[PhilG007]

wyman, on 2013-September-20, 13:28, said:

Well, given this description:
[b]

your responses make it clear that you fail to qualify. This question was very clearly not about noticing that you can cash the ♠AK.

You are obviously not a rank beginner, but you could probably learn a heck of a lot in I/A. And while your responses aren't really welcome (for now) in the expert forum, you should still read it and see what you can learn. And if you have questions about the posts here, PM people (unless they ask you to stop), or repost some content with your questions in I/A, where people will often be happy to discuss similar topics in a more detailed and patient way. But, as many people have told you in other topics, few people will be willing to patiently explain things to you if you are belligerent and bull-headed and continue telling people that they are wrong. Be humble; a lot of people in these forums are a lot better than you are. It will take some time for you to figure out who they are, but it will happen.

Also, one question mark is probably sufficient for your future questions.

Are you speaking about Hitler(?) He's dead (!) And although this is called an experts forum I've yet to see
anything that remotely resembles "expertism." So far all I've witnessed is egotism,bombasticity,and hot air from the so called
"adepts" here. Their so called "wisdom" is actually a dangerous heresy. The advice they espouse is the ultimate
horror of all true friends of this noble game. Well,I dare to challenge the bigoted dogma that is being promoted here
by would be pedagogues. I love ruffling feathers of the wannabes and the aspirants and I will continue to do so.
The game is bigger than anyone. If I think an "expert" is wrong I will tell them,fearlessly,directly. Experts aren't
right all the time...even though there be some here that like to think so....(!)

[mikeh]

Troll Alert!!!!

Warning: this thread has now been godwin'd and should be placed off limits lest the contagion spread.

Please do not feed the troll

[PhilG007]

Vampyr, on 2013-September-20, 12:30, said:

Well...the idea was that your posts are inappropriate in the "Expert" forum.

OMG another pseudo expert Where do they all come from(?!)

[PhilG007]

mikeh, on 2013-September-20, 15:41, said:

Troll Alert!!!!

Warning: this thread has now been godwin'd and should be placed off limits lest the contagion spread.

Please do not feed the troll

OK No food for you (!)

[jdeegan]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 15:36, said:

Are you speaking about Hitler(?) He's dead (!) And although this is called an experts forum I've yet to see
anything that remotely resembles "expertism." So far all I've witnessed is egotism,bombasticity,and hot air from the so called
"adepts" here. Their so called "wisdom" is actually a dangerous heresy. The advice they espouse is the ultimate
horror of all true friends of this noble game. Well,I dare to challenge the bigoted dogma that is being promoted here
by would be pedagogues. I love ruffling feathers of the wannabes and the aspirants and I will continue to do so.
The game is bigger than anyone. If I think an "expert" is wrong I will tell them,fearlessly,directly. Experts aren't
right all the time...even though there be some here that like to think so....(!)

I think you are correct to call these poetasters on their self-reinforcing follies. But what about me? I may be below average for my class, but at least I am really an expert. The thread is worth a look because JLall sometimes posts here. Timo and a few others are OK as well. Still, the drivel to real bridge discussion ratio seems to be getting worse.

[Vampyr]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 15:46, said:

OK No food for you (!)

You are aware, are you not, that the person who has godwin'd has lost the argument, no matter what it was about?

[the hog]

Can someone please explain "godwin'd"?

[Vampyr]

Try this link.

[benlessard]

Quote

1. Having to remember a specific agreement to handle a situation that virtually never arises is not something real experts do. A more generalized agreement would make sense, imo.
2. The odds that LHO will get the yips and pull to 7m is non-existent for many players and unlikely for the rest since such hands are exceedingly rare. You should know your opponent a little have some table feel if he/she is getting jumpy or had a problem on the previous round of bidding.
3. Even against 7m, partner may lead a spade.
4. 7m may be unmakable against any defense.
5. The form of scoring is BAM. You get either 0, 1/2 or 1. Work out the possibilities.

1- Thats why the general rules of lightner should apply
2- There you are wrong, you have 7 pts and the bidding went 2Nt 6Nt. So either the pts are 20-13-7-0 or either responder had a long running suit and just blast to 6Nt. My estimate is that the 2nd case is at least 5 times more frequent. Note that blasting to 6NT and planning to pull a double to rightside might be a valid strategy against "B" players all along.

3- Not if you play lightner double and understand them.
4- Yes but you win MP by helping your case not by defeating unmakable contracts.
5- that why I said that the double may wing half-a board. Bam strategy is the same as MP except that your estimate of the "others tables" contract can be more precise.

[jdeegan]

benlessard, on 2013-September-20, 20:25, said:

1- Thats why the general rules of lightner should apply
2- There you are wrong, you have 7 pts and the bidding went 2Nt 6Nt. So either the pts are 20-13-7-0 or either responder had a long running suit and just blast to 6Nt. My estimate is that the 2nd case is at least 5 times more frequent. Note that blasting to 6NT and planning to pull a double to rightside might be a valid strategy against "B" players all along.

3- Not if you play lightner double and understand them.
4- Yes but you win MP by helping your case not by defeating unmakable contracts.
5- that why I said that the double may wing half-a board. Bam strategy is the same as MP except that your estimate of the "others tables" contract can be more precise.

Perhaps you can educate me about the general rules of the lightner double and how it should apply to this as yet hypothetical situation?

By the way, pulling sh*t like 5 to one odds totally out of your ass is the very definition of drivel.

[benlessard]

By the way, pulling sh*t like 5 to one odds totally out of your ass is the very definition of drivel.

Look at it this way. 1NT (15-17) to your right you have 16 pts and you pass and LHO bid 3nt.

Do you think its way more likely that LHO has 7-9 with a long minors that hew expect to run or that he has exactly 9 pts ?

maybe 20-80% is too much but 25-75% is about right. Its quite rare that you can bid and expect to make 6NT without a running suit and its even less likely when you see the defender hand.

[jdeegan]

benlessard, on 2013-September-21, 01:41, said:

By the way, pulling sh*t like 5 to one odds totally out of your ass is the very definition of drivel.

Look at it this way. 1NT (15-17) to your right you have 16 pts and you pass and LHO bid 3nt.

Do you think its way more likely that LHO has 7-9 with a long minors that hew expect to run or that he has exactly 9 pts ?

maybe 20-80% is too much but 25-75% is about right. Its quite rare that you can bid and expect to make 6NT without a running suit and its even less likely when you see the defender hand.

In the high fallutin' world of mathematics this circumstance is considered an example of what is called Bayesian statistics. In the down home clubs where I learned bridge it recalls the story of the man who bet $100 USD that if a man bet that the seven and one half of spades would never jump out of the deck and spit cider in his eye, he better start looking for a towel.

The opponents bid just like the HCP's were, in fact, distributed 20-13-7 and zero. This is a seriously Bayesian event. Just a guess, but I have to bet that nobody ever responded to a opening 2NT opener with 6NT and then pulled to seven of a minor after you doubled in all of your bridge experience, or for that matter in the experience of anyone you know, personally. Other experiences related in the thread seem, at best, anecdotal. Passing at IMP's is probably correct given the extreme risk/reward ratio. At BAM - well, try to collect your thoughts and reflect on your folly.

[mikeh]

jdeegan, on 2013-September-21, 03:11, said:

The opponents bid just like the HCP's were, in fact, distributed 20-13-7 and zero. This is a seriously Bayesian event. Just a guess, but I have to bet that nobody ever responded to a opening 2NT opener with 6NT and then pulled to seven of a minor after you doubled in all of your bridge experience, or for that matter in the experience of anyone you know, personally. Other experiences related in the thread seem, at best, anecdotal. Passing at IMP's is probably correct given the extreme risk/reward ratio. At BAM - well, try to collect your thoughts and reflect on your folly.

Just because you haven't seen it happen is no justification for dismissing the evidence of those of us who have. I was playing in the worlds in Verona in 2006 and read the bulletin with my own eyes, and Garozzo did indeed pull from 6N to a making grand when his RHO mistakenly doubled 6N, a act of folly given the imp odds. The result at our table had been more mundane...a small slam in a minor, impregnable.

Maybe the bulletin writer lied, but that seems a bit of a stretch since the results were available to check.

[dake50]

Can I believe my eyes???? Holding 2 certain tricks and on lead against a NT slam
you would NOT double??? Show me how 6NT wouldn't fail on the lead of the AS or KS??
Am I missing something???

*** Yes. We've already won 1 MP-BAM on this hand.
When we have the +1, what do you think the gain is?
A +1 gilded??
Or are your teammates in this same 6Nt-1??
Sure 6Nt fails. But does 7C/7D? Not likely 7H as few wouldn't transfer to H.
Can't be likely 7C/7D loses our +1, but if it does??? Lost +1 trying to 'gild the lily'.

[aguahombre]

dake50, on 2013-September-18, 15:31, said:

I would never double as my teammates aren't off one in 6Nt.
That is, this BAM double only wins 1/2 MP-BAM if my teammates are -50. Mine aren't.

dake50, on 2013-September-21, 08:09, said:

Can I believe my eyes???? Holding 2 certain tricks and on lead against a NT slam
you would NOT double??? Show me how 6NT wouldn't fail on the lead of the AS or KS??
Am I missing something???

Hmm. Maybe what you are missing is the entire discussion, including your own early post.

[mikeh]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-21, 08:27, said:

Hmm. Maybe what you are missing is the entire discussion, including your own early post.

you missed dake's point: he screwed up the quote function: he wasn't doubling I think

[johnu]

benlessard, on 2013-September-21, 01:41, said:

By the way, pulling sh*t like 5 to one odds totally out of your ass is the very definition of drivel.

Look at it this way. 1NT (15-17) to your right you have 16 pts and you pass and LHO bid 3nt.

Do you think its way more likely that LHO has 7-9 with a long minors that hew expect to run or that he has exactly 9 pts ?

maybe 20-80% is too much but 25-75% is about right. Its quite rare that you can bid and expect to make 6NT without a running suit and its even less likely when you see the defender hand.

If the 6NT bidder has a long minor and less than expected points, what are the odds that they would check for aces first?

[RMB1]

mikeh, on 2013-September-20, 15:41, said:

Troll Alert!!!!

Warning: this thread has now been godwin'd and should be placed off limits lest the contagion spread.

Please do not feed the troll

In the past, I thought the bridge forum equivalent of Godwin's laws was: "As an online bridge discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison to the Buenos Aires affair approaches 1."

Thankfully, that seems no longer to be true (or the convergence is now much slower).

[jdeegan]

mikeh, on 2013-September-21, 07:50, said:

Just because you haven't seen it happen is no justification for dismissing the evidence of those of us who have. I was playing in the worlds in Verona in 2006 and read the bulletin with my own eyes, and Garozzo did indeed pull from 6N to a making grand when his RHO mistakenly doubled 6N, a act of folly given the imp odds. The result at our table had been more mundane...a small slam in a minor, impregnable.

Maybe the bulletin writer lied, but that seems a bit of a stretch since the results were available to check.

Wrong to double at IMP's because of risk/reward ratio. Since we both know Garozzo, we can agree that he is/was a feisty and intuitive little dude who might actually do what he reportedly actually did do at Verona. I have seen him do some miraculous things at the bridge table. He may have been, in some ways, the best (and scariest) bridge player in history. If he is my LHO, then I pass even at BAM.

[rhm]

jdeegan, on 2013-September-22, 03:24, said:

Wrong to double at IMP's because of risk/reward ratio. Since we both know Garozzo, we can agree that he is/was a feisty and intuitive little dude who might actually do what he reportedly actually did do at Verona. I have seen him do some miraculous things at the bridge table. He may have been, in some ways, the best (and scariest) bridge player in history. If he is my LHO, then I pass even at BAM.

I am not so sure.
I think the problem is one of perception. Human memory is impressed by the exceptional not by the normal and the exceptional gets reported not the normal.
Man bites dog is news, dog bites man not.
But this makes our experience biased and humans are notoriously bad in evaluating small rewards against small probability losing big or vice versa. For example many safety plays are not worthwhile at IMPs.

If

a) N-S have a run-out at the seven level and know it and
b) can make North declarer and
c) East will not find the spade lead

you have a great story. But this is a parlay. While such deals exist, how likely is it? Deals almost always exist, which can prove you wrong.

At BAM I would certainly double and I consider PASS the typical expert error. At BAM the reward is not small nor is the potential loss huge.
Good players often see ghosts, in particular if one of their opponents is a name player like Garozzo. There is also the psychological effect, that no knowledgeable expert likes to look stupid.

With regard to IMPs it is true that the reward is small but not tiny, maybe 3 IMPs, but the probability of a big loss so small that DBL is probably the winning action in the long run.
The chance after the bidding started 2NT-6NT, that N-S will not have 13 tricks in 3 suits and will go down even more if they try is substantial.
If you consider the chance that your partner will find the spade lead against 7m is at least 50%, at worst you simply bet a big IMP win against a big loss even if opponents find the run out.
The IMP difference between winning 500 against loosing 2000 is small, looks only impressive on paper.

Of course I am not blind that there are many doubles of small slams, which are a mistake, e,g when trumps break badly for declarer, but opponents can correct to 6NT or will play differently after a DBL etc.
But as usual it is wrong to generalize, you have to judge the merits of the specific situation.

Rainer Herrmann