Talk:Optimum contract and par contract

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Contract bridge, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Contract bridge on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Contract bridgeWikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridgeTemplate:WikiProject Contract bridgeContract bridge articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New definition?[edit]

A better use of the term "optimum contract" would be as follows. Each side has a best contract, defined as the best combination of score and risk, depending on the manner of scoring (duplicate, IMPs, Chicago, etc.) The Optimum contract, then, is most simply defined as that contract, for which neither side can improve its Score-Risk result by bidding to any other contract. The optimum contract may be the same as the best contract for one side, or as in the case of a sacrifice, an altogether different contract. Using this definition, the object of bidding is to play in one's own best contract, or failing that, to prevent the opponents from playing in their best contract. One example that might be missed is this: If one side can make eleven tricks in a 4H contract, then a contract of 5H making eleven tricks is not their best contract, because of the increase in risk, and therefore their opponents have won a victory in the bidding struggle.

This suggestion was made by an anonymous editor and moved here by Abtract 18:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to me to confuse optimum contract with par contract, adds nothing to what is already in the article, and is not very encyclopedic in style. For these reasons I would keep what is there now. Abtract 18:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]