Thursday, April 08, 2004 9:57
AM
Hand Evaluation - Openers ( Terrorism )
PITBULLS:
There are two ways or
religions ( if you will ) to adopt playing
IMPS . One is constructive , the other
destructive. The constructive way to earn IMPS is to maximize partnership
discipline so as to be accurate in
bidding partials , games and slams & inflicting sets on
the opponents. This partnership discipline also assists defending & sacrificing decisions. In constructive auctions , partners’
bids are always taken at face value
. The assumption of discipline
especially with opening bids
is paramount in all decision making. You can compete better as partner
is always
believed rather than the opponents. There is no extra baggage like leeway compensating
for the possibility of partner not
having what she announced.
I have
coined the name “terrorism “ for the religion of garbage openers . They remind me of the
real thing as they do not care if the improvised explosive device
( I.E.D. or garbage
openers ) take their partnership with
them as long as the table is blown up.
Like religious fanatics they are right with
this doctrine & refuse to see
other points of views. They worship playing
the hand as opposed to defending
even though the Bridge scoring system
rewards penalties substantially more than offensive results. What is a garbage opener ? Garbage openers are a collection
of HCP’s lacking quick tricks or controls aligned in quick trick combinations.
They are soft values with limited
trick taking potential for offense or defense. I call them “semi-psyches”.
Another reason for opening
garbage they rationalize is to get
to lucky games that make like Meckwell. A logical fallacy again though. Quick tricks are necessary for offense also. They provided control
& timing necessary for suit establishment , ruffing , squeezes & endplays. HCP quick trick combinations are the basis of the most common offensive play in Bridge , the finesse.
The “Great Satan “ for them for some inexplicable reason is one of the basics of Bridge , quick tricks. Who in the F… needs quick tricks to open is their battle cry ( religious
chant ? ). This particular HCP concept is an infidel & will
not be tolerated with this religion. I assume that do not want any restrictions to prevent them from
“blowing up auctions “ more frequently. Perhaps it is total
ignorance on their part of the benefits of quick tricks in the game of Bridge. They do not even seem to be
aware they are contradicting themselves
as garbage hands without quick tricks
are a detriment to offense as well
as defense. Tight games should have
nothing to do with justifying their destructive religion. Silly
rationalization & a silly losing approach to a logical game like Bridge.
By
the term discipline , we mean opening bids have the values & defense
measured in quick tricks as
expected for opening bids . We
mean that 1st & 2nd pre-empts never hold
outside controls .
Suits for weak two’s are not destructive Jxxxxx
or the like . Overcalls at the one or two level do not
have bad suits. Vulnerability is respected & more values are
expected when vulnerable. Psyches or tactical bids are always
done when partner is a passed hand & always at favourable vulnerability. Disciplined take out & penalty doubles & the appropriate
use of the green pass card is assumed with the partnership.
1NT overcalls have a stopper in the bid suit with no singletons. In competitive auctions ,
bids have a meaning rather than “just pushing them up “. Competitive doubles have defense
not just distribution for the unbid suits.
Constructive
bidding brings out the partnership element of Bridge .
Forcing passes show the beauty of the partnership element of Bridge . Single handed actions are rare & only if
the hand dictates it. Otherwise, you try to get partners input by
inviting her to the party in all your
bidding decisions. You respect your partners
ability ,
so do not gamble poorly & risk going for huge sets. Trapping & balancing are a big part
of maintaining partnership discipline
in bidding. The gambling element of
Bridge is done intelligently like in Poker games with pot odds
& not like in a Casino with blind luck.
Modern garbage
openers without quick tricks were
designed for & by destructive bidders. This style is
advocated by pro’s who must play with clients for a living or solo artists who think Bridge is poker. Clients cannot defend so the pros by necessity reduce
Bridge to offense only. There is no Bridge logic for these garbage openers other than to “make
them guess” where them includes
partner ( client ) . Bridge players must know the importance of controls ( quick
tricks ) so taking them out of the
opening bid structure ( requirement ) makes no theoretical Bridge sense. They are distorting opener bids to use them as a tactic where the opponents are the incentive for opening rather than partner so the language of bidding suffers. They are
opening for the sole purpose to disturb
the opponents at the expense of
partner. The lack of a quick trick
requirement even allows them to “open” even more hands to fool the opponents.
Semi-psyches ( modern garbage openers) are the main tool for destructive bidders.
Destructive bidders are usually “solo artists” who have a partner only because
the rules of Bridge demand it or they
are getting paid for results J. Clients do not care if they are taken out of
the picture as long as the result justifies
the means.
The
destructive approach to Bridge is to
win IMPS by causing the opponents to go wrong . Good established partnerships also have that weapon in their repertoire but not at the expense
of partnership discipline . If any bid (
opener or not ) might get partner
as well as the opponents , the bid is not made in a constructive
partnership. With the destructive partnership
( terrorism ) , partner is fair game also. If
you make a modern garbage opener
causing partner to go wrong by doubling the opponents into game or bidding a slam going down , you
deem it the cost of doing business as per the terrorist religious doctrine.
When
you pre-empt with an outside Ace
thereby missing a slam or cause partner to make a pseudo sacrifice
, you are “unlucky” . If you overcall vul
on a Qxxxx suit ,
go for 1100 you shrug your shoulders & say “these things happen”. If you
overcall 1NT without a stopper in the opponents suit ,
they cash 5 tricks in 3NT when another game makes it is “unlucky” . You
overcall 1NT with a stiff , partner bids a game in that suit & goes down
when 3NT is cold again it is “bad luck “ . You open a weak two vul with Jxxxxx , the opponents convert the balancing double so you
go for 800 it is “unlucky” . You play a 10 HCP 1NT vul
against non vul & get doubled for 1400 with your
partners coming back with +460 in 3NT is unlucky. You overcall or open 1NT on
14 one time & 18 another time so partner has to field it .
You get to 22 HCP games & go two down vul or get misdefense & make it.
You make a single handed sacrifice to 7♣ & push the opponents
into a vul 7♥
that your partners do not get to . Unlucky
! Conventional toys like Michaels
& Unusual 2NT bids are total undisciplined with
a range of 0-40 HCP. Does not matter if partner has any idea what your range is
as the opponents being confused are more important than partner judging correctly in competitive auctions. You do not
bid your own hand when you bid , you gamble that partner can cover your
losses otherwise you risk going for a huge set or misleading partner. Again
partner is an unnecessary complication to your grand plan starting
from the garbage opening bid on.
The destructive style is based on poor gambling or just random terrorism . You are gambling that the opponents do the wrong
thing & partner does not get in the way by believing you . This was a definition of a psyche for the first 60 years of the game. This style of Bridge
works best in weak fields where you
are taking advantage of the opponents inexperience
in dealing with such situations . Your system is geared towards destructive
bidding so single handed decisions are the norm
. What this does , of course is erode
partnership discipline & trust. I was playing against a team recently that employ such tactics. Partner opens two
spades vul
, you hold ♠Jxx ♥KJ109x ♦xxx
♣xx , RHO passes . When you play undisciplined weak twos vul,
you are scared to take tactical action. If you bid 3, you
may go for a tremendous set if partner has xxxxxx for
example. For a disciplined
partnership , this hand is a natural for a 2NT bid or a 3 spade
bid as the opponents are in the +26 HCP range . Partner this time had quite the
weak two ♠KQ109xx ♥Axx ♦xxxx ♣void so 4 spades makes .
3NT , 5♣, 5♦ all
make the other direction but you can jam the opponents out of the
auction. They passed 2♠ so we had room to get to our game. They said they
did not want to bid 3♠ as they were vul which
is ridiculous leeway,
in my opinion.
Playing
this destructive style of terrorism , partnership confidence
is put at risk . Responder must deal with the ambiguity of partner not having what she announced for an opening bid. In competitive
auctions , you must believe the opponents
rather than partner. In fact , the opponents guide
you through the auction rather
than partner. This works well when partner does not have his bid
with a modern garbage opener but back fires when
partner does have his bid & the opponents do not . The destructive style of
terrorism is by necessity a “master minding” approach
. You cannot pass the ball to
partner as either of you might not have your bid .
The opponents escape unscathed because you are “compensating” for partner not having his bid . This is a win win situation for the opponents . Sacrificing is a pure gamble as we do not know when we have defensive tricks or not as that is not a requirement
for a modern garbage opener apparently.
Quick tricks are not a consideration for religious reasons only as
they have otherwise passed the test of
time with Bridge logic for well over a ½ century .
Quick tricks make more than Bridge sense , they are a Bridge fundamental.
Slam
bidding is
one of the victims in this destructive garbage style. Partnerships who do not trust each other leap to game
quite often . Slams that require delicate Q bidding
are missed . Partner must overbid just to say he did
not have a garbage opener this time rather than legitimate extra values . Actually , games are
missed because you make very heavy invitational bids in case partner “does not have a opener” after he has
opened. Leeway is given because there is that nagging doubt doe partner
really have an opener
this time ? Does partner now accept the invitation when he just
has what he has shown or does he bid
game because he is not an Ace short of his opener ? Opening leads take a beating playing
the undisciplined style. If you lead
from Kx against 3NT after a weak two auction , you risk hitting the opponents AQJ10 suit . Unlucky as overcalls
& weak twos are just to disturb the opponents so not for
leads ! Sorry partner , you got destroyed this
time.
We have caved into destructive
bidding on one vulnerability only nv vrs vul
( the terrorist
vulnerability) . With this one
vulnerability only,
we bid like Meckwell & the other
pros who subscribe to modern garbage bidding. We do this even without having a forcing ♣ to fall back on as
the vulnerability protects us to
some extent. The other 3 vulnerabilities , we play disciplined partnership Bridge. On the
terrorist vulnerability , we put pressure on
partner to read the situation & give us leeway the
pros get on all vulnerabilities. Keeping the opponents from their
rightful vulnerable games is just too large a prize with IMP scoring. We
subscribe to the Bridge sin of believing the vul opponents rather than nv partner. We must give partner tremendous
leeway as we are sacrificing bidding accuracy for the benefit of disturbing the opponents auctions. Our
penalty doubles or competitive bidding are based on our own hand only as
partner is not asked to contribute anything as she may be bluffing for the opponents
benefit, as in Poker. Edgar Kaplan
many years ago introduced the “controlled
psyche” concept . This is in effect the same thing with
the vulnerability being the caution flag.
We rationalize to ourselves & call these tactics “playing the vulnerability” . Partner is only a nervous
wreck ¼ of the time this way J .
The
style of Bridge religion you
choose, I guess is up to the
partnership. There are many players in Edmonton & the world that subscribe
to Bridge as a bidders game , let them figure it out
& colour is for kids with the goal of a garbage
opener for the opponents
benefit. . They open flat 5-3-3-2 twelve HCP’s with little or no quick tricks. Partner somehow must field it as if there is an “undo” in Bridge. Frankly , I will not
play Bridge like a terrorist, as
I feel insulted by all the straight Casino like gambling & partnership destruction. There is an
element of gambling in Bridge but I think the game is above that type of gambling which could take the partnership
down with you. The partnership element of Bridge is just
to huge a factor to sacrifice in order to play this destructive style . Modern
garbage openers are a very real form of terrorism ,
the way I see it. Terrorism is not
the way to play Bridge in my opinion as Bridge is a game of skill not chance.. With terrorism ,
it is always “feast or famine” for your
I.E.D.’s . They win big when their
tactics work & do their damage by blowing up the opponents. They lose big
& far more often when their tactics fail & they get blown up instead ! Bridge suicide
is tolerated and even encouraged with
their religion. Suicide is never a good thing , not
even in a game of Bridge because you are
taking partner & your team mates with you. Suicide is considered very selfish by our society.
In the Thursday nite IMP games in Edmonton , it has
been proven statistically over the
years. The modern garbage bidders
win big once , than for the next long stretch they end up
on or near the bottom. The constructive bidders win often also but when they do not , they are 2nd ,
3rd, 4th & remain in the top half.
This is the way the law of probabilities
dictate it to happen. Live by the sword , die by the
sword for the terrorists ( solo artists & modern garbage bidders ). Quoting George Bush , “you are
either with the terrorists or against them”. Not hard to figure out my position L.