[dboxley]

---

IMPS

[Cyberyeti]

I assume N deals, if S deals, basically S will show 5-5 blacks with A♣ and N will bid 6♠ which is OK but I'm not sure how good it actually is.

If N deals:

1♥-1♠
2N(GF unbal)-3N(5+♠/5+♣, basically 3♣ is bid on 90%+ of hands, this is a rare exception)
4♦(KC♣)-4♠(1)
6♠

Bit of a punt, but asking in clubs means you'll reach the grand easily opposite ♣AKxxx

[hrothgar]

 dboxley, on 2015-April-27, 16:49, said:

---

IMPS

Pass - 1♥
1♠ - 4♠

[aguahombre]

 hrothgar, on 2015-April-27, 17:04, said:

Pass - 1♥
1♠ - 4♠

That would be your auction; that would be my auction. But these guys would torture the VuGraph operator for at least four more rounds, giving her a chuckle when the spades are 4-0.

[mikeh]

How good is this slam, anyway?

I think it is good enough that we wouldn't mind being there, if we knew that S had this hand, but it is far from cold. A 5-2 heart break would be very difficult to deal with, not to mention a 4-0 trump break.

More to the point, when looking at cyber's auction (funny how he always posts sequences that are idiosyncratic and yet always seem to work well with the actual hands posted), I found it amusing that he chose to keycard in clubs and then somehow knew that partner's one keycard was the club A...not the club K! Wow...what science. I mean, the contract is a lot worse if responder held, for example, Jxxxx x Jx Kxxxx or 10xxxx void Jxx KJxxx.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, I think Richard's auction would be pretty common amongst those of us who play relatively mainstream bridge. N has a good hand, but with 4=5 majors, one ought not to distort/upgrade into 2N, and so 1♥ is foisted on one unless S gets to open some unusual gadget.

As it happens, my current partner and I are experimenting with 2♠ as weak, with 5 spades and a 4+ minor.

Playing that method, which is (I think) fairly popular in some parts of the world, N should be able to relay enough to discover 5-5 blacks, but how that goes beyond that would depend on methods. I'm not convinced that my partnership has the tools needed to find the club A...I don't think we can set spades as trump low enough to allow for cuebidding.

So I think that I'd be resting in game in all my partnerships, including the ones where I played, a long time ago, a forcing club method.

I admit I'd be impressed by any pair who reached slam knowing what they were doing.

[PhantomSac]

 mikeh, on 2015-April-27, 17:50, said:

I admit I'd be impressed by any pair who reached slam knowing what they were doing.

I think strong clubbers esp relay systems might bid it. Although given that we can't tell if it's a good slam or not, relayers armed with 5125 and the club ace might not know whether to bid slam or not lol. Without any gadgets 1H 1S 4S seems normal, though ofc the north hand is very strong for that even given that its showing a very strong 4522, without artificial methods 4S is all one is left with.

[benlessard]

Its a borderline slam.

3-3 in clubs is 35% - 3% for 4-0 trumps = 32%

S 2-2 and clubs 4-2 is 40x50% = 20%

there are some additionnal chances if clubs are 5-1 with a stiff K/Q.

Its could be a cool hand for my pet system.

1H-1S
2NT-3D (exactly 4522 18-22, S rkc)
3H-3S (14-QS?)
4D-6S (yes+Kh no Kc)

However I think its likely that over 2NT ill jump to 4S giving up on slam. For slam to be really good opener need the Kc isntead of the Qs its a bit much to ask such a perfecto.

[fourdad]

1♥-1♠-4♠-4NT-5♣ (0314)-6♠

Any less than the 3ACES and shut out at 5♠

[mcphee]

I would not be reaching 6S which is possibly down with 3/1 trumps and 4/2 C. Yet is Mike says, one you will be delighted if you only make 5 as this slam you do not mind being in. Even with 3/1 trumps you may be able to bring home C. I doubt many reach this slam, even with a big club system it's not so clear 6 will be the spot.

[jodepp]

I guess most pairs would like to be in 6♠, which essentially requires 4-3 hearts and trumps not 4-0 (you have chances with worse heart breaks when trumps are 2=2 as well). Maybe it's a little better if one dodges a diamond lead.

I think it's almost impossible to reach 6♠ in a standard system if North opens only 1♥. After this start:

1♥-1♠, 4♠ is an underbid on the North cards, so unless North jump shifts (into a 2-card suit, which most players hate to do) North will be leaving values 'on the table'. After the 4♠ jump, maybe South could cuebid 5♣ and then you get there.

There is NO WAY South should bid 4NT after a 4♠ jump.

Maybe this is easier to bid if North starts with 2♣:

2♣-2♦ (say)
2♥-2♠
3♠

now a 4♣ cuebid becomes obvious and you get to slam.

[fourdad]

 jodepp, on 2015-April-28, 05:46, said:

I guess most pairs would like to be in 6♠, which essentially requires 4-3 hearts and trumps not 4-0 (you have chances with worse heart breaks when trumps are 2=2 as well). Maybe it's a little better if one dodges a diamond lead.

I think it's almost impossible to reach 6♠ in a standard system if North opens only 1♥. After this start:

1♥-1♠, 4♠ is an underbid on the North cards, so unless North jump shifts (into a 2-card suit, which most players hate to do) North will be leaving values 'on the table'. After the 4♠ jump, maybe South could cuebid 5♣ and then you get there.

There is NO WAY South should bid 4NT after a 4♠ jump.

Maybe this is easier to bid if North starts with 2♣:

2♣-2♦ (say)
2♥-2♠
3♠

now a 4♣ cuebid becomes obvious and you get to slam.

Convoluted

[Cyberyeti]

 mikeh, on 2015-April-27, 17:50, said:

How good is this slam, anyway?

I think it is good enough that we wouldn't mind being there, if we knew that S had this hand, but it is far from cold. A 5-2 heart break would be very difficult to deal with, not to mention a 4-0 trump break.

More to the point, when looking at cyber's auction (funny how he always posts sequences that are idiosyncratic and yet always seem to work well with the actual hands posted), I found it amusing that he chose to keycard in clubs and then somehow knew that partner's one keycard was the club A...not the club K! Wow...what science. I mean, the contract is a lot worse if responder held, for example, Jxxxx x Jx Kxxxx or 10xxxx void Jxx KJxxx.

I said it was punted because there is no available science here for me.

Partner could have lots of hands where the slam is pretty much cold even without the A♣, J10xxx, x, xx, KQJxx for example, or others where it's bad xxxxx, x, QJ, Kxxxx, but you're bidding on the balance of probabilities. I just wanted to make sure I was in the grand opposite Jxxxx, 3 red cards, AKxxx and in a small opposite a 5-5 with a top club.

[Zelandakh]

 mikeh, on 2015-April-27, 17:50, said:

I admit I'd be impressed by any pair who reached slam knowing what they were doing.

I reckon a fair few LOLs in England, France and Germany might get there after a Benji 2♣ opening.

[aguahombre]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-April-28, 09:52, said:

I reckon a fair few LOLs in England, France and Germany might get there after a Benji 2♣ opening.

Is a Benji 2♣ opening something like the Club level or on-line 2♣ openings?? The main characteristics of those 2C openings are: 1) much too frequent and 2) usually directionless.

[mikeh]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-April-28, 09:52, said:

I reckon a fair few LOLs in England, France and Germany might get there after a Benji 2♣ opening.

That doesn't mean that they'd know what they were doing

[Cyberyeti]

If you're playing an Acol 2♥ and open one on this hand type you might well bid it too.

[zillahandp]

Er y ask , 1h, 1s, 4d, 4s , allpass

[rhm]

 mikeh, on 2015-April-27, 17:50, said:

How good is this slam, anyway?

 benlessard, on 2015-April-28, 02:08, said:

Its a borderline slam.

A simple simulation shows that slam makes about 72% of the time.
Yes I know that is double dummy, which works both ways but favors slightly declarer at the slam level.
The play in this case is usually quite straight forward and on some of the hands where slam fails opponents might bid on my simulations.

So slam is not cold, but I would want to be in slam every day of the week.
To call it borderline is the understatement of the month.

Rainer Herrmann

[PhantomSac]

Rainer, why do a simulation? You of all people can tell us what is the best single dummy line, then you can simulate what % of the time that line makes. It doesn't seem right to give us credit for making it every time it is makeable, that is like saying KJxx opp AT98 is a 100 % suit combination. You are getting credit here for every time it is Hx of clubs behind the Tx and stuff breaks badly otherwise, for instance. And also when the KQxx is onside and everything is onside. etc etc.

[rhm]

 PhantomSac, on 2015-April-29, 02:53, said:

Rainer, why do a simulation? You of all people can tell us what is the best single dummy line, then you can simulate what % of the time that line makes. It doesn't seem right to give us credit for making it every time it is makeable, that is like saying KJxx opp AT98 is a 100 % suit combination. You are getting credit here for every time it is Hx of clubs behind the Tx and stuff breaks badly otherwise, for instance. And also when the KQxx is onside and everything is onside. etc etc.

Justin,

I appreciate that but I think all these scenarios where a single dummy declarer has a guess are not that common here and low percentage..
I had the feeling this slam is not cold, but a good one.
Since I am lazy, I tend to check my assessment with a simulation, since I do not have the software to compute statistics based on a given declarer line.
Yes, I know how to compute probabilities instead, but it tends to be work and you must be careful not to overlook something.

Rainer Herrmann