[quiddity]

---

Matchpoints. (Does scoring matter?)

[Foxx]

You can never pass a jump-shift auction below game, unless you're at 4 of a minor and the bidding has revealed an unstopped suit to keep you out of 3NT.

Here, partner could have ♠AKxxxx ♥K ♦KQJx ♣Kx, when 4♥ is a heavy favorite. Or ♠KQJ10xx ♥x ♦AKQ10 ♣Kx, when 4♠ is where you want to be.

I really don't know what the hell I would do here. Any of 4♥ or 4♠ or 3NT or 4♦ could be right. I'll admit that even pass could be right. But I could not bring myself to do it.

[aguahombre]

The form of scoring doesn't matter. What matters is that partner has forced to game because he thought you had a response. So, if you don't want to keep the pard, don't honor the force. If you do, then either bid something or don't respond to 1S. Your choice.

[mtvesuvius]

When I saw the title of the thread I knew my answer already. The hand has not changed that.

NO!

[655321]

This hand is just a minimum, and you can't pass a forcing bid just because you have a minimum.

The time you might decide to pass a forcing bid is when you have a hand way outside what partner expects. For example, if partner makes a (non-GF) opening bid at the 1 level, you respond with some 5431 yarborough and a singleton in partner's suit, and partner reverses into your 3 card suit ... now I would pass even though the reverse is forcing.

[JLOGIC]

I would 100 % pass. 655321!

[JLOGIC]

655321, on 2011-March-31, 17:53, said:

This hand is just a minimum, and you can't pass a forcing bid just because you have a minimum.

The time you might decide to pass a forcing bid is when you have a hand way outside what partner expects.

You might pass if you reasonably expect it to get you the best result on average opposite partners range of hands.

Yes you are in a force, but partner is also limited by his failure to open 2C.

I also do not understand a previous posters assertation that form of scoring doesn't matter. Game needs to be higher percentage at MP than imps, so of course it matters.

I would make the educated guess that we usually have no working card for partner, and we have 3 small of his second suit. Our ruffing value is usually not working either given that partner is 6x4x. Is our hand really that much better than a yarborough with 2 spades? Yeah it's possible our CQ is opposite the king, or partner is 6043, but our hand is pretty terrible. Do we really expect to make 4S more than 50 % of the time? I certainly don't.

I don't think whether a bid is forcing or whether we have a normal hand or not should rationally factor into our decision. It should solely be about trying to get the best possible result on this hand. The "normal" reason to not pass a forcing bid is because partner is unlimited, for example 2C p 2D p 2S would never be passed. That is not the case here.

I would be happy if someone like han did a simulation to see how often 4S is making here.

Quote

Here, partner could have ♠AKxxxx ♥K ♦KQJx ♣Kx, when 4♥ is a heavy favorite.

That is irrelevant if you are going to bid 4S and go down. You cannot factor in all of the times that 4H is the best spot, and all of the times 4S is the best spot, and use that as evidence against passing. It would be the equivalent of saying KJx opp ATx is a 100 % suit combination, because if the queen is on your left you can make, and if the queen is on your right you can make. You must choose how well one bid does against another bid.

The fact that you will often get to the wrong game even when a game makes strengthens the case for passing, not bidding.

[Foxx]

JLOGIC, on 2011-March-31, 18:09, said:

That is irrelevant if you are going to bid 4S and go down. You cannot factor in all of the times that 4H is the best spot, and all of the times 4S is the best spot, and use that as evidence against passing. It would be the equivalent of saying KJx opp ATx is a 100 % suit combination, because if the queen is on your left you can make, and if the queen is on your right you can make. You must choose how well one bid does against another bid.

The fact that you will often get to the wrong game even when a game makes strengthens the case for passing, not bidding.

And I said I was going to bid 4♠ when exactly? After doing some thinking about this hand, it would probably not even be my third choice.

Sure, any game-level bid is a stab in the dark, but why do we have to take that step all by ourselves? Can't we bid 4♦ or even 4♣ and get partner involved in the decision? In fact, I like 4♣ more and more on reflection. Consulting with partner should get us FREQUENTLY (not always) to the right game when we have a making game. When you're playing KJx opposite A10x, you can't get partner involved in the decision, because PARTNER IS DUMMY.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

quiddity, on 2011-March-31, 13:00, said:

---

Matchpoints. (Does scoring matter?)

You wouldn't have been in this predicament in the first place if you would have rebid 3S = minimum with as few as 2 cards ♠.

[ See quote below by Justin ... which he made re. these types of hands ] .

[aguahombre]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-March-31, 20:10, said:

You wouldn't have been in this predicament in the first place if you would have rebid 3S = minimum with as few as 2 cards ♠.

I see, so opener could pass after creating the force, instead of you. or perhaps he would try 4H himself with HX or somesuch.

[quiddity]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-March-31, 20:10, said:

You wouldn't have been in this predicament in the first place if you would have rebid 3S = minimum with as few as 2 cards ♠.

Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[karlson]

I would definitely not pass. I think 4♥ rates to have at least some play.

[Flameous]

What would partner's 4♣ mean instead of 3♠? Would it be a hand with good heart support? I guess we could also hold quite a good hand with hearts for this sequence so partner needs a bid to encourage a possible slam.

So this means that even if partner has some kind of heart support, he has to bid 3♠ if that might be a better strain. Something like 7231 distribution perhaps. Considering this the pass starts to look a rather scary option. Our suit also play pretty well opposite a singleton honor. I think I'd bid (4♣ cog) just to keep partner happy, but just because I'm not quite as sure as Justin was that pass would be clear ev+

[JLOGIC]

Ok, I can accept that 4C might be played as a choice of games over 3S (but not partners 4C over 3H, that is clearly a slam try in hearts). I always play those bids as slam tries (Jx AJTxx xx Axxx or something seems like an easy 4C bid), but whatever.

I am sending a request to han to simulate this. I think this will be a tricky one to simulate. I will specifically request how often 4H makes and 4S doesn't, how often 4S makes but 4H doesn't, how often both make, and how often neither make (so then we can argue about 4C some more maybe!).

Setting constraints for opener is tough, I would say 6+ spades, 4-5 diamonds, 0-2 hearts seems reasonable. 7x3x might be possible sometimes, don't know how to include that in (since sometimes opener can bid 4C or 4H over 1N with that, etc).

Setting constraints for a jumpshift might be difficult, as well as for non 2C openers. I will let han use his judgement, obviously 6-5 and 7-4 can jump shift lighter than 6-4 or w/e.

I would like to get a general idea for how often we are making game and if it is as low as I think.

And of course, han might tell me to ***** off because he has work And of course anyone else is welcome to try the simulation but I probably will have a lot less faith in your judgment/partiality.

[wank]

i'd bid 4h here.

however, i think to say you should never pass a forcing bid is essentially cowardice.

[JLOGIC]

4H bidders, don't you expect partner to pass with a stiff or even a void (unless he has 7 spades)? That seems like a big gamble rather than playing your known 6-2 fit. Yes you will gold sometimes, but...

lol @ me for calling 4H gambling when I am passing

[rhm]

I tried a simulation (1000 deals) with the following specifications for North: At least 4 ♦s and 6♠s and at most 2♥s.
Since I believe North will be more aggressive with good dsitribution I used points including distribution to assess North strength by specifying 1,3,5 points for a doubleton, singleton, void.
Accordingly North had a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 10 points for distribution. The total points including distribution I gave North was 22-24, which looked to me just short of a 2♣ opening when I inspected the deals.

Game is an underdog, but 4♠ is much more likely than 4♥ to make.

4♠ made on 335deals (33.5%)
4♥ made on 85 deals (8.5%)
3♠ would have made on 738 deals (73.8%)

Average number of tricks in ♠ was 9.098 and in ♥ 7.885

Rainer Herrmann

[han]

What is 1S - 1NT - 3D - 4H?

[pooltuna]

han, on 2011-April-01, 07:56, said:

What is 1S - 1NT - 3D - 4H?

Perhaps we should be asking as well what is 1♠ 1NT 3♦ 3♥ 4♠?

[quiddity]

I passed at the table, mostly as a result of a new matchpoint strategy I've been trying: whenever I find myself in the tank about whether to bid game, I'm forced to pass. (Here I tanked for an extra long time over whether the forced pass overrides the forcing bid or vice versa). Partner was not happy, because the hand was:

---

But all was forgiven when spades broke 3-1 and nine tricks was the limit.
At the time I thought this was a top-or-bottom action but it turned out to be dead average. The rest of the room was in game with exactly half making on poor defense.