[jillybean]

LBengtsson, on 2022-March-23, 04:40, said:

The problem with posting hands like this, jillybean, even though they are instructive, is that when a player has done something fundamentally wrong, as West did doubling South's 1NT bid, then all our answers become nonsensical. We expect West to be the strongest hand at the table, then find South has a stronger hand (points).

What can I say, it's club bridge. I do find the answers instructive, although not always for the original reason I posted the hand. I can also see that it would be frustrating to find the hands do not match the bidding, would it be better if I posted these hands in the beginner forum?

[mycroft]

A lot of players (even in weak NT countries) think that "double = equal values+" is a good agreement. They argue that you need to compete when you could have the hand. Mike has written above in great detail what I would say about why that's wrong (in particular, "you have a balanced 9. They've found their fit. What do you do?" and "you have a balanced 4-5. Whose hand is it?")

If you have this agreement, you're in on a lot more hands than those who play the way Mike and I recommend. But decisions on game, say when you're vulnerable and they're not, are a "can't get it right beyond a straight guess", whereas going plus on a partscore board will almost always get you a decent score, even if it's +50 into +110 (because there will be a bunch of -50s/-100s that got pushed too high, and +50s from when they got pushed too high).

The question is very interesting, because the colours and the strength of the hand argue for defending even if they have a fit, trying for 500. That's really dangerous at other colours, and it's a question worth investigating. The reveal that West/their agreement has hooped the partnership because it's a bad one - oh well. That doesn't take away from the question, and "what agreements should one have when they run from 1NTx in order to maximize our advantages".

[helene_t]

LBengtsson, on 2022-March-23, 04:40, said:

The problem with posting hands like this, jillybean, even though they are instructive, is that when a player has done something fundamentally wrong, as West did doubling South's 1NT bid, then all our answers become nonsensical.

I don't agree.

Of course the post-mortem becomes a bit silly when it turns out that a non-forcing pass would be the winning call because partner has overbid, but that's not the point of the discussion.

There can be four or five reasonable calls here: double, 2NT, 3♣, 3NT. Plus pass if that is forcing. So it's a quite good problem. That none of the reasonable choices would have worked at the table is not a big deal.

[smerriman]

jillybean, on 2022-March-22, 07:51, said:

I'm coming back to the game after a break, partly due to the "do what you like" attitude of ruling the game. I'm already wondering how long I will keep playing.

Well, let me just put it out there that I hope you do keep playing, since regardless, I enjoy reading the interesting discussions that always stem from your posts, and the forums have been quite quiet recently without them..

[jillybean]

smerriman, on 2022-March-24, 17:53, said:

Well, let me just put it out there that I hope you do keep playing, since regardless, I enjoy reading the interesting discussions that always stem from your posts, and the forums have been quite quiet recently without them..

Thanks, good to hear that someone enjoys the strange hands I post!