[MickyB]

phil_20686, on 2012-June-11, 11:54, said:

Since I started playing transfer Walsh I feel like I have a pretty strong reason not to upgrade, as the chance of reaching a good 2M/3m partscore instead of 1N is dramatically increased compared to standard methods, at least if the opponents pass

Really?

Nat/bal club with transfer walsh allows you to occasionally stop in 1M with 11-13 NTs and in 1N with 17-19 NTs. It also allows you to reach 4-4 spade fits when some people bid 1m:1H, 1N:P. However, I can't see how it makes it easier to reach a good 3m part-score, quite the opposite in fact.

Quote

I suspect that a reverse effect happens if you play precision, as now the 1d (and 2c) opener is such a loser that it makes sense to upgrade frequently.

A nat/bal limited 1D opening should tend to do better than a nat/bal wide-ranging 1C opening. Obviously many Precisionites open 1D on some unbalanced club hands, but then their 2C opening shows 6 cards and isn't a loser any more IMO.

[phil_20686]

MickyB, on 2012-June-11, 12:09, said:

Really?

Nat/bal club with transfer walsh allows you to occasionally stop in 1M with 11-13 NTs and in 1N with 17-19 NTs. It also allows you to reach 4-4 spade fits when some people bid 1m:1H, 1N:P. However, I can't see how it makes it easier to reach a good 3m part-score, quite the opposite in fact.



A nat/bal limited 1D opening should tend to do better than a nat/bal wide-ranging 1C opening. Obviously many Precisionites open 1D on some unbalanced club hands, but then their 2C opening shows 6 cards and isn't a loser any more IMO.

Obviously you can play xfer walsh different ways. I play that after 1c-1s= transfer to NT-1N I can bid either minor natural and to play, and generally do so with any hand that would pull a wk nt if its a major. With the 4M5(6) d you can transfer into your major and still play in 2d if it seems right by using 2c-2d checkback. You always get to the right spot when partner is 4-5 or 44 in the majors, as the auction can go 1c-1d-1h-1s to show 44 with no game interest. I also allow that 1c-1N=> clubs can be 5-9 with 5 clubs, or any GF with clubs the longest suit, and I would do that with a weak hand that just wants to play in clubs opposite a wk nt.

Also when opener has (23)35 with a small doubleton you can have auctions like 1c-1d-1h-1n-2c = 5 clubs and 3 card support for your major.

On your second point, although it sounds plausible as a general statement that a limited opening ought to do better, I don't think it is true in practice, as its the variation in shape, rather than strength, that is important in part score auctions.

[JLOGIC]

phil_20686, on 2012-June-11, 11:54, said:

I think your upgrade tendencies matter a lot here. If you basically never open a 14 count red vs white in second (understandable), then this is pretty close and probably just on the side of an invite.

I just find it hard to believe people don't open 1N with AKT9x and an ace and a king or something. That hand is clearly worth 15 that is why I would upgrade it. AQJxx and a king and an ace is ok for me too. Etc. Likewise, if you add a king to those hands, I cannot imagine that people don't upgrade it out of 1N. Even with very normal but conservative upgrading tendencies, I cannot see inviting with this. My point is just that there are so many more 14 counts than 17 counts that if you are upgrading hands like that, even though it is a small %age of 14s, it still makes an impact on your 1N openers. Likewise, if you cannot have the huge 17 counts, that hurts your chances for game.

If you can literally have any 15, no 14s, and any 17, I do not know but the fact that you think that would make this hand just worth an invite is pretty damning for actually inviting. And have you really seen many people pass the invite with 16? I would bet that people bid with 15 more than they pass with 16 and rightfully so. That is very bad for this hand.

I would be interested in simulations on this one, I think they will show that passing is clear. True, a double dummy simulation will be beneficial for the defenders, but they also won't double you which is a pretty big factor, though I guess it depends on the opps.

[antonylee]

Assuming a strict 15-17 opening (and all 5cM hands as well), my DD sim over 1k deals says that Staymaning is better than passing by ~0.2 imp per board even if accepting all 16 counts, if you only accept on 17 counts then you are ~0.4 imp better. If 1N covers all 14s instead, Staymaning costs you ~0.6 imp per board (the difference between accepting and rejecting with 16s is less than 0.1 imp). So I guess this really depends on how many 14s you put in your NT opener (as well as how many 3532/2533s, which probably contribute a lot to making 4♥s).
On the other hand this was done with a new DD simulator that I've just written so I feel like I need someone else to confirm these numbers.

[JLOGIC]

Thanks for the simulation. If you are going to stayman and play hearts opposite a heart fit, well, I could not stomach having the auction 1N p 2C p 2H p 3H p 4H holding xxxx hearts. That one is really going to get doubled a lot lol. It's not hard to double that auction with 4 good hearts, and if hearts are 4-1 they will very often have good hearts. If I staymaned and partner bid 2H I'd def pass.

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-11, 16:00, said:

I just find it hard to believe people don't open 1N with AKT9x and an ace and a king or something. That hand is clearly worth 15 that is why I would upgrade it. AQJxx and a king and an ace is ok for me too. Etc. Likewise, if you add a king to those hands, I cannot imagine that people don't upgrade it out of 1N. Even with very normal but conservative upgrading tendencies, I cannot see inviting with this. My point is just that there are so many more 14 counts than 17 counts that if you are upgrading hands like that, even though it is a small %age of 14s, it still makes an impact on your 1N openers. Likewise, if you cannot have the huge 17 counts, that hurts your chances for game.

If you can literally have any 15, no 14s, and any 17, I do not know but the fact that you think that would make this hand just worth an invite is pretty damning for actually inviting. And have you really seen many people pass the invite with 16? I would bet that people bid with 15 more than they pass with 16 and rightfully so. That is very bad for this hand.

Yeah, I agree with you. I upgrade something like 10-20% of 14 counts, and downgrade about 1% of 15 counts out of my 1N. I used to upgrade closer to 50% of fourteens. (numbers approximate obviously)

It was just my judgement on this hand that if you were very conservative in what you open 1N, you could certainly make this a close decision, and in fact that extreme conservatism could make this into an invite. That seems to be broadly what the simulation said.

From the PoV of DD simulations, I think if you upgrade 14's that you judge to be an average 15, you are not changing the strength profile very much, since I think the median hand is good fifteen to average 16. More common is to upgrade any 14 count which is equivalent to the poorest 15 count that you would open 1N, and this drags the strength profile down a lot.

[jillybean]

This discussion of upgrading 14 counts to be included in your 15-17 1nt openings is interesting, I do not recall upgrading
a 14 count, ever. I will experiment with random BBO experts and discuss it with my partner.

[Hanoi5]

jillybean, on 2012-June-12, 09:51, said:

This discussion of upgrading 14 counts to be included in your 15-17 1nt openings is interesting, I do not recall upgrading
a 14 count, ever. I will experiment with random BBO experts and discuss it with my partner.

Hi, welcome to the forum.

[jillybean]

Hanoi5, on 2012-June-12, 14:14, said:

Hi, welcome to the forum.

ASS

[the hog]

jillybean, on 2012-June-12, 14:28, said:

ASS

Rofl Jilly. Good riposte!