BBO Discussion Forums: We pushed them into grand slam and they made it - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

We pushed them into grand slam and they made it a bidding disaster

#1 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 321
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2021-August-19, 09:32

MP scoring.



I sat at South. They played Acol strong 2 opening. My partner passed (If I were him I would preempt 3 here). RHO responded 2 showing value in . I doubled asking my partner to bid an unbid suit as I had great offensive value but lacking defensive value.

The opener raised to 3, partner overcalled 3, confirming a fit. RHO responded 4NT.

I now think that they were likely to have a slam in and bid 5 to disrupt their bidding, hoping that they would double us instead of bidding 6 themselves, but they really bid 6 themselves. Their slam is definitely makeable and I believe I should make a sacrifice to 6 to have better result, but it resulted the opener to bid 7 which my partner doubled. The result was solid 13 tricks by them, 7X= by West.

Par contract was 7X-4. Among the 7 tables, 5 ended up at 5 by north (4 were doubled), 1 ended up at 5, that meant at the moment the 6 was bid we were doomed.

Was we unlucky at this board that they could bid slam? If North instead preempted 3 over strong 2 opening, would it be less likely that they could bid slam? (If North preempted 3 I would bid 4 over anything and ready to compete to 6 having 12 trumps)
0

#2 User is offline   apollo1201 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 2014-June-01

Posted 2021-August-19, 10:59

I canít find words to describe your partnerís bidding. Letís say Iím not a native speaker.

Your X is also very cautious, 4H (even undiscussed, what can it be except an extreme 2-suiter with blacks) will put more pressure.

A plausible auction

2D - 3S - 4H - 6S, with a smile saying ę†and please now, make the guess†Ľ

Bidding 4 then 6 is bad bridge as you let opps exchange a lot of info. Your goal is to disturb them as much as you can so that they cannot use their methods to find a slam (or stay away from a bad one).

But if they bid 7, I think it is safer to bid 7. A void is likely and partner probably wonít have a defensive trick, so all H and D will provide tricks. I donít see how your partner could find a X.

The top is to let very timid opps play 5+2. But it is not easy to find.
0

#3 User is offline   Gilithin 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 359
  • Joined: 2014-November-13
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2021-August-19, 16:30

North's Pass and 3 are bad, way too timid. But South's X and 5-6 are also poor. X just does not do a 6-5 hand justice . apollo's 4 or, if you want to emphasise rather than , 2NT are both better. The ideal bid is probably an Unusual 3NT but that is usually best left to pairs that have discussed it. The 5-6 is another basic error; either bid 5 and shut up or bid 6 directly and make them guess. That is not a good time for walking the dog so just decide how high you want to go and get there as fast as possible.

A final note, if you play with this type of partner too often it will kill your judgement when you play with good players. If this is a regular partner, try to teach them basic competitive bidding asap and encourage them to overbid rather than underbid to help them find the right line. Otherwise you will never be in a good position to get these decisions right.
0

#4 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,089
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2021-August-20, 13:41


mikl_plkcc's deal. MP scoring.
++++++++++++++++++
Just unlucky. North could overcall.
South might prefer some other action to a double.
With hindsight, It's easy to criticise South's competition to 6 but it looks fine to me.
A imps, over 7, North should probably "bid one more";
but at MPs, pass/double seems reasonable.

0

#5 User is offline   johnu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,330
  • Joined: 2008-September-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2021-August-20, 14:30

Solid bidding by North. Was this a basic or advanced bot???
0

#6 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 321
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2021-August-20, 15:04

View Postjohnu, on 2021-August-20, 14:30, said:

Solid bidding by North. Was this a basic or advanced bot???


An ad hoc partnership at my local club
0

#7 User is offline   akwoo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,041
  • Joined: 2010-November-21

Posted 2021-August-20, 20:08

The initial pass by North is pretty bad.

I think South should bid 4N at the first opportunity.

On the given bidding, I think South should bid 6, not 5. Does South really think E/W won't find a making slam at that point?

Now, I am making these statements on the assumption that your opponents are competent(*). If you're playing against unknown opponents at an average standard club, you might be best off playing for the opponents to bid badly, and, in fact, that might be your only opportunity for a decent MP score on this hand.

(*) Most bridge players are not competent.
0

#8 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 997
  • Joined: 2019-October-13

Posted 2021-August-21, 06:31

Everyone has made the valid points already but was North awake on the first round of the auction, because it is obvious to overcall at least 3, if not 4 at their first turn. South can then blast 6 and leave it to them to guess. If they still find 7, 7 is tempting as you know they have a void and where are you getting even one defensive trick from?
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users