Bridge, like Baseball and Cricket, is a game packed with statistics. The advent of online play has made it possible to compile a massive amount of information.
In this series, we are analyzing 1,000,000 deals which were played online. These deals cover a wide range of level of play and were provided by Stephen Pickett with Bridge Browser.
On how many deals was 3 No-Trump the final contract?
Answer: 181,119 ‒ or 18.1% of all deals.
On how many deals was 4-of-a-major the final contract?
Answer: 248,980 ‒ or 24.9 % of all deals.
That was the singular most popular contract.
FYI:
5 Clubs was played on 2.3% of all deals and
5 Diamonds on 2.9% (so, a game contract in a minor occurred on 5.2% of 1,000,000 deals). That means that GAME was bid on just less than half of all deals played. The most common slam contracts were 6 Hearts, 6 Spades, and 6 No-Trump – each occurring approximately 14000 times out of the 1,000,000 deals (or 1.4% of the time for each). Cumulatively, small slams were bid on 5.7% of all deals. Grand slams (with 7 No-Trump the most common one) were bid on a little more than 5000 of 1,000,000 deals – or about half a percent. I suspect the number would be higher in an expert game.
SUMMARY:
Slam (small or grand) was bid on 6.2% of the 1,000,000 deals.
When the final contract was 1 No-Trump, it was set about 29% of the time and made 71% of the time (often with overtricks).
Here is how many tricks were taken (in order of frequency):
When the 1NT bid was a direct overcall (passed out in 1NT), the overcaller averaged 45% at matchpoints and went slightly minus in IMP expectancy.
In contrast, when the auction went 1NT-Pass-Pass-Pass, this was very good for opener’s side. At matchpoints it resulted in an average of 58% and at IMPs a gain of nearly 1/2 imp per board. These are remarkably high averages. It proves what I’ve always known: "If at all possible, interfere over the opponents’ 1NT opening, especially in balancing seat."
When one side opens the bidding, how likely is it that they will be the declaring side?
75% – a number that might have been guessed. The non- opening side plays 25% of the hands.
Some more trivia (or is it minutia?):
The non-opening side played in a grand slam (keep
in mind, it could have been a sacrifice) on only 471 of 1,000,000 deal (note that 10,000 would be 1%, so this is a really low percentage, as expected). Of those grand slams, 26 were a contract of 7 No-Trump for the non-openers side. Contrast that to 1350 contracts of 7 No-Trump reached by the opener’s side.
On the other end of the spectrum, the Opener’s Side played it in 1 Club (that would be 1♣-Pass-Pass-Pass, in case you are having a bad-brain day) on only 1997 of 1,000,000 deals – a fifth of a percent. In case you are really having a bad-brain day, I will tell you that the non- opener’s side played in 1 Club zero times – of course. They did play in 1 Diamond (that would be a 1♣ opening and then the other side buys it in 1♦) on only 237 out of a million – a rare occurrence indeed.
What was the most popular contract by each side?
For opener’s side, 3 No-Trump (as we’ve already seen in this series), on 165,240 – or 16.5% of all deals. For non-opener’s side, 4 Spades on 31910 – or 3.2 % of all deals.
I know that this question will remind people of "The LAW of Total Tricks," but I am innocently asking: on any given deal, what is the most likely division of the thirteen tricks?
Answer: nine and four.
The most likely number of tricks to be taken (by the declaring side) is nine – it happens 21% of the time.
Close behind (in second place) is ten tricks – on 20 % of all deals played.
The full table is below (note: "0" includes deals which were passed out).
# TRICKS BY DECLARING SIDE
Tricks | % |
0 | 1.52 |
1 | 0.02 |
2 | 0.05 |
3 | 0.13 |
4 | 0.54 |
5 | 1.81 |
6 | 4.84 |
7 | 10.02 |
8 | 16.19 |
9 | 21.01 |
10 | 20.21 |
11 | 14.13 |
12 | 7.26 |
13 | 2.27 |
What is the most likely opening bid?
Let’s start at the very beginning: 1♣ is the winner. Of course, some of this is influenced by system. Players using a strong Club system open 1♣ on all good hands. Balancing that out to some effect is the fact that they also open all minimum hands (that don’t fit 1NT or 1MAJ) with 1♦. 1♣ was opened on 22.7 % of all deals, just slightly ahead of 1♦ on 21.31%. So, the opening bid is 1 of a minor on almost half of all bridge deals!
Some questions with logical answers:
Which is more likely to be opened: 1♠ or 1♥? Logically, there is an equal chance of getting dealt 5 Spades or 5 Hearts. However, a 1♠ opener is more likely for two reasons:
Here’s another question with a logical answer: Which is more likely – a 3-of-a-minor opening or a 3-of-a-major opening?
Since most people use 2♣ (and a few use 2♦) as conventional, there is no way to open weak two bids there. That puts more weight on the 3-bid. Conversely, most players can preempt on the 2-level with a major, so there should be fewer 3-level preempts in majors. Again, the data correlate. A 3-level preempt in a minor occurred on 37% more deals than a 3-of-a-major preempt.
For the curious-minded, here is the full report – there are even more logical conclusions that can be drawn.
Opening | % out of a million deals |
1♣ | 22.68 |
1♦ | 21.31 |
1♥ | 15.54 |
1♠ | 16.31 |
1NT | 11.68 |
2♣ | 2.02 |
2♦ | 1.32 |
2♥ | 2.02 |
2♠ | 2.05 |
2NT | 1.85 |
3♣ | 0.69 |
3♦ | 0.68 |
3♥ | 0.52 |
3♠ | 0.47 |
3NT | 0.10 |
4♣ | 0.04 |
4♦ | 0.05 |
4♥ | 0.32 |
4♠ | 0.27 |
HIGHER | 0.08 |
Larry est largement considéré comme l'un des meilleurs professeurs du monde bridge et est aussi proche d'un nom familier que vous pouvez probablement obtenir dans le monde de bridge. Il a été nommé joueur de l'année de l'ACBL, membre honoraire de l'année de l'ACBL, 2020 Hall of Famer, et a remporté un total de 25 tournois nationaux Bridge . Il contribue également régulièrement aux magazines bridge et a écrit et produit de nombreux livres, cd/logiciels informatiques, vidéos et webinaires bridge qui ont été primés et vendus avec succès.
Bridge God...
Quite a few i am guilty myself. Sorry.
Many (most?) 7N contracts on BBO result from one player getting angry, and sabotaging the hand.