Wednesday,
April 28, 2004 12:50 AM
Hand
Evaluation – Competitive Decision Making
PITBULLS:
Bridge
is a partnership game . When you can use that fact to your advantage you are way better off. The beauty of forcing pass theory is with a pass you giving
your partner information to make a joint
decision for the partnership . Your pass
says you want to take offensive action in a high level auction but if partner’s
hand is more defensive oriented or weak then let’s double the opponents. Your
partner’s opinion was taken into consideration when you decided to double the
opponents. Much better than making a single handed decision for the partnership. Results when
the partnership has made a decision
as opposed to one partner taking matters into his own hand are far far better.
D.S.I.P.
competitive double theory is an attempt to re-enforce that Bridge is a partnership game by getting both partners input into the decision
making process. D.S.I.P. theory borrows from
forcing pass theory but it uses
the double rather than the pass to encourage
bidding. In addition , D.S.I.P. theory only applies in
competitive auctions where
forcing pass theory does not. Let’s use
& modify the Tom/Bob 2♣
auction against Maurice & Susan as an example.
!♦-P-1♠-2♣
2♠-3♣-4♠-?
Say Tom has this collection ♠x ♥AKx ♦1098 ♣AKxxxx . With the opponents
bidding his singleton & partner raising his 6 card suit is not a 5♣
bid reasonable ?
Not playing D.S.I.P. doubles , he only
bids 5♣ with a hand that does contain defensive values as well as
offensive values. Partners 3♣ bid was based on the wrong values for your
side ♠Kxxx ♥xx ♦KJxx ♣J10x
or a
similar defensive hand. Ace of spades lead , partner plays a low spade . Switch to the diamond Ace
so RHO ruffs . Turns out opener had Qxx of clubs so you go for –500. Now playing D.S.I.P. doubles , you want to bid 5♣ so you ask partners permission to do so by doubling 4♠ . Partner happily passes so you collect 1 club , 2 hearts , a heart ruff & your spade
King. This is +500 your way for a 1000 difference !!
What
if the 2♣ bidder had ♠Kxx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AKxxx
with the
same auction ? This time he passes 4♠ as he wants to
defend so partner wants to bid 5♣ .
Partner has a singleton spade , well
located diamonds with 4 trump. ♠x ♥xxxx ♦KJ10x ♣QJ109 so 5♣ looks
nice from his perspective. You
double saying you want to bid 5♣ but partner says no thanks lets defend. You score both
diamonds, the clubs are 2-2 , you get a heart & a
spade trick. Down 3 for the opponents
+800 & 5♣ goes for -500 !
Lets
look at the positive offensive hands . Partner doubles
with the first hand saying he wants to bid 5♣ .
You hold ♠Qxx ♥QJxxx ♦x ♣QJxx
& bid 5♣ . This is a double game swing as
both sides make their contract ! Say partner bid 2♣
just for a lead with ♠x ♥xxxx ♦xx ♣AKQJ10x ( I would pre-empt
to 3♣) so of course he passes 4♠ as not enough
defense to double. You want to bid 5♣ from your side with ♠xx ♥KQxx ♦Kx ♣xxxx so you double . Partner bids
5♣ so you have a one down sacrifice against a cold 620 in spades . If the vulnerability
for a sac was not right , you simply pass.
The difference in these auctions from standard
bidding is that there was no single handed
decision making. The double as “asking permission to bid” brought
the other partner into the
process. Of course , you should not over do that . Do not leave up to partner
what you can do yourself if you
had the hand for it . You hold ♠x ♥AKx ♦xx ♣AKxxxxx
you simply
bid 5♣ over 4♠ as long as partner
raised clubs we are playing this hand.
This
treatment of course is not a 100% magic bullet. You still need to exercise judgment like duplication of value
in the trump suit , shortness in their known suit ,
extra length in partners suit , controls vrs queens
& jacks etc , vulnerability considerations , state of the match etc . In
other words , Bridge experience is very necessary.
Standard
bidding has the penalty double as an ambiguous either or bid .
Partner can have a strong defensive hand for doubling 4♠ which combined with
your distributional hand will make a 5♣ game . However , what if partner had spade values for his penalty double of 4♠ ?? You cannot pull the double for
fear that it might be that hand . This ambiguity
screws up the decision making process . The
double should not be ambiguous in
these auctions. The advocates of this type of bidding just make a rule “ do not pull my penalty doubles” . –790 occurs when your
distribution obliterates partners defense so if you do bid 5♣ with his
points in spades an awful pseudo sac
happens . The trouble with this bidding is the decision is made from only one side of the table & only looking at one hand. D.S.I.P. theory “looks at two hands “
.
There
should be no room for ambiguous penalty doubles in high level or low level competitive auctions. D.S.I.P. theory to the rescue. Everybody should be convinced
by now that this
new way of thinking in
competitive auctions is the way to go. .