Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 45 46 47 48
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I expect my partner to double 3NT in search of 3NT almost always with two or more hearts and no stopper.
April 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or more or less right to double.

So far I can't think of a reason.
April 15
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He was lucky there was not a couple more rounds of bidding he might have found another way to show the same hand later.
April 14
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin because there are hands where you would bid 5 over 4 but not 4 over 3 does not mean that it is not your fault when you 5 and it is wrong.
April 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nice. Impressive sample sizes.

What software does this run with? Deal?

I forgot to mention that my IMPs were based on vulnerable. I should rewrite my scripts so it does vul and not vul at the same time. Actually since I use it for competitive bidding I might need four conditions but not for this problem.
April 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Its possible you agree on 100% but disagree on simple and easy.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff Miller has done extensive single dummy simulations using GIB that showed that 3NT was best at MPs with a wide range of hands.

Personally I think the question being asked is the wrong one. I think we should be asking when do you prefer 3NT or 4M with these shapes?
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is my code:


hcp(north)==hcpS and hcp(south)==hcpN and
shape(north, any 5332) and spades(north)==5 and
shape(south, any 4333) and spades(south)==3

with hcpS and hcpN defined, for example, as follows:


hcpS = 15
hcpN = 12

Of course the results are double dummy with whatever disclaimers that implies.

Here is a summary of the numbers:

(Edit: IMPs are based on being vulnerable)

11 hcp 5332 v 13 hcp 4333

4M made 296/1000
3NT made 451/1000

On average 3NT won 1.894 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 55.65% at MPs

12 hcp 5332 v 13 hcp 4333

4M made 476/1000
3NT made 635/1000

On average 3NT won 2.056 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 57.95% at MPs

13 hcp 5332 v 13 hcp 4333

4M made 670/1000
3NT made 799/1000

On average 3NT won 1.531 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 59.6% at MPs

14 hcp 5332 v 13 hcp 4333

4M made 844/1000
3NT made 888/1000

On average 3NT won 0.545 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 62.35% at MPs

11 hcp 5332 v 14 hcp 4333

4M made 476/1000
3NT made 660/1000

On average 3NT won 2.311 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 59.35% at MPs

12 hcp 5332 v 14 hcp 4333

4M made 651/1000
3NT made 803/1000

On average 3NT won 1.918 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 61.05% at MPs

13 hcp 5332 v 14 hcp 4333

4M made 847/1000
3NT made 926/1000

On average 3NT won 0.971 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 65.05% at MPs

14 hcp 5332 v 14 hcp 4333

4M made 925/1000
3NT made 958/1000

On average 3NT won 0.401 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 68.45% at MPs

11 hcp 5332 v 15 hcp 4333

4M made 656/1000
3NT made 775/1000

On average 3NT won 1.407 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 57.25% at MPs

12 hcp 5332 v 15 hcp 4333

4M made 847/1000
3NT made 901/1000

On average 3NT won 0.646 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 60.15% at MPs

13 hcp 5332 v 15 hcp 4333

4M made 925/1000
3NT made 947/1000

On average 3NT won 0.361 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 71.05% at MPs

14 hcp 5332 v 15 hcp 4333

4M made 975/1000
3NT made 973/1000

On average 3NT won 0.061 IMPs per board at IMPs.

On average 3NT scored 76.75% at MPs
April 13
Wayne Burrows edited this comment April 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Haughie and Turner or Crombie and Reid - both pairs used HUMs but one of them was hummier than the other. Blackstock and Newell”

Thanks David.

Haughie lives and plays in Australia these days. Turner and Crombie don't play. Newell plays with Reid. Blackstock only plays occasionally but he will be our NPC for the Mixed Team in the APBF in Singapore.

Blackstock certainly did play ferts but I am not sure if he did so with Newell in International events. They would have been playing symmetric relay and possibly some sort of submarine (transfer openings.)
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my early days playing relay we had no cap on when the relays finished and any bid was to play. In practice, (unfortunately not at the table) the ultimate hand came up where the bidding was at 7 and 7 was a relay and 7 would deny a specific side jack and that would be the best contract as the suit could be ruffed out but when the key jack was held we had 13 top tricks in 7NT.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The best method after 7NT XX is to try and make thirteen tricks.
April 13
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once south found out north's minor what was that information going to be used for?

North has nothing that was not shown by the double at 4. If north really thought there might be a good sacrifice then bidding 4 the previous round and letting south decide how to use the information would be superior to the unilateral 5.

In all I think south is to blame 100% …

… and the other 100% goes to north.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Khokan do you have the full hand (with declarer's spots)? Are the spots accurate in the opening post or is this just a representation of the position? The hand you gave has a card missing. I presume you mean 8=2=2=1.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You definitely need good methods when running from 7NT doubled.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is not change to methods that makes 2 safe. You also have to change the opponent's methods so that they never double you and you might like to not be vulnerable.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play a hybrid inverted version where 2 is either any weak hand or any hand with four hearts. This seems to get us a maximum chance of finding a heart fit.

After 1 1NT; 2

2 weak without spade preference or any strong hand with four hearts.

2 Any strength (almost any strength) with five or more hearts

2 spade preference (over clubs and not four hearts)

2NT extras

3 extras

3 six diamonds and maximum

3 six hearts and maximum

Over 2 opener rebids:

2 invitational with four hearts - 2 immediately over 1NT would have been limited.

2 weak with spades and clubs

2NT invite without a side five card suit and usually without six spades

3new suit five five invite

3 six spades invitational
April 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Which New Zealand Pair was that?
April 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nick: I did mention strong 1NT in third and fourth. The other advantage of this is that at least some of your machinery is useful after 1NT strong in third or fourth seat. After 1NT weak all of the machinery designed to get you to good games and slams is near worthless when partner could not open.
April 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually we changed more than just our 1NT range. We played four card majors. In first and second seat we opened the lower of two four card suits so 1 Major was quasi five card suit. In third and fourth we opened a major ahead of a minor so 1 and 1 were routinely minimum balanced hands with four cards in the major.

Once I managed to open 1 when 4 was the only making game for the opponents and I got accused of a psyche but I had my twelve points and four spades.
April 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is not clear to me whether you think this is a serious error or a wild or gambling action.

Having been doubled at a low level I am not sure that running to a four card suit could be classed as wild or gambling.

For something to be classed as a serious error for adjustment purposes it has to be unrelated to the infraction. Running because of the information that you are given about the opponents methods is not unrelated to the infraction.
April 10
1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 45 46 47 48
.

Bottom Home Top