[MP7601]

Stephen Tu, on 2019-May-26, 08:21, said:

System is 2/1, not stone-age Acol. 1nt in this case can have up to 12 hcp. Though after 3H probably 11 is the max.

I agree with the pass though.

and even if playing Acol, a 3H courtesy raise was probably needed if having 9 hcp and a good fit, as opener could still have 16-17

for the opening post, I agree with pass.

[Stephen Tu]

maartenxq, on 2019-May-26, 04:35, said:

It is very close indeed. I consider my pass as rather timid. A lot depends on partner, opponents and the field we are playing in. If partner is a good declarer and hates to miss game I surely bid game. Same if opponents are sloppy defenders.

Partner can easily have 5 ♥ which improves game chances considerably. Will 3 +1 score enough. In a good field probably not. Maybe I should change my vote to close but bid on.

Partner with 5cd hearts should bid more aggressively himself; if he is top of invite range he is supposed to bid 4 himself, to avoid pressuring us to bid game on hands like these. He has to courtesy raise on a lot of 9 counts and some 8s since we can have a 16-18 point hand. So if he has 5cds he should be at the lower end of his possible HCP range.

If you are a good declarer relative to field, or opponents bad defenders relative to field, *you don't actually have to bid the game to gain most of the benefits of making 10 tricks* on close hands. Say 13 pairs, only top 4 capable of making it, and two of those 4 actually bid it, you being one of them. Bidding game in this case only gained you 1.5 MP, you get 11.5 rather than 10. If game turns out hopeless though, and say 6 pairs are bidding game, now you get 2.5 MP instead of 8.5, a loss of 6. So if it's close to 50-50 whether it makes, you lose a lot of MP in the long run, since you are losing 6 when wrong and only gaining 1.5 when right.


You only need to bid game when most of the field is bidding AND making game.

[dB451]

I prefer to play a Losing Trick Count/Cover Card game (as opposed to both sides thinking in terms of LTC); given that, this is a very straight-forward hand. Opener is assumed to have a 7-loser hand. When responder invites with 3H, they are showing three cover cards, or the ability to take three tricks in the context of the auction. Yes, like a full LTC approach, these considerations are predicated on having a fit, but that's been established. So, opener, hearing their partner say they have three tricks for them, can easily pass, since they have no better than a 7-loser hand, and partner said they can only cover three of those losers, hence 4 losers remain, so stay out of game. What's a trick? An top honor (A, K, or Q) in partner's suit, an outside A, K (with a K being more like 3/4 of a trick), an outside KQ or even QJ, honors in other of partner's bid suits, or two more trumps than any shortness - for example, with a stiff (singleton) and three trumps, that's 1 cover card; three trumps and a doubleton does not, repeat not, provide a cover card, but four trumps and a doubleton can be counted as a cover card, and four trumps and a stiff may be two cover cards. Given that context, a statistically sounder basis for decisions is provided, within the context of a known fit. So, here, on this hand, the decision couldn't be easier, given any reasonable degree of discipline. So, that's my $0.02.

[Cyberyeti]

dB451, on 2019-May-26, 11:56, said:

I prefer to play a Losing Trick Count/Cover Card game (as opposed to both sides thinking in terms of LTC); given that, this is a very straight-forward hand. Opener is assumed to have a 7-loser hand. When responder invites with 3H, they are showing three cover cards, or the ability to take three tricks in the context of the auction. Yes, like a full LTC approach, these considerations are predicated on having a fit, but that's been established. So, opener, hearing their partner say they have three tricks for them, can easily pass, since they have no better than a 7-loser hand, and partner said they can only cover three of those losers, hence 4 losers remain, so stay out of game. What's a trick? An top honor (A, K, or Q) in partner's suit, an outside A, K (with a K being more like 3/4 of a trick), an outside KQ or even QJ, honors in other of partner's bid suits, or two more trumps than any shortness - for example, with a stiff (singleton) and three trumps, that's 1 cover card; three trumps and a doubleton does not, repeat not, provide a cover card, but four trumps and a doubleton can be counted as a cover card, and four trumps and a stiff may be two cover cards. Given that context, a statistically sounder basis for decisions is provided, within the context of a known fit. So, here, on this hand, the decision couldn't be easier, given any reasonable degree of discipline. So, that's my $0.02.

Are you really expecting partner to bid game with Qx, AKxx, xx, xxxxx ? yes it's 4 cover cards, but it's a terrible 4, could he be blamed for only bidding 3, it's probably a disaster if you also have a doubleton diamond.

[HardVector]

Thanks for the responses.

[rmnka447]

nullve, on 2019-May-26, 04:20, said:

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Plus scores are good at MP. Or, if you will, the converse -- the lack of minus scores -- is also good.

At the end of the session, if you look at your scorecard and see only a few minuses, then you can be pretty sure that you have a good game. It isn't 100% foolproof, but normally it is a very good indicator of success.

Think about it this way. In a 24 board session, you'd expect about 12 positive and 12 negative scores if everyone plays to the par. So the more positives you accumulate the more you are likely to be above par.

If I play a session and see only 4 or 5 negatives at the end of the session, I'm pretty confident that we've probably won. OTOH, if the scorecard has more negatives than positives, then I'm pretty sure that we're probably below average.

[rmnka447]

At MPs, I'm passing 3 ♥.

The hand has 13 HCP, but the ♣ Q is of dubious value and both red suit holdings aren't that good. In a 2/1 auction, responder's hand should be somewhere between 10-12 value. I don't see game as very likely to make oppose 10-11 hands, and might still be iffy opposite many 12s.

[blackshoe]

It's not possible to get a minus score at match points. Scores range from zero match points to about one less than the number of times the board is played.

[pescetom]

rmnka447, on 2019-May-28, 08:57, said:

Think about it this way. In a 24 board session, you'd expect about 12 positive and 12 negative scores if everyone plays to the par. So the more positives you accumulate the more you are likely to be above par.

If I play a session and see only 4 or 5 negatives at the end of the session, I'm pretty confident that we've probably won. OTOH, if the scorecard has more negatives than positives, then I'm pretty sure that we're probably below average.

Yesterday we played 24 boards at MP with 14 positive and 10 negative, overall 55%.
This time that was enough for first on the line, but usually one would need several more positives I agree.

[rmnka447]

blackshoe, on 2019-May-29, 09:10, said:

It's not possible to get a minus score at match points. Scores range from zero match points to about one less than the number of times the board is played.

The plus versus minus scores refers to the raw scores on the board, not the match pointed resulted.

So if you score +50 for beating the opponents 3 ♠ contract, that's a plus score. If they instead make 3 ♠ that's a minus score, -140.

Not all positive scores are going to be good. Not all negative scores are going to be bad. BUT, watching how your scorecard develops in terms of plus versus minus results is a measure of how you're doing. So when mikeh and others talk about MPs being about getting plus scores that is what they a referring to.

[rmnka447]

pescetom, on 2019-May-29, 09:30, said:

Yesterday we played 24 boards at MP with 14 positive and 10 negative, overall 55%.
This time that was enough for first on the line, but usually one would need several more positives I agree.

Exactly! Typically, I find that if about 2/3 or more scores are pluses, then you've usually have a very good game.

[nige1]

HardVector asks 'MPs, club game. Bidding is 2/1. After partner shows a heart fit and a limit raise, what do you do?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Close decision, at imps, but, at MPs, the arguments of FelictyR, Apollo1201, KenBerg, PesceTom, Stephen Tu, MikeH, Shyams, rmnkaA447, PhilG007, and MP7601 are persuasive, especially if KingCovert's simulation is germane.

---