[Cyberyeti]

Just back from the worst 32 boards I've played in a while, pretty much everything that could go wrong did including bidding a slam with ♥KQx opposite a suit partner opened and had to rebid, to find his suit was 8xxxx, the ace was right but single.

Two of the more interesting hands we butchered, both hands IMPs

---

Do you agree with this action ?

---

So what now if anything ?

[Fluffy]

first one I'd prefer 3♠ if available as a stopper ask, but not really sure, 5♣ on next round seems routine.

I would double on the second one.

[the_clown]

1st hand I would have duplicated your bidding, second one its very close between pass and X, but I think I would X.

[gszes]

Hand 1 is neat since no matter what we decide to bid LHO will not have the ammunition to x
(unless they show up with 5 clubs sigh). So the question is how high is reasonable with this
very good hand opposite two opponents that have opted for preempts???

Lho may be bidding 4s to make but can also be messing around. A bid of 5c is reasonably safe
here and goes along nicely with the theory game before slam. The bidding leads me to think
p has some reasonable values over there and it takes very little to make 6c so IMHO I will bid
6c and we shall see right away if lho was messing around or not since they will probably bid 6s
as insurance since it is virtualy impossible for them to have the cards to feel x is right.

Hand 2 so many things can go wrong and so few things can go right it just feels wrong at these
colors to do anything other than PASS. If we were forbidden to pass what is the next most
logical thing to do?? x is the most flexible but p will pass far too many hands where we want them
to bid and if they do bid how much confidence will we have in their suit????? Bidding 5d is where
you live but it is a very inflexible bid and can easily lead to our worst score if lho can x.

In order for any action to work we need p to hold most of the remaining power and we have no
reason to assume that is the case. A double game swing is indeed possible here and that alone
is a strong temptation to take some kind of action but the odds seem to be against us here and
at least pass will rarely lead to a horrible result. Second choice is a scared x.

[nigel_k]

The first is a guess but I think the odds favour bidding 6♣. If partner has either ♥Q or ♦K there's likely be some play via a finesse or squeeze and it may well just be cold.

The second I would double assuming partner needs shape to pull at this level.

[Cyberyeti]

nigel_k, on 2013-November-10, 22:29, said:

The second I would double assuming partner needs shape to pull at this level.

Your agreement is that the X is pure T/O, and partner is more likely to remove at this vul given that he's probably assuming only getting 300 out of 4♠.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 sure, the auction was fine
#2 5D

With kind regards
Marlowe

[benlessard]

I agree 100% with Fluffy.

Maybe jumping directly to 5C (wich must mean exactly 10 tricks IMO) is better

[nigel_k]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-11, 01:48, said:

Your agreement is that the X is pure T/O, and partner is more likely to remove at this vul given that he's probably assuming only getting 300 out of 4♠.

Ok then I reluctantly pass.

[cherdano]

benlessard, on 2013-November-11, 03:09, said:

Maybe jumping directly to 5C (wich must mean exactly 10 tricks IMO) is better

For me, 3♠ followed by 5C is stronger than a direct 5♣. I am actually surprised anyone would think otherwise.

[Cyberyeti]

cherdano, on 2013-November-11, 03:26, said:

For me, 3♠ followed by 5C is stronger than a direct 5♣. I am actually surprised anyone would think otherwise.

fine if partner bids 3N, but if he doesn't, I'm not sure it is any better, you may just reluctantly be bidding 5♣ when partner can't stop the spades. X I think is best if they don't bid 4♠ as partner may now be able to show his red suit cards.

Also difficult for partner, I think you have to guess here, partner can be looking at some quite nice cards and have no clue if they're useful (example he has a stiff club and ♦KQxx and finds you have 8 top clubs and both red aces, but if one is stiff and the other is Axx, you're making 10 or 12 depending on which way round they are)

Edit: bonus question, what do you think (2♠)-3♠-(4♠)-4N means

[Fluffy]

4NT there is to play, 5m is pass or correct.

[Cyberyeti]

Fluffy, on 2013-November-11, 05:01, said:

4NT there is to play, 5m is pass or correct.

So as you implied 9 tricks if partner had a spade stop, it's a spade stop and another card ? I was more interested in what it said outside the spade suit.

[PhilKing]

I would punt slam on the first. The rationale is that if partner has nothing, we will go down on five, but if he has even one reasonable card, that may be enough to make slam. For instance, the diamond king with either red suit jack gives us play, and the queen of hearts to length makes slam good.

The second one is close, but I pass. FWIW it is very wrong to play that partner routinely removes a double here. This is not really a matter of style - it's simply that I have access to more data on this than anyone else.

[Cyberyeti]

PhilKing, on 2013-November-11, 05:15, said:

I would punt slam on the first. The rationale is that if partner has nothing, we will go down on five, but if he has even one reasonable card, that may be enough to make slam. For instance, the diamond king with either red suit jack gives us play, and the quen of hearts to length makes slam good.

The second one is close, but I pass. FWIW it is very wrong to play that partner routinely removes a double here. This is not really a matter of style - it's simply that I have access to more data on this than anyone else.

I'm not saying it's routine to remove the double, I'm just saying it's more likely to be removed at this vul.

[PhilKing]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-11, 05:40, said:

I'm not saying it's routine to remove the double, I'm just saying it's more likely to be removed at this vul.

That is also a practice that the data firmly rejects!

[Cyberyeti]

PhilKing, on 2013-November-11, 05:51, said:

That is also a practice that the data firmly rejects!

Interesting, that seems counter intuitive.

If you have the a hands where 4♠x is -2/-3 and 5♣ is making, you want to remove 4♠x at some vuls but not at others, so it would seem you want to remove a little more often at unfavourable. Are a few -1400s skewing this data ?

[PhilKing]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-11, 06:08, said:

Interesting, that seems counter intuitive.

If you have the a hands where 4♠x is -2/-3 and 5♣ is making, you want to remove 4♠x at some vuls but not at others, so it would seem you want to remove a little more often at unfavourable. Are a few -1400s skewing this data ?

It's not really that the cost of removing incorrectly being higher, since that cuts both ways.

It's just that they tend to have better hands when they are vulnerable. Anwayway, I don't want to give the impression that I have quantified the data, but I have looked through a lot of hands for this sequence.

[CamHenry]

On the first hand, what would 4♣ have meant? We play it as showing a strong hand and a solid (ish) suit, and that seems like a reasonable idea on this hand. The risk of finding 5♣ rather than 3NT is much less of a problem than it would be at MPs.

On board 2, I'm reluctant to pass. I think X, provided partner knows my shape may not be ideal, is best - 5♦ is a close second.

[Cyberyeti]

CamHenry, on 2013-November-11, 07:23, said:

On the first hand, what would 4♣ have meant? We play it as showing a strong hand and a solid (ish) suit, and that seems like a reasonable idea on this hand. The risk of finding 5♣ rather than 3NT is much less of a problem than it would be at MPs.

Very strong hand with clubs and hearts, leaping michaels.