Help
mikeh, on 2014-May-07, 11:49, said:
This is what I mean by talking oneself out of an action. I do it myself all the time: it is (imo) my biggest weakness as a bridge player: I find reasons to be conservative. There is no reason to place partner with a stiff club. Indeed, statistically he and LHO are more likely to have club length than is opener, and partner is statistically most likely of all to have club length. Opener showed 5+ spades, which reduces the spaces for clubs. Partner failed to pre-empt at favourable, thus eliminating a set of hands more likely to have short clubs....imagine he opened 3♦ instead of passing. None of this makes a huge difference, but the reality is that partner is less than 33% to be the one with short clubs, assuming a 2=2=1 0r some 320 break,
My action wasn't all based on the hope that partner had a singleton or void in clubs. I thought the ♦K was likely to be a trick, and I felt unlucky that neither of these chances came off.
mikeh, on 2014-May-07, 11:49, said:
My 'silly comment' was based on you posting your observation that your choice of 2♣ was most popular, in a context that suggested, to me at least, that you saw that as somehow validating your choice. I note that in your post, referencing the popularity of your choice, you made no attempt to deal with the arguments made in the thread. Indeed, you still haven't...all you have done is state that you feared that both games would fail based on what I trust you will now see to be a low-frequency occurrence.
Your posting here so far seems to reveal a very common, human attitude. You posted a good problem. You pretended, even perhaps to yourself, that you were looking for advice. You get advice, including some detailed analysis.
You choose to note none of the arguments against your choice, note that your choice was leading the poll, and try to defend your bad decision (bad in theory and in practice) by referring not to the arguments presented here but to the same erroneous reasoning you used at the table.
IOW, while you may claim to have been looking for advice, you were instead looking for confirmation that you acted reasonably.
You aren't going to learn much with that attitude.
Your posting here so far seems to reveal a very common, human attitude. You posted a good problem. You pretended, even perhaps to yourself, that you were looking for advice. You get advice, including some detailed analysis.
You choose to note none of the arguments against your choice, note that your choice was leading the poll, and try to defend your bad decision (bad in theory and in practice) by referring not to the arguments presented here but to the same erroneous reasoning you used at the table.
IOW, while you may claim to have been looking for advice, you were instead looking for confirmation that you acted reasonably.
You aren't going to learn much with that attitude.
I'm doing none of the things you accuse me of. I wouldn't ask the question if I weren't prepared to consider the answers. I've read all of them very carefully, and you seem to be taking offence because I haven't declared yours the "correct" one and repented of my errant ways. I have not tried to insist I am right, and I'm quite prepared to accept that my choice was wrong. I'm just trying to find out why (if indeed it is wrong), and advance my thinking beyond just counting the cards in my longest suit and my high-card points when deciding whether or not to pre-empt, which is what beginners are taught to do. That way I may be better able to deal with this situation if it comes up again. In the same way that ♠KQJ10763 ♥8 ♦Q3 ♣532 is a good pre-emptive hand and ♠A1075432 ♥94♦75 ♣A10 a poor one, I thought this hand had too much defensive potential for a pre-emptive bid.
I note that you are now leading in the poll. Read into that what you will.