
P-P-1♥-Dbl
2♥-P-????
Now what?

[pooltuna]

keep the opps in the dark as much as possible and 4♥ is the best shot at a makeable/sacrificial game

[whereagles]

4H wtp? This is going to make LHOs minor suit bids quite hard.

[JLOGIC]

I would try to achieve the game bonus

[neilkaz]

I'd bid 4♥ if the opps had passed and will do the same now.

[mikeh]

I'd say that 4♥ would be unanimous, but there's usually someone willing to take a contrarian view, sincerely or otherwise. Plus, there has to be a story here

[jdeegan]

mikeh, on 2011-September-06, 17:44, said:

I'd say that 4♥ would be unanimous, but there's usually someone willing to take a contrarian view, sincerely or otherwise. Plus, there has to be a story here

Story time! South was a much beloved (and very good) tournament veteran who is still not yet quite 80. It was at a sizable ACBL regional where he had already won one major pairs event and placed third in another. Come to think of it, he one of the better MP players in the world.
He bid 3♥, and LHO doubled again. Pard passed, and RHO bid 4♦. All Pass. Dummy tabled:
AKxx
x
K109
AKQxx

RHO had:
Jx
xxx
QJxxxx
xx

Eleven tricks for the enemy.

So I asked South his reasoning for the 3♥ call. He replied that his hand was so weak for defense that he didn't want to push the opps. Not a bad bridge lesson, imo.

[cloa513]

jdeegan, on 2011-September-06, 19:11, said:

Story time! South was a much beloved (and very good) tournament veteran who is still not yet quite 80. It was at a sizable ACBL regional where he had already won one major pairs event and placed third in another.
He bid 3♥, and LHO doubled again. Pard passed, and RHO bid 4♦. All Pass. Dummy tabled:
AKxx
x
K109
AKQxx

RHO had:
Jx
xxx
QJxxxx
xx

Eleven tricks for the enemy.

So I asked South his reasoning for the 3♥ call. He replied that his hand was so weak for defense that he didn't want to push the opps. Not a bad bridge lesson, imo.

If partner had more ruffing strength, he'd have picked a higher level than 2♥ like 1♠ and four ♥.

[kayin801]

Someone who raises to 3 only deserves to have partner pass with the K of spades on top of the 3 ("4") pts he had. Or maybe just the jack.

[JLOGIC]

jdeegan, on 2011-September-06, 19:11, said:

Not a bad bridge lesson, imo.

lol

[neilkaz]

jdeegan, on 2011-September-06, 19:11, said:

So I asked South his reasoning for the 3♥ call. He replied that his hand was so weak for defense that he didn't want to push the opps. Not a bad bridge lesson, imo.

Does your partner really think that they can bid 5♦ after he bids 4♥?

[jdeegan]

Reading the opps is part of the game. South did a masterful job in this particular instance. I'm not saying one should rely on it a lot, but it is a non-trivial percentage of the game.
Consider this hand from an earlier MP pairs game:

---

You and pard stumble into a routine 6♠ contract after a 1NT open and a forgettable sequence that left South (me) the declarer. A ♦ is led. How do you play the hand?
Well, you have 12 or 13 tricks depending on whether or not you find the ♠Q. If you make the normal (and percentage) play of cashing the ♠ ace and finessing RHO, you will beat all the idiots who missed slam, tie with the other 6♠ bidders, lose to the 6NT bidders and the idiots who bid seven. So, maybe the best percentage play for the contract that guards against 4-1 and 5-0 ♠ splits isn't the right way to go at MP's. Finessing the 'wrong' way will give you an average minus when wrong and a cold top when right.
All this entered my mind as I noticed that RHO was sitting normally, and LHO was sitting like he had a cob up his ass. After that, my decision didn't even seem close. ♠ king, and a small ♠ to the ten winning the trick for a cold top. I might not have worked, but so what? Bridge is a game of percentages.

[Phil]

1. I don't see a way to pick up Q9764 onside.

2. If you are going to brag about your great reads, at least bother to put 13 cards in the dummy.

[Free]

Phil, on 2011-September-07, 00:07, said:

1. I don't see a way to pick up Q9764 onside.

What is onside in this case?

[jdeegan]

Phil, on 2011-September-07, 00:07, said:

1. I don't see a way to pick up Q9764 onside.

2. If you are going to brag about your great reads, at least bother to put 13 cards in the dummy.

1. You can't pick up Q9764 onside, but playing the suit backwards costs an extra trick at MP's.
2. I don't mean to brag about a read. Given the weird MP situation it was a play I was contemplating when I glanced up and saw this guy and said to myself 'what the hell, let's do it'. I'd like to raise a serious issue: What percentage of the game is reading the opponents?

[mikeh]

jdeegan, on 2011-September-07, 12:12, said:

I'd like to raise a serious issue: What percentage of the game is reading the opponents?

I think it depends on the level at which you play.

many years ago, when I had little experience playing against true world class players, I was playing a match against Paul Soloway and Eddie Wold, and suddenly realized that I was getting zero information from them by way of facial expression, body language and tempo. I remember commenting to my partner afterwarsds that on defence they played as if they were metronomes......perfectly even tempo every trick. I hadn't realized until then just how much we can sense from our opps if they lack discipline.

Fast forward to Alberque in 1994, and I was defending a hand being played by Mike Lawrence....dummy held KJx(x) in a suit and Lawrence held xx. At one point he led towards dummy and I broke tempo for a minuscule amount of time....Lawrence successfully flew the K. My partner, afer the hand, asked Lawrence why he played the K. Baze answered for him, that I had broken tempo. It was the tiniest of hitches, to the point that my partner hadn't noticed, but I had, as had both Baze and Lawrence.

So I think that it is an important part of the game, and that it behooves all serious players to consciously develop constant tempo and good 'poker' faces and body language.

[Phil]

jdeegan, on 2011-September-07, 12:12, said:

What percentage of the game is reading the opponents?

I remember driving to dinner at some random national a few years ago with JLogic who said that your reads need to be really good if you are bucking any meaningful disparity in odds.

By the way with Q9764 on my right, it makes no difference unless I make the strange play of starting with the K or J from hand.

[rogerclee]

You mean jdeegan made a pointless post in an attempt to teach the forums a thing or two about bridge? No way!

[jdeegan]

rogerclee, on 2011-September-07, 15:21, said:

You mean jdeegan made a pointless post in an attempt to teach the forums a thing or two about bridge? No way!

I am trying to teach myself something about bridge. I just saw one of the better matchpoint players in the Texas bid 3♥ on a hand where I thought everyone would bid 4♥, and it worked. Then he dropped a doubleton Q offside on another hand, and I picked up on the tell. It began to dawn on me that this guy didn't have 15,000 masterpoints for nothing. Legendary players like P. Hal Sims and Barry Crane were famous for their table feel.
First, I needed to see if anyone in the forum saw anything but 4♥ on that hand. That established, the request by mikeh for a 'story' prompted me to continue my quest on the same thread. This was not my original intent. Anyway, at least mikeh has a clue about table presence.

[jdeegan]

mikeh, on 2011-September-07, 12:48, said:

I think it depends on the level at which you play.

many years ago, when I had little experience playing against true world class players, I was playing a match against Paul Soloway and Eddie Wold, and suddenly realized that I was getting zero information from them by way of facial expression, body language and tempo. I remember commenting to my partner afterwarsds that on defence they played as if they were metronomes......perfectly even tempo every trick. I hadn't realized until then just how much we can sense from our opps if they lack discipline.

Fast forward to Alberque in 1994, and I was defending a hand being played by Mike Lawrence....dummy held KJx(x) in a suit and Lawrence held xx. At one point he led towards dummy and I broke tempo for a minuscule amount of time....Lawrence successfully flew the K. My partner, afer the hand, asked Lawrence why he played the K. Baze answered for him, that I had broken tempo. It was the tiniest of hitches, to the point that my partner hadn't noticed, but I had, as had both Baze and Lawrence.

So I think that it is an important part of the game, and that it behooves all serious players to consciously develop constant tempo and good 'poker' faces and body language.

Having witnessed the importance of reads and table presence, have you ever thought of turning from defence against really good players to offence against your peers and lesser players? South's successful 3♥ operation really turned my head. His opps were hardly chopped liver.
Many of today's new generation of top bridge players are playing hold'em poker as well. Some of them are going to get very, very good at reading the table.