[sasioc]

As it happens the 3♣ bidder had a ropey 5 card suit. He initially tried to bid 2♣ and was obviously told this was insufficient. My guess is that he wouldn't have bid at all if he'd realised he couldn't do so at the two level

[MrAce]

sasioc, on 2012-February-11, 15:42, said:

As it happens the 3♣ bidder had a ropey 5 card suit. He initially tried to bid 2♣ and was obviously told this was insufficient. My guess is that he wouldn't have bid at all if he'd realised he couldn't do so at the two level

They can defeat 4♥ with exactly the same noobish defense i suggested. Overcaller having only 5 ♣ wont change a thing. ( refering to gszes's construction )

[gszes]

MrAce, on 2012-February-11, 14:59, said:

You are VERY wrong about game being to close to % 50 with your specific example. In fact i will prove you game has no chance at all whatsoever with the hand you constructed.

Here is why you went wrong;

A-You dont count tricks of defense
B-You ignored the bidding.

Here is the hand you constructed

---

-I expect 3♣ bidder to hold at least 6♣ (i hope we all agree to this), which makes the guy on lead hold at most 1♣. (This you would know if you listened to bidding)

-Lets assume that the ♣ he led is not one of A-K-Q-J otherwise he will hold this trick and be able to find ♦ shift.

-Lets make them misdefend or lets make the deal very friendly for you. Lets say opener took 1st ♣, lets say he scrtached his head and cashed his 2nd ♣ and lets assume his pd failed to ruff it and play ♦. I will make the most beginner level defense to you. Then the guy scratched his head and cashed his ♦ A for you to comfort your ♦K !!! (Did you count how many tricks defense took already ? 3) And now seeing his pd discarded on 2nd round, he decided to play 3rd♣. I am also giving you ♥K onside. You need to ruff 3rd ♣ with either T or J which brings you down to Q4 vs AJxxx with 5 trumps out and no way to avoid AT LEAST 1 trump loser

No, the chances of making game with the specific hand you suggested is not even close to %50, if it has any chance at all Not even with the worst defense possible on the planet. (Well that maybe overstatement, you could have some decent chance if Me and my pd Haspel was on defense, thats another story )

There is roughly a TWO (ugh)% chance the opening leader has no clubs they must find the killing lead (if there is one at trick one
lets say you hold x Kx QJT AKQJxxx) so lets agree from the bidding the contract is not hopeless. 2% is NOT a good % to hang
ones hat on when deciding to bid can we do better? The example you gave your hand might have looked something like x Kx AJTx AKQJxx

If p leads a non descript club (around 60% of the time) how do you know to cash a second club trick?? Is it because declarer
is more likely than partner to hold a singleton??? NOPE thats not it because p is a 2/1 favorite to hold 2 clubs (after trick
one). If you stop to think about that you have to consider other ways to set the contract. Is a spade switch necessary in case
declarer was 2641 that might work but is a disaster if declarer was 3622 Is a dia switch needed to try for 2d 1c and hope p
has the heart T well thats a disaster in many other circumstances. If you continue a club and declarer ruffs declarer will make
their contract an enormous amount of the time.

While indeed my example hand with all cards exposed has no prayer ----- under normal circumstances anyone that thinks about the
defense will probably switch at trick 2 and it will be wrong around around 80% of the time. I dont see 50% as being a poor
overall estimate of the chances of 4h with the hand I gave. It has 50% not because of poor defense (it would not be poor
defense to switch just defense that didnt work that particular hand) but the backs of the cards make defending a ton
more difficult.

[dake50]

With my style, after 2H, I double 3C to show
HAK as defensive tricks. Partner is now well placed.

[MrAce]

gszes, on 2012-February-12, 12:20, said:

There is roughly a TWO (ugh)% chance the opening leader has no clubs they must find the killing lead (if there is one at trick one
lets say you hold x Kx QJT AKQJxxx) so lets agree from the bidding the contract is not hopeless. 2% is NOT a good % to hang
ones hat on when deciding to bid can we do better? The example you gave your hand might have looked something like x Kx AJTx AKQJxx

If p leads a non descript club (around 60% of the time) how do you know to cash a second club trick?? Is it because declarer
is more likely than partner to hold a singleton??? NOPE thats not it because p is a 2/1 favorite to hold 2 clubs (after trick
one). If you stop to think about that you have to consider other ways to set the contract. Is a spade switch necessary in case
declarer was 2641 that might work but is a disaster if declarer was 3622 Is a dia switch needed to try for 2d 1c and hope p
has the heart T well thats a disaster in many other circumstances. If you continue a club and declarer ruffs declarer will make
their contract an enormous amount of the time.

While indeed my example hand with all cards exposed has no prayer ----- under normal circumstances anyone that thinks about the
defense will probably switch at trick 2 and it will be wrong around around 80% of the time. I dont see 50% as being a poor
overall estimate of the chances of 4h with the hand I gave. It has 50% not because of poor defense (it would not be poor
defense to switch just defense that didnt work that particular hand) but the backs of the cards make defending a ton
more difficult.

You handpicked and constructed a hand for North to support your bidding and you claimed that the game was close to % 50 due to non double dummy defense.

And i said you are dreaming.

-You asked for 3-2 ♥ break, granted !

-You asked for non ♦ lead, granted !

-You asked the guy on lead dont have any of A-K-Q-J of ♣ so he can not shift to ♦, granted !

- Now after you handpicked your pd's hand, you are handpicking the opponent hands too, fine, granted too !

Here is everything u asked and everything granted for you in the diagram.

---

You are telling me that after ♣ lead, it is not obvious for West to cash 2nd ♣, and you are telling me he may choose to shift ♠ or ♦. Bro...are you aware that west sees south hand as dummy ? Why on earth west wanna play a ♠ towards dummy's AKJx ? If he cashes his 2nd ♣ and lets say declarer had stiff ♣ and ruffed, he will have to play ♠ himself to dummy in order to take ♥ finesse !!! LOL. And ♦ shift ??? What does ♦ shift wins for ? Seriously !!

Look, this is A/E forum. I understand when it comes to bidding, people can get away with all the jambo mambos they want. But when you start to debate the card play, u better be careful about your claims. Because once you step out of your comfort zone of bidding and step into the "card play" part of this game, there aint much room for jambo mambos, unfortunately.

You are using words like "Close to % 50" "Enormous amount of time" etc etc. Are you even aware that even after i grant your wishes, just alone Qx vs AJTxxx combination making 6 tricks percentage is %36 ?