The side suits areSkyDog wrote: ↑29 September 2025, 18:37 It's definitely a safer one bid than a nil bid (trumping in on a third diamond trick), but that gets you nowhere compared to what a nil would.
You just have to hope the spades aren't distributed evenly with each of the other players getting three, or hope that if another player has 4 or more that they aren't able to get rid of them by trumping in early.
It also depends on the game situation going into the hand, as that would change the risk level you should be willing to take.
If it was three low cards in each of the non-spade suits, I'd go nil all the way.
With what is shown, I'd go nil more often than not, but not by a whole lot.
It's not having "enough" low cards that is the problem, as it's obvious that there are plenty of them here. It's the distribution. If you've got four cards in a non-spades suit like here, the odds of someone having only two in that same suit is reasonably high, meaning they can play a spade on the third trick of that suit. That's one less spade for the future tricks, and a higher likelihood that one of your four spades will win a trick and wreck the nil.FrankJones wrote: ↑29 September 2025, 19:18The side suits areSkyDog wrote: ↑29 September 2025, 18:37 It's definitely a safer one bid than a nil bid (trumping in on a third diamond trick), but that gets you nowhere compared to what a nil would.
You just have to hope the spades aren't distributed evenly with each of the other players getting three, or hope that if another player has 4 or more that they aren't able to get rid of them by trumping in early.
It also depends on the game situation going into the hand, as that would change the risk level you should be willing to take.
If it was three low cards in each of the non-spade suits, I'd go nil all the way.
With what is shown, I'd go nil more often than not, but not by a whole lot.
8-3-2
8-5-3-2
8-5
And you're concerned with not having enough low cards?
The probability of losing a nil in the side suits with those cards is close to zero. The 4-card spade suit is the major risk, but one I think is worth it. Certainly, it is score dependent (and also dependent on the other birds, if any, but let's assume it is the first bid of the first hand of the game. I'll take my chances on the nil bid.
And if it's any situation in which we are behind, I can't see justifying a 1 bid.
I see now what you were getting at. I thought you were concerned about getting stuck on the 8-5 doubleton because we do not have the 2, 3, or 4, or something like that. (which is not impossible, but very unlikely).SkyDog wrote: ↑08 October 2025, 01:11
It's not having "enough" low cards that is the problem, as it's obvious that there are plenty of them here. It's the distribution. If you've got four cards in a non-spades suit like here, the odds of someone having only two in that same suit is reasonably high, meaning they can play a spade on the third trick of that suit. That's one less spade for the future tricks, and a higher likelihood that one of your four spades will win a trick and wreck the nil.
