LBengtsson

I love the title of your post "Misplay this slam with me" lol. I think I would misplay it also. Best line? I am still thinking after 5 minutes. ♣A looks a stiff, and given that North has two aces, I do not think he has ♠K. I think sometimes a player can overthink the situation because if the ♠ finesse is right, and if the ♣ suit is breaking 3-2 then the slam is 68%. I cannot see any squeeze possibilities here, the menaces and entries are not divided between the hands. Am I missing something? North might have a stiff ♦ honor, but is he likely to be 2812 shape? Still undecide what is the best line here.

No one has said this, Maris: You picked up a random partner who either does not know how to bid, or, 99.99% more likely, one that has a big personal problem and wants to spoil your, and everyone else's game. Put them on your blacklist, avoid. I have looked at your profile, given your name, and seen that you are from Israel. My guess is that the person who partnered you on this hand is probably anti Israel. It is so bad that this happens. Racism should never happen on BBO, or anywhere. Instead of abusing you with words, that you could report, he has chosen to do it this way. I would still report this to BBO.

It is unlikely to be passed out in 2♣ - there are so many red cards missing - so that is what I am going to bid. Bidding anything else just looks dumb. In the absence of having Gazzilli on board, the hand, even though it is 6-5, is not that strong, so I would introduce the ♣ suit at the two level. If partner now gives preference to ♠, we are then worth another bid, but not before. It could be a horrible misfit with partner having 1♠5♥5♦♣2

More Crappelletti, than Cappelletti :(

Richard Pavlicek's bridge site - thanks - provided the odds of 7-6-0-0 shape as 17970 to 1. I have seen Zia with a 8-5-0-0 hand where the odds are 31947 to 1. But having two 7-6-0-0 hands against you back to back...well I cannot remember that either! The opps. on the second hand cannot have been that good as instead of bidding 6♥ quickly surely a bid of 5NT is better. Partner could have ♥AKx(x) and would not know whether to raise 6♥ to 7♥ but I think I would on that bidding.

I think 4♣ is obvious. Partner has heard you pass twice and still bids 3♣. I guess you were scared of pushing them to 4♠ but that, to me, is thinking one step far ahead. You have to tell partner now that you have support and some values and bid 4♣. If you do not bid 4♣ now, and the opps. bid 4♠ you have lost your chance to show your hand.

LOL :) Without agreements, with a unknown partner, or a regular partner who sometimes makes bids unknown to you, I would take it as a pre-empt, with a couple of honors and seven card suit and out, no interest in your suit. Other than that it is a jump-fit or splinter, spin a coin.

Great hand to post, helene_t. Sure got me thinking. It is too good to pass, but there is a bridge maxim that if you do not have a bid available then you should pass. I like mikeh's suggestion because partner should turn up (on probability) with about 8-9 points here, and as you have the other suits covered, there is a good chance he can cover the ♦ suit. And at red/white you sure do not want miss a vulnerable game. But there is the other probability that partner is more like to have <7 points than 8-11 so game cannot be made. Is anyone a member of bridgewinners, because a poll there and comments might be a stronger base to get opinion? Given that Kit Woolsey, Zia, Larry Cohen and others comment there, I would like to know what they think is best here.

Nope. It's a bit more complicated than that. The robots would have to understand why they are making the bids. Bridge is a far more subtle game than chess, which is effectively number crunching various positions in a linear mode. The Russian and world chess champion Mikhail Tal used to make positions deliberately complicated for his opponents, but if his opponent had been a computer program, the program would just number crunch faster and more accurately than him. His chess method was sometimes psychological, but can computers learn a similar psychology at bridge? I doubt it. There are far too many variables for a bridge computer program to assimilate: chess effectively is a series of patterns, with moves that are conditioned by how a piece moves. Even if a new bridge program could look at the billions of boards that have been played on BBO, or at least a few million played by expert players, it also needs to understand so many factors other than bidding and play. I am not saying it will not happen within the next 20 years or so, but it certainly will will not be happening by 2025 in my opinion.

I have always played attitude leads to mean that I have a long suit and a honor against a NT contract (although other partnerships may play it differently). The more I look at this hand, the more difficult it gets. It will be interesting to see what the right line was.

Interesting discussion, and having looked at this a few times, I am now appreciating how difficult this is +1 to lamford. If the ♣3 is attitude, then that should mean LHO has the ♣Q. I am tempted to play the ♣J here and then take the ♥ finesse. The problem with this hand is declarer can end up squeezing dummy and get endplayed himself. It is indeed a tough hand.

ROFL :) So North turns up with a 11 count and two useful ♥s :that happens every day of the week - not! I know, I know, East/West are unlikely to end up in a major suit contract, and 1NT-2 might give them a top, but bidding off the cuff like this is dangerous. There's a case for North raising vulnerable, or suggesting game surely? Oh, the commentator did not suggest that. Bidding 2♥ might be right sometimes, but it is not the percentage call. I am with you, AL78: suit quality matters.

Agree. A "grit teeth" X at whatever form of scoring and vulnerability. You could have a worse hand than this, and whilst it is not the ideal shape it does have a (poor) four card ♠ suit, and when you X any weak two [major, Multi] bid I would hope that my partner would have four of the other major. Bidding 2NT instead here automatically prevents partner bidding 2♠ which could be the only making contract. I do not like 5422 hand for doubling generally, but you have an extra honor card to make up for the shape so not bidding and expecting partner to balance makes life difficult for him. Better to X and apologize after if it is the wrong decision.

Nice hand, poor suit, I would not even make a direct overcall at white/white, let alone red/white. If you had a conventional bid available showing two/(three) suits in one bid then I would be using it, but with caution. The dreaded -200/-500 at MPs comes to mind. So as it stands with no conventional bid available, I would pass here.

It's a slow burn scan, similar to fraudsters who scam people on online dating sites. The scammer builds up a level of trust between the client and scammer by asking the client to do certain things, and the scammer does other things that build a level of trust for the client. A two way dialogue is started. The big hit comes later, maybe days or weeks, or even months down the line. Anyone who is not gullible would have disappeared off the radar quick. It is similar to gambling, and the gambler who cannot stop putting bets on, because that is what they hope to find: someone with a addictive personality who is not quick on the uptake. I cannot work out in total how this scam is operating - I admit - other than starting the dialogue, but that is all the scammer needs. It is no different to sales methods employed by car salesmen, who once they get a client interested, start to negotiate the price, give away add-ons such as a free warranty, gasoline, etc. The bigger picture is the sale of the already overpriced car whatever it takes, the big hit.