Justin Lall

Ask Justin 3 April 3, 2009

About playing matchpoints, I’m wondering why you think avoiding zeroes are so important. If you were getting two tops for every bottom before, isn’t that a great 66% game? In other words, why is reducing volatility important if you have great expected value?

The first problem is that you win less often playing this style. You will have more 75 % games and more 55 % games, but 75 % is overkill for winning. I submit that playing in any game other than a national two very good players rate to win a large percentage of the time with a low variance style. They don’t need to risk zeros to do it.

The bigger problem is that your expected value can be increased by playing down the middle in the beginning because of the flexibility you gain. If you have too many average minus boards you can change your style and go for tops again and get back in it. However, if you start by playing tops and bottoms, and get too many bottoms the game is probably out of reach. To get back in it you have to take negative EV propositions, and your EV is being reduced. Of course if you are playing tops and bottoms and start with a lot of tops you could play sounder, but it’s better to start off normal and see what you need to do later.

The biggest problem is that if you take top or bottom swings in the bidding which is where most of the opportunities will come from, your superior card play is going to matter less.

Consider for instance bidding a close 23 HCP 3N or playing 1N. If you make 3N on tough card play you will get a top. However, if you had played 1N you might have gotten a top anyways. If you make 120 you will probably get above average because you played it well and some only made 90, but down 1 in 3N is zero. Obviously it would be silly to risk a zero by bidding this 3N.

Consider doubling them in a close 4H game. If they make you will get a zero, if they go down you get a top. Even if you have great defense to beat 4 two tricks, had you not doubled you still would get a top for that great defense. Doubling is just unnecessary, and risks a zero when they’re able to make it because there was nothing special you could do.

Taking big views in the bidding also commits you to a decision on how to win the board way too early. You can take all the views you want during the cardplay because you have much more information to go on. You don’t want to eliminate your chance to do something special in a normal 4H contract because you chose to bid 3N with a 9 card heart fit. There is advice in declarer play that you should delay the guess as long as possible, this is true in this situation as well.

I have talked to many people about matchpoints. One of them thinks that one should blast games at matchpoints because the defense will be worse. Another player thinks that one needs to be aggressive against weak players to pick up all the matchpoints against them, in order to win the event. Another player kibitzed the world open pairs and noticed the success of someone who just blasts to 3NT whenever possible (hiding his hand) and scores very well but with high variance. I’m wondering what you think about these theories.

LC Chen

I agree with the theory of hiding your hand to make the lead and defense hard for the opponents. It is all about balance, and I think some people go too far with it. In an ideal world you get to the best contract as quickly as possible, however sometimes you give away information to gain accuracy, and sometimes you blast and sacrifice accuracy. I would say I’m right in the middle of the blast/science spectrum.

Being aggressive against weak players in competitive auctions is a very good idea, especially non vulnerable. They’ll drop tricks and won’t double you and will probably undercompete. Other than that you don’t need to be aggressive. Do not bid hyper aggressive games against them, as we saw earlier that would be a big mistake. Don’t double them more aggressively unless you’re protecting your plus score.

The final thing I will add is that coming up with lots of strategies and theories for matchpoints is not the best way to improve your results in matchpoint events. Just play better, and figure out where you are dropping tricks or making bad bids. A lot of the players who are very successful in matchpoints at the national level tell me they basically play it like imps without the aggressive game bidding. That is probably not an optimal way to play, and just shows that they win because they are excellent bridge players.