PhilKing

By establishing an account with the BridgeBase Forums (BBF) you agree that: 1. You will not engage in conduct or post any material that is defamatory, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of ANY law. Doing any of these is a good way to find yourself barred from the forums. The board should never go above PG-rated for any reason. :angry:

N/a, because the next hand is probably about to bid 4♠. 4♣ is often (usually) a raise to 4♠ and definitely is for many pairs. If I pass 4♣ I am almost certainly passing a double. My only explicit slam try below game is 4♦ (train).

When you start worrying about auctions like this, it is time to give up Acol. FWIW, I agree with the Cyberyeti approach of opening the major with 15-(bad)16 to avoid this problem. That keeps strong no trumps out of your 1m-1M-2M sequences. Then you can stick with the "standard" treatment of 4315s and keep 1m-1M-3M up to scratch, showing the equivalent of a 2434 17 count plus or minus one.

When the opponents bid to the four level, we can DOUBLE THEM FOR PENALTIES. Not all of our options should be geared towards slam bidding - some should deal with the mundane. With that in mind: Double = penalties Pass = I have nothing to say 4♦ = slam try 4♥ = I would like to play in Four Hearts Pass is not encouraging (though it is unlimited), but it keeps open the option of defending. Four hearts should be a decent minimum, giving partner the option to bid 5♥ over 4♠.

Yes, they are silly. I knew this was going to be a round six mix-up regarding kickback, but that's because I'm a mind-reader. Back to the problem, once you actually gave it - just bid 4♥ over 2♥. Your alternative is 3♥ which should be a slam try setting the suit, but IMO you are not really worth that since if partner has ♥AK and the ♠A, you are still not home yet and partner should stretch to bid 3♥ even with a minimum in high cards holding such good controls.

FWIW, I would double again on Hamman's hand.

It all seems a bit dubious - South's 3♦ bid suggests they had been there before.

That was close to my construction - unless the 3♦ bidder has four spades, partner has to have five. That means he is 54??, since he would overcall 2♠ with 5314 or similar, and I know I would double with any 54?? 11-count regardless of club length.

I would squeak a pass.

Since declarer was WC, I'm doubtless about to get into an egg-on-face scenario, but ... I don't get why declarer did not play on clubs earlier. And shouldn't he still make it?

It feels like declarer has butchered this one. :)

When declarer has two clubs, the five-card ending is something like: ..........♠- ..........♥J ..........♦Qx ..........♣T9 ♠T6..........♠AJ75 ♥.............♥ ♦..............♦J ♣742........♣ ..........♠83 ..........♥ ..........♦AT8 ..........♣ Declarer ruffs a club with the A♠ and plays the 5♠ to dummy's six before ruffing another club high. So to beat it we need declarer to have a stiff club, and partner to have played low with ♦Qx where it would be insane to drop the queen. I must say, declarer has adopted a rather odd line of play so far, whatever his hand.

He ruffs a club high (this is the obvious play) and finesses the spade six (the more I think about it, any good declarer will do this). Dummy is good. If we insert the eight to block trumps, he has a high cross ruff. And partner cannot give count on the second diamond when he has Jx or Qx. The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to play the Q♣.

I play a ♣. Not sure it's beating it, but declarer is down for sure if partner has five clubs as long as I don't let him make the stiff jack, since we will get a trump promotion. if declarer has two clubs he can make it if he is good. If declarer is a champion, I play the Q♣. If he is not, I think a low club is best, since I doubt many declarers will run it to the Jx. The point is that if declarer is 5332, he can play three rounds of clubs ruffing high and finesse the ♠6. I think this is the indicated line but a poor declarer will not find it. However, the queen is suicidal when he has Jx.

North could hold: ♠Jx ♥KQJ ♦QJxxxx ♣AQ or ♠x ♥KQJ ♦QJxxxx ♣AQx. They may not be perfect RKCB hands, but are hardly ridiculous. Having said that, I don't think the BIT should be assumed to have woken partner up to miscounting aces and it is not a crime to recount aces as long as partner does not go on when he has the number he showed. It's not as if the pause tells partner to go on if they have misbid by one ace, so South is entitled to punt here.

I think the AC dropped the ball on this one. Whether or not they all believe 4♠ is obvious is almost certainly irrelevant (unless they were 2♠ bidders). How can it possibly be obvious to someone who overcalled only 2♠? Now I would double 4♥, which also leads to 5♦, but I would not have overcalled 2♠, so my view of what to do now is immaterial.

I would bid 4♠. I agree that 4NT shows two places to play, but one is 4NT and the other is 6NT. :P

I doubt there is much in at on either street. I would double at pairs and bid 2♠ at teams. After 3♣, I would double again playing standard (and pass 3♥), but bid 3♦ playing (effectively) unbalanced diamond.

Three-two-five-one-nine, writes poems that nearly rhyme, but raising the bar, is a bridge too far, because the wannabee poet tends to put far too many words into each line.

No - I plan to play one to the ace, look shocked when West shows out, and concede two down. :huh:

He had TEN POINTS!!! Did he explain that he had miscounted?

I've cleaned up, checked and cross-referenced the stats for the Spingold hands (1996-2012, available finals and semi finals). The rawest figures: Total hands: just under 1696 (there are a few hands missing or with incomplete auctions). Slam was bid on 162 boards. Slam was bid and made at at least one table on 126 boards. (one in 13.46 deals) That translates to slightly more than one time in forty. :P Efficiency over time: In the 52 sets included from 1996 to 2005 there were 36 failing slam ventures. In the 54 sets I have for 2006 onwards (approximately 20 Mercury years), 24 slams failed (more semi final records are available in the more recent years hence the shorter time-frame). In the first period there were 85 successful slam ventures, whilst from 2006 there were 100 (there is an apparent discrepancy, but that is because I count playing Six when the other side makes grand as a "fail"). Slam bidding appears to have improved a lot. Caveat: there were a lot lucky making slams in recent years which have skewed things slightly. Competitive auctions: 140 out of the 324 auctions where at least one table bid slam were competitive (24 highly so, with the villains getting to at least the five level). 86 were contested in the first period and a mere 56 from 2006 onwards. Auctions are less competitive. It's not rocket science to suggest that this may be a key reason for the improved performance, but it is far from the whole story. I am still analysing some of the figures, but slam bidding was not that much less accurate on the contested hands. Tough Europeans: Few of the regular European semi finalists and finalists joust around. Helgemo/Helness, Fantunes, and Lauria/Versace (all recent regulars) just bid every game in sight and then try to make them.Top Europeans do not preempt all that much. For that matter, few of the top Americans are that wild either. The highest percentage of contested auctions was in 2005 when the semi final I covered was Jacobs v Ekeblad and the final was Ekeblad v Carmichael - basically all-American affairs. I have everything in a word file, which I can email (6 columns with the hands all referenced) if anyone is interested. As I said before, I would want to have nearer to 10k hands from the top events to draw firm conclusions, but a few things are already very clear.

I ruff a diamond at trick two. Five clubs, four trumps, two ruffs and an ace = 12. But not if I win the lead in the wrong hand.

I would bid 4♥ with ♠xxxx ♥KQ ♦AQxxx ♣xx. Under my generic rules 4♥ is still offering - particularly since I have denied a slam try already. Perhaps you should have agreed with him twice. Two positives mean a negative or is it the other way round?

Thank you. My eyes can stop bleeding now.