Saturday, May 05, 2007 9:17 AM

Hand Evaluation – Balancing ( Trapping )

PITBULLS:

Trapping is a “poker” element of Bridge . Its related to “sandbagging” in poker where you take no initial action with a good hand . It is a philosophy rather than a strategy . I equate trapping to “playing the vulnerability”. It’s an indicator to me whether to enter the auction or stay out of the auction. We do not trap vul vrs nv but will trap on the three other vulnerability scenarios. We do not play the penalty double aspect of negative double theory vul vrs not also. Trapping as a hand evaluation concept means I have duplication of value in their suit , so defending is the best way to “take our plus” initially . The Vinnies , among others of the Cohen disciples , do not subscribe to this philosophy . They believe it’s much better to get in early at all costs . Even at the expense at overcalling 1NT without a stopper in the opponents suit or having a stiff somewhere with their NT overcall . Length & strength in the opponents suit also mean nothing to them as they will bid regardless, rather than trap on any vulnerability . This is the “Bridge is a bidders game” competing philosophy taken to its most fanatical extreme most commonly seen in the matchpoint game.. The corollary of this “religion” is that your balancing doubles will always be T/O as there is no need to “protect’ your trap. Obviously the two strategies are incompatible. You cannot have your balancing doubles totally defined as T/O , these balancing doubles should just promise defense in quick tricks or may be T/O. Shapely offensive hands in the balancing chair should be described by other means rather than a double. Trapping & balancing is not unlike negative double theory.

We subscribe to the other competing philosophy of trapping rather than just bidding like modern garbage bidders advocate. There are two ways of getting a plus score in Bridge , not just bidding. Defending even non doubled contracts can be very lucrative. We feel that you are just rescuing the opponents from impending disaster by always bidding ( competing ) & getting them off the hook when things are very unfavourable for them . This is especially true when you are “playing the vulnerability”. Trapping is also the hand evaluation skill of identifying misfits & letting the opponents play the misfits. “Fools rush in where experts fear to tread”. Modern garbage bidders actually encourage the style of trapping against them. They open garbage ( poor playing hands with soft values ) usually with no respect for vulnerability so they invite trouble when the auction is a misfit. Do not rescue them by bidding. Trap & wait for partner’s double. If the double never comes , take your plus in the best spot for your side. Bridge is a bidders game when we have offensive hands not when we have their suit or unsuitable soft or defensive hands. Over competing & rescuing the opponents are the same thing. Cohenists refuse to believe that self evident truth.

Trapping also imparts discipline to the partnership as partner can infer that if you do bid initially , partner knows you have the requisite shape , a stopper in their suit & no excessive length, strength in their suit. Trapping also brings in the concept of “belated doubles” with the partnership so what do they mean ? Belated doubles with the Vinnies will by necessity have different meanings with them than with a trapping style partnership . Since the Vinnies would have acted initially , belated doubles will almost always mean takeout maybe without defense ( shape ) . With the trappers , belated doubles especially of majors & NT bids will quite often mean penalty or describe transferable values ( quick tricks ) . Partnership understandings again are necessary.

Trapping is vulnerability dependent . You do not trap vul against non vul . You prefer vulnerable games against non vul sets . You manufacture bids vul vrs non vul so maybe overcall 1NT with a stiff honour or without a solid stopper in their minor. Equal & favourable vulnerability , you trap . Vulnerability , length & duplication of value in their suit determine whether I overcall their suit with a NT bid. This is why if their resting spot is 1NT , a double is always for penalty. Trapping breaks down when partner interprets the double of a NT bid for T/O. My partners play 2♣ when the opponents are in 1NT as an all purpose T/O. Doubles cannot be misinterpreted that way.

I held this hand playing with Scott at the sectional ..

A	A	K	A
J	x	10	x
10		x	x
x
x

The opponent in 3^rd seat opened 1♠ . I felt I was too strong in spades to overcall 1NT at equal vulnerability so I passed. LHO bid 1NT so all pass back to me . I doubled & I was lucky to hit Scott with 10 HCP’s with a 5 card club suit . We can make 430 in NT but unfortunately for the opponents that translates to 4 down in 1NT doubled for +800 for us. What if you just want to balance to compete ? Kantar invented an all purpose 2♣ bid for that purpose. A 2♣ bid is in effect a balancing T/O double without a trap. Kantar says you have the best of both worlds with that understanding.

A	K	K	A
x	x	x	K
		x	Q
			J
			x
			x

The vulnerable opponent bid 1♣ . Why bid ? Trap and see what develops . If LHO passes when partner is too weak to balance . The set will compensate .

With the trappers , all belated doubles of NT are penalty oriented showing their suits. With the Vinnies or Cohenists , belated doubles of the opponents NT are takeout oriented . When suits are rebid , the trappers double is penalty , with the Vinnies it might show the two unbid suits as they would have bid initially with the opponents suit . For the Pitbulls , you must adopt a style & all your belated & balancing sequences will stem from that . The trapping style is rubber bridge oriented giving the victim the maximum rope to hang himself therefore maximizing your chances for pluses. The T/O style is prevalent in matchpoints where competing for partials are the ultimate in that particular game. +800 is better than a partial in IMPS though. Big ticket items are more common now with the reckless modern garbage style of bidding. I recommend gearing your trapping style with the times & reap the benefits from garbage bidders..

My Bridge experiences are that the trapping style gets positively re-enforced more often than not. Modern garbage bidders are ripe for the picking by the trapping strategy with their bad garbage openers & 2 level overcalls & disrespect for vulnerability. Trapping also effects the way you balance at the one level or after pre-empts. Playing a trapping style , your re-opening philosophy should be geared to a double. Your double should promise quick tricks rather than perfect shape. This style brings in numerous off shape doubles in the balancing & usually a lower HCP range for a double. Equal level conversion is needed to find the best spot if no penalty conversion takes place. If you tend to get in the auction immediately, you do not need a “balancing” double as such. The double would then be bidding her own hand ( T/O ) rather than what partner did or not do so can start as high as 15 HCP for the double . Balancing means you are bidding partner’s trapped hand as well as your own. You are “bidding the table”.

Normal balancing theory means by balancing you are protecting partner’s hand. This is the reason the auction got around to you at the one level. All bids in the balancing chair should be approximately 3 HCP’s less than normal . Partner compensates by underbidding by 3 HCP’s at his end. This strategy allows the double to be used more often in the balancing seat so penalty conversions can happen more frequently. One level doubles are quite often messy to the tune of +800 or worse.

When you think about it , negative double theory is based on “trapping” . You have a penalty double but you wait until partner re-opens with a double to convert for penalty. Back to trapping being vulnerability dependent. We should not even play negative doubles vulnerable vrs non vul in my mind. When you have a penalty double on this vulnerability , bid NT or find a bid. This allows partner the luxury of not having to stick her neck out vul vrs not and re-open with a weak hand. She can confidently pass knowing that you do not have anything on this particular vulnerability. When partner does re-open with a double on this one vulnerability , she is bidding her own hand , so not just following her negative double theory obligation.

Cohenists have a horrible time with negative double theory. They are so brainwashed that everything in Bridge is geared to them playing the hand for competing purposes, they will not make a re-opening double unless the hand has the required shape for a T/O double. Of course this destroys negative double theory . When you have a juicy penalty double for your pass , partner even with defense does not double as he does not have a T/O shape. Appalling logic or lack thereof. They shirk the responsibility of the penalty double aspect of negative double theory , so just play ½ negative double theory as they see fit..

Do not “trap yourself” by not bidding when you have an obvious negative double. This upsets the delicate balance of nature of negative double theory. When the auction gets passed back to opener , she is going to assume you have a penalty doubles with an unlimited hand. You hold ♠J10xx ♥xx ♦KJx ♣Axxx with partner opening 1♥ & RHO bidding 2♦. There is no reason to trap as a negative double describes a 9 HCP hand with 4-4 in the unbid suits. However you pass & partner re-opens with 2♥. When partner goes against negative double theory , a red flag goes up. She did not want you to convert for penalty even with a possible 19 HCP trap pass. They now bid 2♠ so you cannot “make up for lost time” and double as they still may have the balance of power. You fixed yourself by not bidding initially so a pass is in order and they end up in a quiet diamond partial making +130. At the other table your teammates made +460 for a nice pickup.

Trapping means you have a reason to trap. It is not just playing “wait & see” . When you have the unbid suits with HCP’s , get in there fast as partner will never read your pass correctly for opening leads or anything else. There is always the why did partner not bid element. My partner held this hand recently. ♠AQ ♥KQxxx ♦Jx ♣QJ98 , LHO opened 1♦ & RHO bid 1♠. You have 15 HCP’s & 9 cards in the unbid suits so this is an obvious T/O double. My partner passed & they bought the hand in a NT partial. I led a spade because I inferred she must have their suit for not acting initially ( I held minimum values ) . Not acting initially is master minding & removing partner from the decision making process. You will determine the final outcome from your side of the table only.

Bidding belatedly is more difficult than bidding initially. Here are two hands that complicated the bidding by “trapping” for no apparent reason. Not having the “ideal” T/O double is no reason to trap. Partner will not read you for that hand later on the auction & play you for severe duplication of value in their suit. Trapping means that you have wasted duplication of value in their suit. They open 1♠ & you have ♠Ax ♥Q1098 ♦Axxx ♣Kxx you should get in there with a T/O double. You have the unbid major , the required HCP count & shortness in their suit. The reason to trap should be duplication in their suit & not just length. Recently a new player held ♠Ax ♥AKQx ♦xxxxx ♣Kx , they opened 1♦ to her right so now what. Wrong hand in which to trap. I would overcall 1♥ . This hits partner with ♠KQJ10xx ♥109876 ♦void ♣xx so they must cash their club Ace to hold your heart slam to 6. The new player passed initially & the opponents bought the contract their way !!

A tormentee recently practiced the bad habit of “wait & see” & ended up trapping herself. Bergen scornfully calls these type of players the pass & guess later contingent. I agree with Bergen that bidding early is better than passing . However , do not over do it. When you have an obvious bid at the one level , make the bid as the opponents can make it difficult for you to bid later. ♠Kxxx ♥KQ1098 ♦xxx ♣x , everybody vul partner opens 1♣ & RHO overcalls 1♠. This is an obvious negative double as your spade spots & values are unsuitable for a trap pass. You double & pull partners minor to 2♥ which is very standard Bridge. The Tormentee passed & when the opponents raised to 2♠ she had no bid in the balancing seat. Bidding 3♥ singlehandedly now could be right into their 5 card heart suit !! We doubled 2♠ instead & they made it on bad defense.

Need to discuss your trapping philosophy with partner ..