BBO Discussion Forums: Simple(?) hand evaluation - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Simple(?) hand evaluation

Poll: Simple(?) hand evaluation (38 member(s) have cast votes)

Your plan?

  1. transfer and pass (20 votes [52.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.63%

  2. transfer and invite (13 votes [34.21%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.21%

  3. Stayman and invite (nominally 5 cards); 3S if opener bids 2S (2 votes [5.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  4. Stayman and invite (nominally 5 cards); 4S if opener bids 2S (1 votes [2.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.63%

  5. force to game with a Texas transfer (2 votes [5.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 User is online   mycroft 

  • Secretary Bird
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,435
  • Joined: 2003-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, D18; Chapala, D16

Posted 2019-December-22, 18:31

I'm surprised that with [20]21-23 high, everyone's so optimistic that they're going to get to play 2, and they're not going to be playing 3 on the best opening lead.

It would be fun to find out, on those sim hands, what par is, and how often it's -100 for -1x (which in real life will frequently be -50, and even if 4 is -2 for -100, double isn't automatic, especially if you get there immediately.)

I was thinking of bidding Texas, because it might make, but it also might beat 3 after the lower transfer gets doubled, or 3 when fourth hand with AKTxxx, a stiff spade and a 12 count comes in.

I may do that more often than I should because I spend so much of my time playing weak NT (where I think this is automatic Texas, but as a preempt). I would certainly think I was right if the round suits were reversed.
When I go to sea, don't fear for me, Fear For The Storm -- Birdie and the Swansong (tSCoSI)
0

#42 User is offline   MrAce 

  • VIP Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,971
  • Joined: 2009-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 2019-December-23, 05:47

I am totally with you on not overbidding, in fact I prefer under bidding in most of the doubtful decisions at MP and playing in a field that you think you are better than the average of the field.
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"

"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."





0

#43 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,660
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2019-December-28, 19:10

At IMPS I would invite but I see little advantage to upping the level at MP to reach for what is probably still a sketchy game. This is the type of hand that helps one find a compatible partner.
0

#44 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,128
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2019-December-28, 21:41


AntonyLee 'Matchpoints. Partner will occasionally upgrade 14 counts, but not very aggressively.
You have the option of showing a 5(!)-card invite (which can be balanced or not) by bidding Stayman then 2 (over which partner's 2N would be a shortness ask).

 rhm, on 2019-December-14, 04:26, said:

This is easy to simulate. I used 1000 random deals giving North a balanced 15-17 HCP. If North declares double dummy North makes
  • 10 tricks or more on 495 deals (49.5%)
  • 9 tricks on 820 deals (82%)
  • 8 tricks on 972 deals (97.2%)
Simply transfer and raise 2 to 3, assuming you can not show shortage in an invitational hand.

 smerriman, on 2019-December-14, 13:45, said:

Rainer's numbers surprised me, so I ran my own 1000 hands to compare. I got slightly different figures for North declaring in spades (and the opposite conclusion):
  • 10 or more tricks on 46.9% of hands
  • 9 or more tricks on 84.2% of hands
  • 8 or more tricks on 96.7% of hands
Under the assumptions that:
  • North will accept an invite with any 16+ HCP
  • North will superaccept with 17 HCP and 4 spades:
and comparing transferring and passing with transferring and inviting:
  • 2.5% of the time, opener superaccepts (excluded from cases below)
  • 15.8% of the time, we take 8 or less tricks, so passing wins
  • 19.2% of the time, we take 9 tricks, but opener accepts an invite, so passing wins
  • 17.2% of the time, we take 9 tricks, but opener rejects the invite so it doesn't matter
  • 15.8% of the time, we take at least 10 tricks but opener rejects an invite, so it doesn't matter
  • 29.5% of the time, we take at least 10 tricks and opener accepts an invite, so inviting wins
This means passing the transfer is better than inviting with 3 - it wins 35% of the time, and loses 29.5% of the time.
(This sim doesn't take into account upgrades - ie allows North to have 17 counts with a good 5 card suit and no 14 counts - but of course, adjusting for that makes North weaker, so would be more in favor of staying low.)
Thank you, rhm and SMerriman for the educational simulations.
  • Without the simulations, I would transfer -- and bid game only after a super-accept. Many top BBO players deride the LTC (Losing Trick Count) and its variations. Almost all experts seem to believe it's inapplicable in notrump auctions. Nevertheless, some ordinary players rely on such crude tools to aid judgement, I confess that my favorite WTC (Winning Trick Count) undervalues the OP hand as 3.5 winners (SA = 1.5. singleton = 2). If the 1N opener has support, then you can add 1 trick for trump control. Arguably, in context, JT are also worth almost a trick :) but that you might regard that as special pleading :(
  • Now, rhm's advice seems apt -- transfer and invite.
  • AntonyLee's suggestion is also attractive: 2 (Stayman), then 2 (Invite), allowing opener to try for game with a shortage-ask.

But it's a close decision, For example, AntonyLee makes an excellent point about picking up Q at double-dummy.
0

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users