[Phil]

In a vain attempt to improve my bridge, I'm going through some old problems I did many years ago. I won't initially tell you where this hand was, but Frances might recognize it, as well as a few others.

Scoring: IMP

(1D) - dbl - (2S*) - 4C
(pass) - 5C - AP

Opening lead: Club 5

---

Nice lead opp. How do you counter?

[Free]

I would take in South and let ♦Q run, even if LHO covers.

[ceeb]

What is the opponents' NT range?

[Phil]

ceeb, on Apr 10 2009, 02:39 PM, said:

What is the opponents' NT range?

15-17

[ceeb]

If West holds Qxx,AQJ,KJxxx,xx, West can be endplayed with the 3rd heart.

Win ♣K, ruff ♠, lead ♥. West (say) takes ♥A, exits ♣.
Win ♣J. If ♣'s are 2-2, ♠A, ♠ruff, ♥K, ♥ and discard.

If ♣'s are 3-1 it would have been better to play for ♦'s 3-3 (or ♦J10 doubleton in East).

[rhm]

Obviously West must hold the ♥ ace for success
From the bidding it is possible that clubs are 2-2 and that West has no more than 6 cards in the majors. In the play you may have a guess whether to play West for 3-3 in the majors or for 4 ♥ and 2 ♠.

Win in hand and play a heart.

Assume West goes in with ♥ ace to return a second club.
Win in dummy

Now the play continues:

♠Ace , ♠ ruff
♥ King, ♥ruff
♦ Ace, ♥ ruff or ♠ ruff, if West is 3-3 in the majors
small♦ to West and West in end played

If West ducks at trick two the play continues in similar fashion:

Win ♥ King, play ♠ ace and discard a ♥ from hand
Now ♠ ruff, ♣ to dummy, ♥ ruff
♦ to dummy's ace, ♥ ruff
small ♦ to West and West is end played
He can cash his ♥ ace, on which you discard a ♦, but ten has to open the ♦.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

I forgot to mention if West is 2=3=6=2 and gives East a ♦ ruff, when in with the ♥ ace, you simply ruff your diamonds on the table and discard thelast one on the ♠ ace.

Rainer Herrmann

[Phil]

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 02:10 AM, said:

I forgot to mention if West is 2=3=6=2 and gives East a ♦ ruff, when in with the ♥ ace, you simply ruff your diamonds on the table and discard thelast one on the ♠ ace.

Rainer Herrmann

LOL I also recognize this name as answering some of these problems before.

Here's a link. Pavlicek can discuss this better than I'll ever be able to:

It's problem 5.

Pavco

[rhm]

Phil, on Apr 12 2009, 10:31 AM, said:

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 02:10 AM, said:

I forgot to mention if West is 2=3=6=2 and gives East a ♦ ruff, when in with the ♥ ace, you simply ruff your diamonds on the table and discard thelast one on the ♠ ace.

Rainer Herrmann

LOL I also recognize this name as answering some of these problems before.

Here's a link. Pavlicek can discuss this better than I'll ever be able to:

It's problem 5.

Pavco

I did in deed not remember the problem.

Nevertheless Pavlicek clearly stated the conditions of his contest, namely Standard American and gave system notes for it, while you did not.

In this case this had a clear bearing on the solution, which I overlooked when I participated in the original contest.

Pavlicek's solution, while artistic, is dependent on that you open 1♦ with 3-3 in the minors (Better minor based on Standard American).
If West opens 1♣ with 3-3 in the minors, as many do (for example ACBL SAYC system notes), then Pavliceks solution, while artistic is not best, because a 3-3 break in ♦ is not possible. (What Pavlicek calls the base line).

In this case my solution is clearly better.

If you copy a problem from somewhere else at least you should do it properly

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

I thought this looked familiar. I've now failed to solve this problem twice.

[Phil]

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

(snipped a little, as well as sniped)

Nevertheless Pavlicek clearly stated the conditions of his contest, namely Standard American and gave system notes for it, while you did not.

In this case this had a clear bearing on the solution, which I overlooked when I participated in the original contest.

Pavlicek's solution, while artistic, is dependent on that you open 1♦ with 3-3 in the minors (Better minor based on Standard American). 
If West opens 1♣ with 3-3 in the minors, as many do (for example ACBL SAYC system notes), then Pavliceks solution, while artistic is not best, because a 3-3 break in ♦ is not possible. (What Pavlicek calls the base line).

Pavlicek's notes say a minor opening is 3+. PAVCO notes. There's no reference to "better minor with 3-3".

Several expert references on SAYC on the net, including Cascade's, make no mention to better minor with 3-3.

Edited: nor does the ACBL SAYC booklet: ACBL SAYC

Where are you getting this stuff?

This post has been edited by Phil: 2009-April-13, 09:43

[cherdanno]

Phil, on Apr 13 2009, 10:39 AM, said:

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

(snipped a little, as well as sniped)

Nevertheless Pavlicek clearly stated the conditions of his contest, namely Standard American and gave system notes for it, while you did not.

In this case this had a clear bearing on the solution, which I overlooked when I participated in the original contest.

Pavlicek's solution, while artistic, is dependent on that you open 1♦ with 3-3 in the minors (Better minor based on Standard American). 
If West opens 1♣ with 3-3 in the minors, as many do (for example ACBL SAYC system notes), then Pavliceks solution, while artistic is not best, because a 3-3 break in ♦ is not possible. (What Pavlicek calls the base line).

Pavlicek's notes say a minor opening is 3+. PAVCO notes. There's no reference to "better minor with 3-3".

[...]

Where are you getting this stuff?

Here: http://www.rpbridge.net/2z05.htm

[whereagles]

I'm not sure what to do, but seems like we need some sort of red suit magic here. I'll start by ruffing a spade, heart up. I'll take it from there, planning to strip West.

I'm probably down already, though

[Phil]

cherdanno, on Apr 13 2009, 11:04 AM, said:

Phil, on Apr 13 2009, 10:39 AM, said:

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

(snipped a little, as well as sniped)

Nevertheless Pavlicek clearly stated the conditions of his contest, namely Standard American and gave system notes for it, while you did not.

In this case this had a clear bearing on the solution, which I overlooked when I participated in the original contest.

Pavlicek's solution, while artistic, is dependent on that you open 1♦ with 3-3 in the minors (Better minor based on Standard American). 
If West opens 1♣ with 3-3 in the minors, as many do (for example ACBL SAYC system notes), then Pavliceks solution, while artistic is not best, because a 3-3 break in ♦ is not possible. (What Pavlicek calls the base line).

Pavlicek's notes say a minor opening is 3+. PAVCO notes. There's no reference to "better minor with 3-3".

[...]

Where are you getting this stuff?

Here: http://www.rpbridge.net/2z05.htm

Arend, I hate to get pedantic about this stuff, but my link was the one in the original article, not this 'bidding guide' that Richard also has on his site. On the SAYC notes, there's no reason to think that 3+ in a minor includes 'better minor'.

I don't even know if this 'bidding guide' existed when the problem set was published in '02. The copyright date is 2008, while the bidding guide was 2002.

Also, apologies to RFP if I violated a copyright here by c/ping this here

[rhm]

Phil, on Apr 13 2009, 10:39 AM, said:

rhm, on Apr 12 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

(snipped a little, as well as sniped)

Nevertheless Pavlicek clearly stated the conditions of his contest, namely Standard American and gave system notes for it, while you did not.

In this case this had a clear bearing on the solution, which I overlooked when I participated in the original contest.

Pavlicek's solution, while artistic, is dependent on that you open 1♦ with 3-3 in the minors (Better minor based on Standard American). 
If West opens 1♣ with 3-3 in the minors, as many do (for example ACBL SAYC system notes), then Pavliceks solution, while artistic is not best, because a 3-3 break in ♦ is not possible. (What Pavlicek calls the base line).

Pavlicek's notes say a minor opening is 3+. PAVCO notes. There's no reference to "better minor with 3-3".

Several expert references on SAYC on the net, including Cascade's, make no mention to better minor with 3-3.

Edited: nor does the ACBL SAYC booklet: ACBL SAYC

Where are you getting this stuff?

Really? Do you read what you quote yourself?
The ACBL SAYC you reference clearly says on the first page
under General Approach:

"Normally open 1♣ with 3–3 in the minors."

Pavlicek has a bidding guide already mentioned and wrote in his analysis

*This may seem remote after the 1 D opening, but it’s actually a reasonable chance. In Standard American, the general practice with 3-3 in the minors is to bid the better minor, though in close cases (e.g., D K-x-x C Q-x-x) it is normal to bid 1 C. On this deal there can be no “close” cases, so if West has 3=4=3=3 shape, 1 D would be expected.

You did not even mention what the bidding system was and my impression is that the majority of tournament players do not open 1♦ when 3-3 in the minors just what the ACBL SAYC says.

Admittedly I was not happy when Pavlicek set out his solution, because I felt he also could have made it more clear that "original" Standard American opens better minor when 3-3 in the minors, because for people outside of the US it is not so clear what is "normal".

rainer Herrmann