BBO Discussion Forums: Balancing Problem - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Balancing Problem A popular topic

#1 User is offline   Kalvan14 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 839
  • Joined: 2005-October-20

Posted 2006-February-05, 17:51

Scoring: IMP

1S-(2C)-P-(P)-?


What is your pleasure now?
0

#2 User is offline   pbleighton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,153
  • Joined: 2003-February-28

Posted 2006-February-05, 18:01

Since my reaction is "2S, wtp?", I'm thinking there must be a problem :)

Make it
♠ KQT9753
♥ T2
D AKT
♣ 2
and I'd consider 3S.

Peter
0

#3 User is offline   mike777 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,779
  • Joined: 2003-October-07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2006-February-05, 18:01

Kalvan14, on Feb 5 2006, 06:51 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1S-(2C)-P-(P)-?


What is your pleasure now?

2s no problem yet
0

#4 User is offline   Blofeld 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 2005-May-05
  • Location:Oxford
  • Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.

  Posted 2006-February-05, 18:05

The question is whether to bid 2♠, describing our hand better, or to double, catering to partner having a penalty pass.

Will doubling then pulling 2red to 2♠ show extra values? I'm inclined to think not[1], so I shall venture a double.

[1] but I am exhausted at present. I may think differently when less tired.
0

#5 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2006-February-05, 18:36

I would X. It seems quite likely partner is trapping, if he is not and has hearts he has no values (no neg X) in which case the opps would likely have bid more. If he bids 2H I can bid 2S.
0

#6 User is offline   Free 

  • mmm Duvel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Duvel, Whisky

Posted 2006-February-06, 02:43

If partner is trapping, won't 4♠ make a great chance? How much will 2♣* go down? Won't they find a better contract? Where are all the ♥ on this deal? ...

2♠
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#7 User is offline   luke warm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,951
  • Joined: 2003-September-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Bridge, poker, politics

Posted 2006-February-06, 05:41

i'd double here
"Paul Krugman is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like." Newt Gingrich (paraphrased)
0

#8 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2006-February-06, 06:52

Pard might be trapping, but my ODR is about 4 or 5, and that means attack. 2♠, thus.
0

#9 User is offline   Kalvan14 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 839
  • Joined: 2005-October-20

Posted 2006-February-06, 16:12

1S-(2C)-P-(P)-?

Pard reopened 3♠, which was set by 2 tricks (4 spades and 2 hearts)
Everything is badly divided in this hand, except diamonds.
Overcaller holds Qx AK Txxx KQJ84, and would have likely been set by 2 tricks also.
While S hand has mostly attack values, IMO a reopening double is best, holding spades. It would have been different with hearts, or with a better spade suit, I agree.
0

#10 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2006-February-06, 16:38

I think 3♠ is insane, 2♠ and X are the only options.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#11 User is offline   mike777 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,779
  • Joined: 2003-October-07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2006-February-06, 16:50

Thanks for posting this in the forum.

I learned something and I change my vote to x. It also has me thinking of similiar balancing issues, thanks.
0

#12 User is offline   Kalvan14 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 839
  • Joined: 2005-October-20

Posted 2006-February-06, 17:51

Balancing is one of the grayest areas, or maybe one of those areas which are in flux. I'm also quite interested in these issues, soI'll post another problem which happened yesterday.

Agreed that 3♠ is simply not there. A few years ago, I'd have had no doubt in balancing with 2♠. Now, I'm much more inclined to reopen with a double.
0

#13 User is offline   HeartA 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,016
  • Joined: 2004-October-17

Posted 2006-February-06, 19:08

Jlall, on Feb 5 2006, 07:36 PM, said:

I would X. It seems quite likely partner is trapping, if he is not and has hearts he has no values (no neg X) in which case the opps would likely have bid more. If he bids 2H I can bid 2S.

agree with Justin.
Senshu
0

#14 User is offline   HeartA 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,016
  • Joined: 2004-October-17

Posted 2006-February-06, 19:09

cherdano, on Feb 6 2006, 05:38 PM, said:

I think 3♠ is insane, 2♠ and X are the only options.

totally agree.
Senshu
0
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