jogs

That's another reason for 1♣ by North in 3rd seat.

I like Frances' auction. North has a 5th heart with the singleton. It may be more pragmatic to play any hand worth forcing to 4♥ is worth showing the singleton along the way. East should pass 4♣. South can how bid 4♦.

Today BBO often posts hand histories from matches of the experts. Staying out of slam is right much more than 50% of the time. Whatever the range for partner's bid. Partner seems to usually be at the bottom. Sometimes he has less than the bottom. On my own unscientific(small sample size) study, when one team bids slam and the other didn't, the team not in slam won more imps.

I love the match when I missed two games. Won both boards. Opponents bid the wrong game and went down on both boards. Surprised none of you play the newer style(been around nearly 20 years). Never invite. Jump to game or pass. New suits are slam tries.

I'm in the school of bringing back plus scores. Would have passed both hands. Partner seems to have the absolute max and it still isn't clear that games are better than 50/50. I plan to continue to pass in the future.

Just like your other thread. What two suiter? This hand is 4333. Need 3=2=4=4 to be considered a two suiter. 4♠ only because of favorable vulnerability. Would pass on the other three vulnerabilities. Seems like the spades are likely to be 5=1=3=4 around the table. Opener gets only one chance to decide whether to double 4♠ or bid 5♥. If you reach 4♠ by some slow method opener would have room to exchange more info on the hand.

I like 1♠ as constructive, not forcing. If South had bid 2♠ fit jump the double would show 5=4=2=2. North would be in a better position to know what to bid on his turn.

1♦ - 1♥ - p - ? You can't double on this sequence. You won't hold 13+ HCP in this sequence very often. Fit jumps just occur much more frequently. Also 2♦ can show all big hands. Although 13 HCP hands without a fit may contain many wasted values. Many systems reserve bids for hands that rarely occur. If 1♠ is constructive, forcing? , there is no need for an upper limit.

Don't like 4♣. Like 3♦ as a advanced cue. Usually shows four-card support of the second suit. Occasionally it is support(3-card limit raise) of the first suit. 3♦ shows ace or king and an ace in one of partner's suits. If 3♣ is real clubs, opener should bid slam in clubs. Advancer can always correct the lower suit to the higher suit.

Should have been playing fit-jumps. 1♦ - 1♥ - p - 2♠ Partner would know about 5-4 in spades/hearts by advancer's first bid. In either case double 5♦. Singleton rule.

It is correct to jump to 4M with a minimum hand. The problem is players think in terms of minimum in HCP. They need to think in terms of controls. 1. ♠ AKxxx ♥ Axx ♦ xxx ♣ xx 2. ♠ KJxxx ♥ QJx ♦ QJx ♣ KJ For purposes of slam 1. is better than 2. 5 controls is better than 2. Bid 3♠ with 1. Close out with 4♠ with 2.

This is where we part company. I firmly believe in fast arrival. Therefore 3M guarantees at least mild slam interest. 4M is a hand weak in controls(considering our previous action). Since an hand worth opening suggests 4+ controls, 4M is 3 or fewer controls. 1M - 2♣, 3♣ - 3M. This auction denies first or second round control of diamonds. 1M - 2♦, 3♦ - 3M. This auction says nothing about clubs. Form of scoring are marginal effects on the bidding. Only minorly more willing to investigate slam in imps.

For the 1970 world championship one writer wrote a review on the boards. He nitpicked every marginal error. Best bridge book ever written. He made so many enemies, he was never allowed to report on the championships again.

We absolutely don't know. Minor changes in the assumptions can lead to major changes in the conclusions.

Both pass and double would likely end the auction. PASS. No percentage in doubling. Down 1. Little difference in mps between +100 and +50. 3HX+3. Huge difference between -140 and -530.

With distributional patterns it is a guessing game. 2♥, 4♥ and 3NT can all be the winning bid on this board. It depends on the location of the unseen cards among the other three players.

When doubler has only one spade, it increases the chances of opponents competing with 2♠. Both heart and spade length matter. Estimating tricks is multi-way ANOVA. You are on to something in that when doubler has two spades, it is much less likely that we can make over one more trick in hearts than notrumps.

Having 9 trumps is no guarantee your side has 9 tricks. Even when your side has 20 points the expected tricks can be fewer than 9. 4=4=2=3 facing 3=2=2=6 with 20 HCPs The expected tricks is 8 2/3. One of the two partners must hold a singleton before the expected tricks is greater than 9.

Granted 1NT is clearly the winning action when the doubler has only three hearts. 1♠ - X. On which percentage of the boards does the doubler hold only three hearts? What's the histogram for doubler's heart holding?

What about the portion of boards where opponents compete with 2♠? Think we want partner to lead hearts.

2♥. The QJxx in spades does not help much toward 4♥.

I like undisciplined preempts. 4♣ is my call. Only aces count toward raises. Partner should pass.

Pulling is 'demanded' by your redouble. But the double of 5♠ is a terrible game theory call. And I don't even know partner's hand.

By your own admission she can only lose the match if 5♠XX makes. That means 6♥X is a losing action if and only if it goes down four or more. Pulling is clearly the correct game theory action. Partner's BIT has no effect on this decision. In fact partner should have passed 5♠. Partner by passing 5♠ wins the match.

No, her side was in the lead. She wanted the lower variance result. Best strategy for winning the match.