thawp66

The opponents getting to a 4S contract like this does seem to me the main danger to a "x". However, I think a very significant % would respond 1S with that E hand. Interestingly, it should be easy for W to bid 4S with his 14 cards! 😂

The opponents getting to a 4S contract like this does seem to me the main danger to a "x". However, I think a very significant % would respond 1S with that E hand. Interestingly, it should be easy for W to bid 4S with his 14 cards! 😂

I was trying to distinguish between getting better results and improving your play. The former can be accomplished by playing with any regular partner (GIB or human). However, this will not necessarily improve your play. That’s probably more complex. I was not necessarily offering an opinion as to what is one’s objective.

Hi, Tramticket. I agree with almost all of your comments and analysis. However, I have a few critiques. I’m almost certain that your comment near the end “...clubs 2-2...” was supposed to be “...diamonds 2-2....”. As to the last 2 sentences and -1 vs -2, it seems academic. We have 6 trumps (with 2 heart ruffs) and 3 top tricks in the majors. We needed 3 of 4 diamond tricks. The fifth diamond is irrelevant. Though everything you said about technique seems reasonable, in this layout I don’t see an endplay. After playing the DA, simply playing diamonds top down gets the necessary D tricks. Starting the D suit by leading the T lead “Thepossum” to -2 To make 7, we need the first 4 diamonds. Cyberyeti’s final comments that this is about 58%, a reasonable contract, but a horrible auction, all seem reasonable. As to your comment about not learning good bidding from the robots and “dsLawds’s” comments about GIB and needing a regular partner to get better, I have some thoughts. Does having 1 regular (human) partner improve your play or your results, and are these mutually exclusive? If you focus on having a strong partnership system, with various conventions and defensive signals, and you play enough to refine these, your results will probably improve significantly. This seems also true if you play a lot with GIB. By learning their system and tendencies, you can improve your results. However, what these have in common is that may not be transferable. That is to say, what happens when you then play with another partner, or in an an individual? If your results seem to be the same as what they were beforehand, it might indicate your play hasn’t improved. For example, as many have commented about this hand, it highlights a weakness in GIB slam bidding and leads to a conclusion that bidding 4D might lead to better results. It’s debatable whether this is a better call anyway, but it may lead to an interesting conclusion; sometimes the “normal” call is not the the “best” call when considering your partner’s system and tendencies. However, in order to learn what these are, you need to have a regular partner (human or GIB)! In order to improve your play independently of partner (or opponents), there are many things to (and not to) do. Playing regularly, a lot, and with players who are stronger than you will all help. Learn to count and observe everything.

I believe no one has analyzed the probabilities correctly. If East won’t make the obligatory falsecard from JTx, then it’s a straight restricted choice situation and the finesse is 2-1 vs the drop. So I’ll assume East will make the falsecard. Assuming random plays from East, all 4 of D’s possibilities are theoretically possible. However, if West has the T and East the x, then East played the J from a holding of Jx. Not only would this be an rather odd play, but both the finesse and the drop would now succeed. Since there’s only 1 x left, that leaves 3 specific possibilities. East has either J, JT, or JTx. JT and JTx are both subject to restricted choice, so each has a probability of 1/2 x 1/3 or 1/6. Both combined is 1/3. The odds of the J is also 1/3, therefore the drop and the finesse are 50/50. I believe that both “sfi” and “Tramticket” make incorrect assumptions. When it’s time to decide what to play from dummy, we’ve seen 2 of the 3 small cards, therefore there’s only 1 holding each of JTx and Jx and if East plays the J from Jx, the dummy play becomes irrelevant. In addition, once we’ve seen 3 of the 5 cards from the defense, the original odds are no longer valid. As to Phil, bridge is rarely a game of higher mathematics, but knowing how and when to use math can be important. It is a game of deduction, detection, and especially OBSERVATION. However, there are other considerations as well. For example, in this case, what do I know about East’s tendencies and what does East know about mine? If you observed West looking at the J curiously, it might indicate his Txxx just became interesting. Will the field play for the drop, and if so, do I want to finesse and get a top or bottom rather than the ave? Maybe if I’m having an above average game I’ll go for the top, but if I’m having a great game I’ll take the average. If the field isn’t bidding the slam, I’ll probably want to take the best line to make it regardless. Lastly, (I hope!)) Tram’s comment was amusing. We should all try to laugh just a little bit more. The world would be a better place or at least seem to be!! 😀😂

I believe if N has a 3rd D instead of the 4th C, your DD solution is still valid.

How do you expect to get to 6!c anyway. If 5N is minors, how is p supposed to know which is your 3 card suit? Assuming he considers the possibility of course! I agree with (forcing) pass. Also, don’t forget to write a big F on the pass card as you play it! That’s legal, right?

If the auction started 1!C 1!H 2!S ... 6!S South should always convert to 6N

It’s always a SD problem, since it doesn’t matter who has the !H K.

Should N pass with !S void !H Axx !D AKTxxx !C Axxx

North has 14 cards. I wonder if that can result in an extra overtrick or undertrick?

As others have noted,given the significant possibility that a “normal” slam might go down with likely bad breaks, I would allow for the possibility that defending might be best. Hence, I would x, and raise partners response (if any) to 6.

Interesting dichotomy; msjennifer raises with xx. Nek plays support x’s so a raise would presumably show 4. I think best use of x is !h Qx or better doubleton. I would pass. 2nd choice is 2!c.

This might be slightly off topic, but why the !C finesse? After winning the 3rd round of hearts and finding!D 2-2, playing on !S works if the SA is in a hand with < 5 heats.

I agree with your analysis, though I would like to know what partner played on the first trump; did he follow suit? In addition, if declarer has 5=2=4=2, the only way to make it is for you to split. However, proper English would be “Declarer, if he has a club loser...” or “If declarer has a club loser...”. If you’re going to correct someone else’s grammar, then you should probably not make any errors of your own! 😀