More IMP Pairs

So, a couple of weeks ago, I wrote about how I wanted to see more board-a-match games and less Swisses. Being one who claims to be more of a matchpoint player, I stand by that. However, I also believe we should have more imp pair games. The fact that tournaments typically do not have imp pair games is even more surprising than the lack of BAM because most of the bridge that is played online is in the form of imp pairs.

There are 3 NABC BAM events and 1 IMP Pairs Event so it is certainly a form of scoring the ACBL overall thinks is important – why don’t tournaments put these on the regular schedule? I know many people like team games for the camaraderie and also to share the blame for when they lose, and also for the ridiculous masterpoints awarded for team games as compared with pair games. But what I’ve heard more lately is that people like team games because they are different from the regular club matchpoint games. People like to play in a game that’s a different format than what they play at the local club. But then I see other people who say they don’t play on Sunday because all they have are team games and they can never find teammates who they get along with.

What’s the solution to this? IMP Pairs! It’s a different form of scoring and you don’t have to rely on teammates for anything.

I’m not sure if I like pair games better because I like matchpoints better or if it’s just because I don’t get good teammates. But I am optimistic about the teams Sean and I have for Gatlinburg (Greg Roberts and Boyce Robbins), the flight B GNT’s (Richard and Andrew Jeng), and hopefully the 0-5K mini-spingold (hopefully Alli Howard + partner).

Sunday BAM!

It has been a tradition to have a two-session Swiss team game on Sunday of a tournament but I was so happy to be browsing tournament results from last week and see that the sectional in Fairfax, VA, offered a flight A BAM on Sunday! The flight B event was still Swiss but that's okay - it's the better players who are more likely to prefer the grind of a BAM. To any tournament organizers reading this, I would really like to see more Sunday Board-a-match games.

I make no secret about the fact that Swiss team games are my least favorite form of bridge scoring. IMPs in general places too much importance on parts of the game – slam bidding, taking big risks on defense, and the invitational bids that no longer seem invitational because partner can’t stand the chance of missing a game – due mostly to the imbalanced nature of IMP scoring. I have always liked that every hand counts the same in matchpoints. Why should bidding a slam be worth 11 or 13 times as much as making an overtrick in a partscore? Why should a bad defensive play that costs gives up the contract be worth 4 imps when the contract was 2H but be worth 10 imps when the contract was 4H (or 5 and 12 imps if they were vul)?

In addition to that, Swiss teams can really drag if you’re not in the running, more so than any other event. In most other events, you don’t know for sure how well you’re doing until the end. This is also why I don’t particularly like barometer games or Swiss pairs. People do particularly strange things that disrupt the game when they see for sure that they are having a 32% game. In most normal events like a KO, when you lose, you are out and can to start a new event. In Swiss events, when you are losing badly, you may be able to drop out (if it won’t cause a problem with the movement) but then it’s like you’ve wasted part of your entry fee.

I also think Compact KO’s would be good for Sunday events that way people could get on the road back home earlier if they lose. Yes, this would decrease ACBL’s revenue because some teams would only play one session instead of the required 2 for a Swiss, but the people would like it better. Actually, my personal preference would be to combine these 2 ideas and have a Compact KO scored as BAM but I know that event would not be well-liked by bridge players in general.

When to take a Safety Play?

Although I do have a preference for matchpoints and consider my overall style better suited for that type of game, safety plays are among my favorite kind of declarer plays. In today's hand, there are a couple of subtle options. South is in 4♥ after an uncontested auction and west leads the ♦Q.

North
♠	KJxx
♥	Jxx
♦	xxx
♣	Axx
South
♠	Axx
♥	AKQxx
♦	Ax
♣	xxx

You might be able to make it on some sort of strip and endplay but you don't know enough about the distribution and that's not really a possibility to consider. The only real way to make 5 is to draw trumps, play ace of spades and take a spade finesse. This line will make 5 when spades are 3-3 with the Q onside, an 18% chance. It will make only 3 when the suit is 4-2 and the Q is off (24%) or when RHO has 5 or 6 spades with the Q (7%). Combined, this is a 31% chance you'll go down with this line, and you'll make 4 51% of the time: 3-3 w/ Q off (18%), 4-2 w/ Q on (24%), 5 or 6 spades w LHO or stiff Q with RHO (9%). That means on average, you'll make 3.87.

Let us consider another line of play, a line that is only available on a non-club lead, for a club lead would cut out an entry to dummy. What are the percentages of playing the K and A of spades first and then leading low towards the jack? This will never get 4 spade tricks because if the Q falls, the suit cannot split 3-3, so it essentially gives up the chance of an overtrick, but does it fact make the contract more likely to succeed. This line will make 4 77% of the time: any 3-3 split (36%), any other time the Q is onside (32%), Q or QX offside (9%). You will go down 23% of the time: RHO with at least 4 spades including the Q. On average this makes 3.77 tricks, slightly worse then the previous line.

In other words, playing the AK first wins an extra trick (and makes the contract when the other way goes down) when east has Qx of spades (8%), and the finesse wins an overtrick when west has Qxx (16%).

So, how do you decide what line of play to take? In a matchpoint game? In imps? In matchpoints, you should consider how likely the field is to be in the same contract. In this case 4♥ seems to be an easy and normal contract to reach so you probably should try for the maximum number of tricks. In an average game, the field will take the straight up finesse and the matchpoints to be won by taking the safety play when it wins should be about equal to the matchpoints lost when it loses, relative to the straight finesse. If you decide that a significant portion of the field will be in a partscore or in 3NT making only 3, you would be even more concerned with making the contract for just making would already be a good score.

In imps, it's a little different. You don't care so much about the 1 imp you could win by making an overtrick but you care about not losing the 10 or 12 imps (Depending on vulnerability) when you go down and they make at the other table. If the probability of making an overtrick is 10 or 12 times as big as the potential gain from a safety play, then it's an even chance, but this time the ratio is 2:1. By taking the safety play as opposed to the normal finesse at the other table, you'll push the board 76% of the time, win 1 imp 16% of the time, and lose 10 or 12 imps 8% of the time, so in this form of scoring, it's clear to take the safety play.