Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-Card Run, Partner Didn't Show Meld & Outbid Me
#1
Just played a game on WoCG.  My partner dealt.  I had
AC  TC  TC  TC  KC  QC  QC  QC  QC  JC  AD  TS  KS  QS  TH  TH  TH  TH  KH  KH

RHO passed.  With only 17 meld, I didn't want to be too aggressive, so I just bid 50.  LHO passed.  The bid then went (partner) 51-52-53-54-55.  I finally gave in.

My partner had a double pinochle, and nothing spectacular.  Her hand was
KC  KC  AD  TD  JD  JD  JD  AS  TS  TS  KS  QS  QS  JS  AH  QH  QH  QH  JH  JH

Obviously, she should have given me a meld bid, either on her first or second bid.  With both opponents out of the hunt, there was no reason not to - and it would have given us the liberty to sort out who had the better hand.  I could understand if she didn't the first one, because my 50 could have been a save...but when I bid again and again...?

We wound up making the bid, opponents saved and pulled 50 points in the hand.  Without simulating the hand as if I took the bid, it's tough to say if they would have saved...but I'm guessing they would not have.

Anyway, we did wind up winning the game.  It took a little while longer, as this was not the only error my partner made.  I think it probably took 2-3 extra hands for us to win.

I feel better now.
Reply
#2
So the auction went:

Code:
Seat1 PartnerLady
Seat2 RHO
Seat3 TigreLXIL
Seat4 LHO

Dealer Seat1
Bids1 Pass 50 Pass 51
Bids2 - 52 - 53
Bids3 - 54 - 55

Let's discuss the potential thought bubbles...

Seat2 Pass -> "I can't bid"
Seat3 50 -> "I have a Declarer type hand, I can easily protect my partner from being stuck"
Seat4 Pass ->"I can't bid"
Seat1 51 -> "I have a hand better than any average dealer-sparing bid"

Seat3 52 -> "There is no way she has a longer, stronger trump than mine"
Seat1 53 -> "Thank you for asking if I truly want the contract, yes, my hand is strong enough to stand up for itself"

Seat3 54 -> "Look, I've got a whooper here.  If you outbid me three times you'd better have a monster as well"
Seat1 55 -> "Come on, guy, I know I can make this contract.  How long are we going to carry on like this?"


My Analysis:
No I don't think a meld bid was of any importance.  She was only right to give a meld bid if she intended to surrendor captaincy to you.  Clearly she had other plans, so the meld bid is useless communication.
I would have stopped bidding, like you, after 3 rounds of the auction.  I would have assumed she had a world-beater of a hand with voids/singletons and a good collection of aces.
I think this points out that your partner has a knowledge deficit regarding what constitutes a playable hand and what is a powerful playing hand; as well as what it means to call consecutive +1 bids with a partner.

3 unobstructed rounds of bidding should always be sufficient to determine who has the better playing hand -- unless one player suffers from delusions.
Without knowing the player, I would profile her as the type of player that is only concerned with the offensive outcome of a hand, and that the importance of denying the defense doesn't enter into her strategy.
If she was thinking unselfishly, she would certainly need to wonder why you bid for captaincy three times!

Lastly, If I was Seat1, I probably would have communicated meld  "55" @ Bid2 then "Pass" @ Bid3.  This would have been a logical time to show meld support and bow out.  Giving the meld would afford TigreLXIX the ability to declarer a Play-Rich & Meld-Poor hand rather than a Play-Poor & Meld-Rich hand (if he had a choice).
It's unbelievable how much you don't know about the game you've been playing all your life. -- Mickey Mantle
Reply
#3
Yes, your partner should have shown meld at some point.

50 -- ambiguous, could be just a save
51 -- could be just a bare run
52 -- a hand worth opening in first seat
55 -- shows the hand *perfectly*...shows the meld, AND shows some offensive orientation. Showing 30 now makes the first bid a strength bid.

But your partner also totally failed to understand that her hand is at the absolute *bottom* for a strength bid. When you bid 52, you showed *at least* as much of a hand as what she had. This is something no one teaches, and it's why I think my 35-7-6 is a critical concept.

I *might* have tried once more and bid 56. This is still a 10 card suit. I would do so, if I have ANY reason to believe she's a clueless git. But at some point you have to give up. The truth of the matter is, many players are horrendous. I've been in your position several times recently on PlayOK, with idiot players who never listen. Your only real option is to try to keep track of them, and don't play with them.
Reply
#4
Hey, Tigre, this might make ya feel better.

Playing on PlayOK...the dealing seems a little better overall...

I'm sitting South, and am dealer.  West opens 50;  his partner shows 40 after, IIRC, my pard showed 20.  I have 9 aces, but no meld.  Licking my chops...I wonder if........

Yep.  Pard had aces.  

West asked for meld with something like a 7 card run that was no better than ATK high, and *1* side ace.  4, maybe 5 tricks.  (Yes, I know my basic count says it's 5, because it counts 4 tricks from trump.  This is a case when you down-value.) When the hand was over, declarer, who had asked for meld, took a total of 8 points.  Dummy apologized for having no aces, but that wasn't the problem.  The problem was bidding total junk.  Sure, declarer ran into some bad luck...*we* pulled 42...but he needs a LOT from partner to make.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)