lackeman

If W have cl A he may duck the club. We can also play unother line and take 2 d ruffs,1 cl, 5 h and 2 d tricks. If we play HA in trick 1 then cl K. Then take da, dk and cQ. Then crossruff d and clubs leaving a heart left at defenders. This line only fails when defenders can take a s ruff. Then of cause if h are 2-2 we are always home(playing your way:)).

Hi free! Lets say that a human based on what happened (ie a conclusion) can bee almoast sure on that for example IF having 11 trumf IT is 2-0 and therfore feel almoast sure on that it is right to finess. Then no computerforce Will be to Amy help for the computer.

Well about this computerforce/speed. If the computers "work" isnt exactly defined then it doesnt matter how "fast" it works the result will then be also a bit "randomlike". Human brain are controlled by our "feelings" that they give "thinking" a mening and the goal for brainworking! Ie feelings are the reason=canuse to 100% of our thinking! Ex thirst is causing brain to work out a Way to drink ie brain solning "problem thirst"! So I claim there is always a feeling causing thinking! We shall be happy we works like that since IT means in practically we Will then "stay alive". Then there are the good feelings ex happines and this is not a "problem" and not nessesarly a "must". This feeling/force/cause Will be used to "understand" bye experience! Aplying this at bridge then I understand that the thinking, analyse "resultl" in a good cardreading and affect our "result", and the computer Will then "hold IT down to =IOM

So how much money does it taskes to produce this machine ? And remember that the computer should also be 25 years old also if we shuld be able to compare here! As said Im not an expert at computers but IT should matter also!

Hi hrutgar so does IT means that it is only one computer that beat the worldchampion? Since IT is so exepensive? So the rest is moderate player? Well this doesnt seames for me as a description of reality! Esther as i remembered ther was many computer for as long as 20 years that beat human! For me this support my explanation and if tru says that it is atleaste much easier for a machine to beat a human in chess than in bridge. If I am right that IT much harder to produce a good machine in bridge then in chess. Then we would expect that IT Will costs much more money and IT Will take much longer time before we se a bridgecomputer at the same level copaired w a chess computer! And that if hypothesis are correct is what we can se ie reality been concistent whith what we could expected! IF IT only were a matter of economics (ie not harder but same dificulty to produce bridge and chessrobots of same strength IT would not be a history like this).

Hi nick! But how do u built together a lot of information and from that your "thought" of what is right to do her in this particular situation? Much info from bidding, opponents act, carding, skill, their play ,thinking, making IT hard for them to find etc? All this and more are factors that humans use and that build upp our picture of where the cards are. Also much of this is build up of our experience of players Way to act and for ex "simular situations", there are also factors like our position, vul, Even when a psycic bid was done etc. Also when waluate the Cards in bidding, "point system", what position relative for ex "opner" All of this kind of factors in my opinion Will be hard for a computer to evaluate and draw conclusions at and act upon. There are so much and diffuse for a computer to act on and if IT does I am sure we often Will se incredable bad act from IT! If ex if a anknown player does a terrible misstake then u will probably judge him as "incompetent", so if the computer do silly misstake like that it maybe also kan be judged!?

The subject was compairing chesscomputers skill relative human with bridgecomputer skill relative human. I claimed that chesscomputer win this by far. Further that the ones i played are weaker than me. Also that chesscomputers for wery long time have beat the best humans. Almoast before the PC were produced. I understand that the computerforce, teknologi and experience of computerbridge has increased (improved program, learning mm, making the product better/stronger.etc I am not sure It will never be stronger than the best humans, It depends on how "big part" of the bridgegame consists of "tasks" that computer are better than human relative the importance of those skills (aspekts) of the game human do better. But the interesting (for me atleaste) is to "explain" the fact i claimed in top of this post! I think I have done that and understand now (atleaste partly) what was earlier a "mystery" for me. I dont have much knolidge of computers for example and there may be more to say about it having that skill! Then i am not convinced whith explanation "not enough efforts compair chess" Well the future will show! Bye all, relax and enjoy!

Perhaps it is your whishes that the computer will beat u (and all humans), any reason for your prediction can I not se in your comments! "The devellopment, that the computer Will be better and better at the tasks we decide for them" this is in some way obvious for all. I know that but still i say what i say. So u say it is because there isnt a economical reason for it! Ie that no serios efforts have been made yet! Are u sure of that? As i remember bridge computer existed for more than 25 years and i think more humans play against them than vs chesscomputers. What do you think? And Why if so? Because human preforms better comparired w Computers! IF so it is fact supporting me not u!

What to be member is not anyone else to decide. So a crature that are destignated to preform well on demand on that is more computerlike since it is directing of a goal separate from its own best. That goal is for me stupid and to preform bad is then intelligent. A computer cant be "aware" of whats happened in the "past" like a human can that have experienced that and can make conclusions of it. This "information" is a LOT and all of this Will be combined by the brain leading to a "thought"/"playplan" etc like life it self. To react at the environment "learn""remember""value" of what has happened, that algoritm is incoorporated in our "brain". Also the "goal", mening is "inbuilt" in our brain so we produce some goals (that follow from nature laws). The more like a adeqate goal our brain task is, the better the brain are compared with computer. The Way brain is used in bridge is far more like the real work for brain ("to live","feal well","devellopment""survival for speeces"). Therfore brain have no capacity to "solve" fantasy problems like chess but are react at reality ie that happened and can understand that happened (in nature,observe it). Since this abillity is Way more important in bridge than in chess we free more brainpower and brain can "produce" much more advanced/complicated tasks! IT is like u demand something of something that it is not designed to do like demand a human to fly, or u demand a dog to read a text or a 95 yrar old to rum 100 meter.

The most important things that matters here is that chess is analysed from the actual position and WHAT HAPPENED earlier in the game dos not matter and dont influence what "the best move is". Say you had to decide what to do in ex move 40, IF u played spainish opening or ex IF u open d4-d6,sf3 or what ever that doesnt matter and isnt affekt or is a what so ever "reason"/"argument" for the move we will do (ie the best move we can find). In bridge we have a "history" of things happened and that "history" shall be consider and more or less be grund/reason of what we do(what card,what Idea, our cardreading..or our bidding). That information (observations) is important to react on in a adeqate Way and this Will lead to the bid/play we Will then do. To "take in information and "evaluate" it, that is the brain capabör to do. And "registrate" everything that happened, give it "priority" and then decide the right to do. The computer cant do this there is no logaritm for that, this capacity lies in our "human structure". Our brain structures(atoms,mollecules, cellorder, neutrons etc). So eaven that IT is Way not as many "possibillitys" in bridge the game is dependent at human qualitys such as "senses" and "judgement". In bridge IT is Way less such factors that influence our thinking, and that is the reason and IT also points out how complicated our thinking is and also how superior human brain is compared with the computer! In "irrelevant" activitys we are thus "protected" to use our brain "wrongly", that we can understand not what "someone else say to us" or eaven what we "want to understand" but what we need to understand for "feal good,for continuate to exist and develloped as a speacis". IT is confermed by the fact that we exist and that is a goal also in our "structure". To respond/react at the environment is a "abillity" that must be mastered by brain. Respons "adeqate" at what happened around us that means. IT is autistic not to be "aware" and take in and "value" what we take in Witherspoon our senses. IF we follow "rules" "guidelines" then whe are machines locking at a stereotyped Way and the brain is not used practically att all.

Hi all! This have been a "mystery" for me for a long time (20 years or so).For about 25 years ago (when I was around 20 years old) I played some chess (I was Ok but not as good that I wanted :) and further what I had expected to be. I started around 17 age and trained and played wery much (every day many ours) for about 2-3 years.. I noticed a fast improvment say for about 6-12 month but after that i dont think i developed much if not att all. Also I didnt like the game so much i know understand and when I were playing "match for ex 2 hour per player" i had problem to concentrate thinking It was wery boring.. So after about 2-3 years i compleatly quit with chessgame. Whith bridge it was different, I started learning the game playing with mother, grandmother and sister... We were sitting often to 4 am playing and I realy enjoyed that.. Then we didnt playing competitions and playing wery simple and (there was in principal nothing we couldd about "theory" playing teknik situation, further the bidding was strong two and the only unnatural bid was gerber and after some years stayman. All 2 were strong. Playing say from I was 7 to 15, then We stopped for some reason. After quit chess when about 20 years I met a friend that tellinng me about bridge, he played in a club. Then I were "restart" bridgeplay. Learning "normal bridge". It was much to study and understand, reading bridgebooks. I liked that. for ex "solving" problems etc... Here I noticed after some years that I still develloped and that this we can call it "curve for learning" stil were following uppwards. This was for me a mystery, I had my "experience" of "chess", and also i did "athletics" and here I stopped develloped( at leaste it were obvious that it was a "stagnation" for me)... So if I worked hard for a long time in those areas/"games" it would not leading to any progress or only a little.. After I played for about 8 years (getting better all the time) some personal things changed (were moving, family, the work more alkohol; and I also wanted a "better" partner) i stoped playing. for about 10 years i didnt play, having much other thing to do. Got in the end depressed and finally "broke down". Now since about 3-4 years i have started again plaing more and more and love the game.. This time I will not quit w bridge!!I love this game!! Well about computer then.. I have played much last 2 years against computer (around 25-30 k hands) and I feel i have un advantage and they do often misstakes that ii think we can call "beginnnermisstakes"... In some situation and for some aspects they do well for example in endgaming in defence they seldom misses unblocking killing squeezes and having count at cards and some other strong caracteristics for the machines.. (i have only played little at BBO GIB computer but they seames to be not as good as they a play against.. I play mostley at "funbridge" there every human allways play w 3 computers and the results (the boards) are compered individually giving a u can say "rating" a skill levell as individual player.. I think this is a extreamley exact way to meassure the skill.. But there is differences comparing to "normal play".. No "dummy" for example playing all declerer play.. Further the avarage hand is better than "statistical" so that approxamatley 2/3 of the bord is declearer play and abauuot 1/3 is defence.. So it is more "decision/hand", and further it is MP so most things matters and also there is often possible to find a little better playingideas...After a time i think moast player will notice som weakness at the computer.. For example their carding is wery stereotyped(they only discard for length, standard carding)... For ex If i decleare and have Axx on hand and KQTx at "table"... If i play K and A and when leading towards the KT if computer to the left carding high, low and now he play a third h (ie he has 3 or 4) and thhe computer to right also has disc high low then a finesse with the T is 100% sure to work.. and if they play low, high both then it is 100 % sure they have 3-3.. I think they have to do this kind of play (whitch is wery bad for their scores) to give themselfes information they needed for their defenceplay..there are more of things like this they do that leads to mor tricks very often for the human.. For ex if they have Q in a suit and we got A,K,J,T,9 and some xes... When playing the J they cover w the Q if they have it.(allmoast allways). Then this leads to finding the Q or for ex we can play for Qx in some situations... So on... Then and this thing i think that u all have "suspected" is that they have "inferior common sense in the bidding", Lackinng of judgement in many situations leading to bad contracts some time.. and they cant be aware of some situations this situations specific caracteristics and take advantage of them.. The human way of for exampel think in a bidding situations can be influenced of many factors and isolated they may not be a reason to anything "out of system, of the book" but when they are present and in combined they may be a good reason to do somethin that is out of normal bidding/playing..When human does something onorthodox one have to take in to that that the computer dont understand our way to think and therfore it will missunderstand/do misstake in cardvalue and play analysis so on.. In some way a human can understand better how the computer "think" than a computer can understand our way of thinking. And this is a very important factor for sucess in the game of cauuse... Well there is much more to say to describe the computer (and much that i dont know get or may never know or can putting "wordds at".. When playing for 20 years ago I had a "teacher"/"mentor for our team" and i asked him why computer is so bad in bridge... For me there seamed then bridge was so extreamly more simple... For example it was often "obvious how to play a problem hand best way" atleaste after u got the solution... If compare w chess for ex is it best to play king pawn 2 step in first move in chess... Situations like this whitch i didnt find in bridge.. But he said that for him this wasnt so strange but i couldnt understand that or his argument.. This was when computer beat "worldchamp kasparov" and this was at that timme when computer was "primitive" as u all know compare w today for example... Faster better att other ways, develloping tecnology. annyway for mabye 6 month ago i sort of got un understanding and un explanation of this.. In chess u can jump in say in move 30 and IT DOESENT MATTER WHAT HAPPENED ERLIER in the game... Say u jump in in a board after 5 cards have been played (ie there has been observation, information has been given).. As u know this is very important to correctley "observe" what has happened and out of that we can build for ex a playplan/un idea of how to play...And we can also have very good guesses on for the lie of the cards based on our analysis of that information given... Now comes the problem for the computer can not take in this in this and use this information... Value it... Priority... Cant have som muce use of it that human brain can...This i mean is beacauuse the "structure on computer, ie the athoms, mollecules DIFFER FROM BRAIN STRUKTURE... Our brain has evolve to MASTER that we "observe in nature" and use this information (whitch is comming in to brain via the senses, eye, ear, feeling)... We are we can say more "adopted" to things that happened around us than a computer and also (and that has evolved for millions of years) we react perfect on that "stimuli" so we "value"/can judge and also take consideration to "everything" and let those seperate information influence our theorys/idees so that the thought that is "the endproduct" is WAY billlions more advanced and complex than a computer now and for all future... If compare w chess in a "position" it doesnt matter and the "right play, move has in principle nothing to to with what has happened erlier in the game"..It is a analysis based on some "algoritmlike procedures",, That means it is a "fantasy of probabilitys and different possibilitys and rules"... Thx for me, would be interesting to hear your experiences and thoughts about this..

Thx for the answers! I have sort of change in this hand. I think pass is the best here. There are some factors for me that makes pass better. Most of them beeing said here. In practice partner will very seldom pass on our invite since he will near allways have a hand borderline or better(invitational+).. Since it is here depending of his distrubution and hounnors in right suits he will have hard to evaluate his hand. If lho now balance we will get better picture of how to do. and partner will sometimes do somethinng active, for ex rebid spade.. lets say lho bids 2d, partner 2 s and rho 3d. Then we have a very good hand and can bid 4 spades and be relativley suure on that it is a good contract. Further partner know better how to do for example if he in some cases later wants to x. And he will be able to have this information in case we will play defence later.(for example he is not likely give a trick away in the lead) I do not agree so much in this case that "the preempting effect" of 2 s is so much worth... In fact i would be glad if opponents intervene with a bid, we can bid spades later in that case if we think it is right to do then. We sort of cant do anything fealing sure of beeing the right move, without opponents comming in and telling us. The only thing (in my oppinion) negative is that we sometimes misses 4s when it is right(or mabye 4h)but I dont think this "factor" is enough for compensation. and mabye opps are going in sometimes at 3 level w heart(not finding the supposed dimond 8 card+). In MP i think pass is acctually "way better than 2 s" partly because the mathematics make us bid less games than in IMP. Seames that I argue mabye a little backwards here, so the "!shrink" may have a diagnos and is "ready to act" on me :) I agree on that partner should bid 3d ( or mabye pass like also was mentioned) but in practice most player i think will act on "backkbone" here and mabye overbid the hand.. Atleaste both me and partner should know that "opner is often relativley strong to borderline 2 club opening" for what it now can be worth in practice bidding here in this case.. If going back to the negative ie missing game, how often do u think partner have a hand making 10 tricks or more? And if so how often of this times do the bidding ending in 1 spades (ie no balancing)...

The one played the J must have J,JT,JT9 or Sometimes J9. After taking the Q leading against the remaining AK8x rho then have shown the two X cards. If for ex lho have JTx, Jx,J9x,or Jx then rho must play some of the "high Cards T or 9". Then we easy take 5 tricks and obvious we cant finesse in trick 2. Therfore we can be sure that lho 100% must have JT9,JT,J, or sometimes J9 from start. Lets say this happens 40 times ie that lho have JT9 10 times, JT 10 times, J 10 times and J9 10 times. How often do we think the J is played? 10 times when he has only J, If J is played more than 10 Times from the other possible holdings we shall top, else finesse. That should be a personal choose. Then IT has been a bidding, a lead, some carding, some knolidge of distribution the 3 other (cl,d,sp). Also we may have other factor that may influence our play.

here u should bid. 4spades i think Will be slightley more often. Since u have no heart partner vill have probably 1or 2clubs. Often home in 4spades or 5d and sometimes slam is making. Sometimes down but then they often do 4hx.

Furthermore partner is depended of more in hearts. Say i have kxx IT may lose to hq. So i have everything and more on your hand than partner could dream of. The only thing is have partner single club and not the a. Best may be to bid 7. They have to lead clubs (the opners partner Will not have IT he may lead something else

IT is for 100% controll i can figure out since i have the major kings. With nothing in clubs (and not da either) i dont beleve he will go for slam. Not with opener behind. Then IT is clear that the hand is monster. If partner shows firstcontroll in clubs then we can be sure almoast on 7. further since opps open and partner didnt pass partner will almoast allways have atleaste 6-5. With ax in club there is 13 most likhet tricks. If pd have Xx in dimond and-in clubs i think he should pass 4s. In the actuall hand the 5club bid is almoast un overbid, since he have to go down in 5spades. Say for ex partner have 652-. For a slam u must have both h and spade K and dimond a. After the lead opps Will moast likley get for that and then take their d if not taking it at trick one. Same is true if pd have 6511. U then have to have both kings and one of the minor A for 6tricks. Therfore partner should have cla or more likley 66 in majors. IF u had have less monstercard partner could have more or not and then have to sign of most hands in 5.

Counting the tricks! So if w have Kxxxxxx then it is 8 tricks. Partner often contributes to one more. Seldom more! In MP not many (in My experience) most Will bid 4 sp. So a pass Will probably give u i think 70-95%. In NT we probably home with d lead(if d is lead. Dont think opner lead d so often ur not from DK. Probably not from ha either. So probably a cl lead. The opener Will probably have 2 honor in sekvence also, indicating he Will probably lead clubs. Then it depends on what pd have beside the s. Often i think 3N Will be made so in IMP i think it is best. But still a pass (ie when 3N is home) Will generate a good score! And when not ofcause a top. This is based on that i think 4sp is down.(didnt se the zones here, in red/red, or red/green the odds for a game from our side increase). In opposit if we are green partner can have for ex qxxxxxx or kqxxxx. Then for me it is pass in IMP as well as MP.

Edit mean " in most cases i dont finesse against T9x after lho drop J"

Hi! In general we have more information that affekt how to play! Whith this info only i still think that finesse is prob the best against most opps. Seldome people play for ex Jxx like that. Say declerer have A9xxx or A10xxx from the defenders aspekt this can lose a trick. So when J comes IT is probably fr.o.m. J,JT,JTx,JT9,JT9x.. We can here then have many hands playing J. Here it is mathematically bad to finesse. But the normal Way to play is lowest from sequence, that means à change in the "true" math. If for ex T comes he often have J. Here "the math,restricted choose" say it is better to "play from top in trumf". But as i said we should not "turn of our senses" not leting us directing bye "everything else that happened and other factors that matters". from our experience we learn more and more and we have to let "statistik,random" play à less part in our play! Random is not Random for ever that seamed so earlier may be understod better tan w math! But before we have understand that we can play "statistic bridge". This is why there is no good computer (i don know of) in bridge compared w for example chess. For me this was a mystery before. Bridge is more like human "life" than for ex chess. Our brain are therfore developped to "work better". Life is observing the nature (oberving playing and bidding). Than based on the "history, and experience" the brain produced a play plan (a theory,"an Idea"). If we take chess for example "the right move" is only depended on "the actuall position" (and the experience of other chessgames"). The best to so in bridge changes therfore during a bord, more info comes in. To value "prioritate" that right and then understand and Know how to do(better) is the factor limiting our understanding.

In this spot Ithink partner try further describe his hand! So the heart bid shuld be natural. He probably have 5-4. then partner must have 2keycards. But even then the slam could be impossible. For partner have A9xxx,KQxx,QX,qx. I therfore not bid 4NT.

Y I feel now that 2s must be the correct bid, not sure.In the end we playedTo play 2 s Is no problem but the problem rises when partner have a hand that he will continue w invite or bidding game. a hand like AKxxxx-xxxx-Axx is a good 4 s contract hand (if not trumf lead but anyway a 50%+ to make).. But when partner have for ex a bad spade tex Kxxxx then he can have many points for ex Kxxxxx-KQ-Kx-KQJ (17 points but a bad game).. By the way partner had AKQJx-xx-Kxxx-KT..He bid 4s.. Mabye 3d had been better but not obvious that it is better than 4s... By the way I think that when trumf i setted it isnt so much of a danger if som points are missing/extras.. Often the 6 trumf for ex are matters more.. It is i think NT hands or when no trumf are setted, then it can bee problem if not follow highpoints to some extennd value the hand. I can mean allso that if we dont get the contract for ex if LHO is declear it can be a bad lead as te result of the 2 s supporting bid. I often think of not support in many cases when partner is leading from his A/K/Q/KJ/KQ etc it often costs a trick. Anotherthing is that (in my experience)when bidding is like this and especially when we have suited hands/renons etc... They didnt bid so often they have less than 11 points if not they passes with trumf.. Then Pd will probably have 15/16+ points and often continue bidding... This talks for pass.. I play often bergen raises and (strong club) then 2S often is wery weak. So in my summary It is some that talks for a pass.. And if they balance then we can bid 2 s or hearts, partner then have more correct picture of our hand, and can make better bids in the case the bidding continue.. WhAT DO U SAY?

I like this post I agree w all arguments also!:)

The first is a 3 clubs and the sekond is a pass. The first is for me obvious and i am sure and it works against all opps i say. First they have often reach the best contract for them. Only if it lies bad, or bad decleare and/or both wery weak (but then our pd will have much points).. So the normal (all i say is my own truth) is 110-140 i will say about 70% it is that result. Sometimes say 10-15% they do 4(but not many will find) and mabye 10-15% they ke 7 or less (extremly rare rare 5 or less eaven 6 is very rare)... This is my experience, what i beleve that i had observed... Can be wrong (say so if u think else) but anyway it must be my truth and truth is what i will be directed by.. Therfore it is clear that if i do 3 cl or take 8 tricks or 7 with no X a 3 cl is obvious.. further when bidding 3 cl opps can sometimes bid 3 H and it is obvious that it must be better for us they play 3 h insteead of 2 h. Some times they find for ex a NT contract or they can see that teir cards matchhes and sometimes they find a better contract than 2 h because we let them and give information.. But this is seldome more often they will play a one down in 3 h.. What can happen then. Say that we do 3 cl (i think around 20%) ie some factors is in our favour, and often it is so even if we are defending).. For ex the K of spades i right (ie if they play h the finesse misses) or the cl Q is at E and so on.. Those factors are also the tricks in the defence... With certanty, mathematically we know that if we do 3 clubs it is right always as long they dont go 3 down or more (and this is not usuall i my world).. The most likely result i would say is that we do 8 tricks ie -50.. And i think that in that case they do 2 h or more i say 70% of cases(still my truth/my experience).. So when we take 8 or more tricks it is clear that balance is right. When we take 7 tricks it is often a bad lie of cards and they allmost allways do teir 8 or more tricks.. And often it is not bad break in trumf more bad place hounnours (and mabye bad play from us, or good def).. In those cases it is not so easy for them to X (better players x more often then)... This i think is a clear proof for me and i am sure on that 3 cl is right in case 1. In case 2 we se that it may be a bad lie for our kings and further it isnt sure on the same way that they are in the right contract, they may have a borderline hand and have a guess (a problem) if we pass... They may do wrong.. Bidding 3 cl take away this problem(their problem) (although it can be that a new one arise) and they can perhapps X.. In this case the opener ar not limeted as he is in the first case. If he gots say AQ in cl and a medium strong hand he can sometimes beleve at 2 or more down...Furthermore since the opener gets some information he can better judge how many hearts they do (handevaluation is better)... The ground for all is the "math" and it says 1 down is good, 3 tricks or more is good.. 7 is good when not X if x it is bad..And if we do 9 or 10 tricks it must bee right to bid since they will allmost allways do more than 5 tricks (+150 to us) Here in opposite to the first case 1)THEY MAY NOT BEE IN THE RIGHT CONTRACT/MAY NOT BE SO SURE...2)IT IS MORE LIKLEY THEY TAKE 6 OR MORE TRICKS in this case (ie a mathematical fact against us since it is the bad outcome for us, ie it happens more frekvently for us)3)THEY CAN EVALUATE BETTER TEIR HAND AND CAN decide better the right level.(this is true for ex 1 also but it doesnt change anything in practice so often ). Is it anything better then bidding in case 2 than in 1.. Yes we can say it is lead directing but i dont think it is worth so much here anyway so it compensate for the negative aspects...So it is therfore pass for me.. They may be more to say but for me it is enough to feel sure on what is right here! Think like this mabye: is it likley 2 heart is a good contract for opps? Prob u say yes in case one.. Is it likley that 3 clubs is very wrong if no it must be better than 2 hearts.(or is it likley 3 clubs is as good or better for opps than 2 hearts, what do u think when u are in opps situation are u often pleased to play 2 hearts or do u in generall prefere that opps bidding 3 clubs?) .In case 1 we have the power to end the bidding, ending it in that contract.. Do we like it? then pass.. If not find something better (3 clubs)... Thx for this problem, a very good one worth workinng/thinking at.. It may be other factors that i dont see here that matters.. The sekond case is not that clear as the first and it is more depending on opps, they have to take advantage of the 3 club bid and "punnish" and take advantage of a 3 club bid... A bad player cant do that to same degree so then 3 clubs is more attractive against them. Also if bad playing it talks for a 3 club bid i think..(it is allmoast always good for scoore if opps do misstakes but i think it is will gain more in case 2)

No most often not only when i take 10 tricks or more :) Any way thx for the respons

First we take the A of heart and then playing the K of heart... Then (if our dreams come true) E steal from x. If nothing of that happens we atleaste know if W has 7 whitch is likley... Remember in my veiw if E has single h and cl he mostly will steal the h... Possible eaven w Kx(worser play have been made "missclick", but that would bee a clear misstake ofcause).. Further if E have x only in club and J only in hearts then many of those hands will open preempt and that further reduce (since it didnt happend) that E have x only in cl...If he have for ex 5-1-5-2 he vill prob s and probably not ruf the hK.. And finally we know more about W cards ie those heart he have that is not cl K.. Say if he got 7h he has if we think in "probability"(Dont like it:)) he has 6 places (unknown cards) and E has (after 2 trick first ha, then hK) 11 unknown cards.. so thinking in that way 2/3 chance to have the cl K, from that aspect. I think we nshould throw spades instead of d because after the heart we will play for finesse ie we have and should then assume E have the K... Then it will be no danger att all to take the the S (A,K,ruff)... If w have the K we would go down anyway if we play clubs instead and finesse.. So we can spare 1 spade in hand and 3 dimonds and also ruff those and then we can get a read in some cases when w have the cl K... Atleaste it is no danger to do like that U get mor information before playing Clubs..In practise they can do wrong also... We are "waiting" for more information simply(often this will not change the way,but it does anyway allways lead to a better grounds, argument for our play)..then In this hand E can discard on hearts also, it may bee possible to get the exact distribution..And when it is calculated one cl for W (ie the king) then we can change our play some times so we can make som of the K single.. Remember the reason that we can do this is that it can not (well if not E steal over dummy in d (very unlikeley) and eaven if so that E overruff it could also happenes that he proved not to be able to overruff and in this cases we naturally places the K of cl to W.. I think that I misses and take "decition" instead of waiting for more info/grounds´, them lacking it will bee hard to be "wise", to do the best play, to get a better plan, better ideas... Thx for mee... Probably i have missed some points here also... Edit:We can eaven play a third heart in 3 trick and observe what E does/throw... Think this is best line to start... Finito.. thx