PhantomSac

Here is a different take on O'Malley: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-on-baltimore-s-anguish Great interview from someone who I would trust to be knowledgeable about this (the guy wrote THE WIRE).

That means dummy opened a 9 count? I mean it is really weird we have so many points here, it definitely points to declarer being 1615. It seems like if we go heart heart we will just get squeezed or something, but a spade will take out the entry/put declarer to a guess immediately./something like that.

3C=GF diamond bid. It is debatable whether it should include hands that are too good for 4H (those hands are pretty rare) or not (I think most would include that hand type). And no one ever says it but 3253 with a balanced 18 or 19 and no club stopper is a real problem hand type that might choose to bid 3C. It doesn't fit anywhere very well.

It also has a decent shot to start knocking out the entries to dummy in the not unlikely event that their keycard is the ace of spades. Before I read your post I was just gonna lead a spade but the 9 seems better!

LOLLLLLLLLLLLL THIS. LOL STL using pick #10 on a RB LOL CHARGERS MORE trading up to take a running back at 15. LOL running backs.

Seems like one of the worst conventions ever, what do you do with 3514 etc type hands?

Just to clarify, the agreement is pass is weak and X would show something? If that's the case, I'd reopen with a double. We are no lock to make anything and my options are to bid 5H (which seems dumb, partner will always pass and it is not at all a lock that I will make this lol), or to force to slam (maybe increasing the chance we get to the right fit, but even then I'm forcing to slam when my partner is showing a bad hand opp a 2C opener?). Unlike usual spots like this I don't think X is t/o as I cannot pass with a strong balanced hand like if I opened 1x... I am a 2C opener! So I don't expect partner to bid and this is a crapshoot, but I partially blame that on my methods, and mainly blame that on the 5D overcall!

Well that is enough for me. Sometimes hands like these look like a good slam but they are not. If you put a gun to my head i would have guessed it was def over 50 but def below 60, so 72 was a surprising number. Often times these kinds of things can be surprising to a human brain though. FWIW I generally think of missing a slam >60 or bidding a slam <40 as a disaster. Missing a slam that is 50-55 is w/e as is bidding one 45-50. 55-60 and 40-45 are in the middle. So apparently missing this one would be very bad by my scale which is enough for me :) No real point, sometimes you don't know if a slam is good or not, but better bidders and better partnerships with better agreements generally have an edge when they decide to bid slam or not bid a slam. It's good to know when or if a slam is good or not if you know your partners hand!

Sweet bumps

Rainer, why do a simulation? You of all people can tell us what is the best single dummy line, then you can simulate what % of the time that line makes. It doesn't seem right to give us credit for making it every time it is makeable, that is like saying KJxx opp AT98 is a 100 % suit combination. You are getting credit here for every time it is Hx of clubs behind the Tx and stuff breaks badly otherwise, for instance. And also when the KQxx is onside and everything is onside. etc etc.

4-6 lol

Since partner is known to not hold shortness and is known to hold the A or K then over pass partner can XX with the ace, sign off with just the K, and bid 4D with the KQ.

Yeah fair enough. His response to jinksy's question of "In any case, since when does asking for the trump Q show all the controls? Can't we ever have hands where we think it's necessary to make small slam a good proposition?" seemed like he was saying that asking for the trump Q traditionally shows all the keycards but I see that that is not what he was saying. Reading comprehension FTW :P

lol, can't wait to see the reply to this

I think strong clubbers esp relay systems might bid it. Although given that we can't tell if it's a good slam or not, relayers armed with 5125 and the club ace might not know whether to bid slam or not lol. Without any gadgets 1H 1S 4S seems normal, though ofc the north hand is very strong for that even given that its showing a very strong 4522, without artificial methods 4S is all one is left with.

Perhaps we should have doubled JOSEPHINE to suggest a desire to save, then leave it up to partner? Maybe that is too kenrexfordian though.

It's tough, if you lead the CA you might set up their 9th that way, but if you lead a spade (or a heart) they might run 9 on you when you had lots of cashing tricks. In a book it might be that the DJ is the only winning lead lol. On a spade lead partner might not find the right shift also if spade over club through is necessary (they will be pretty blind). I would probably just lead the ace of clubs.

I have never heard of this theory before lol, what is the idea behind it? Like jdonn I always play it before deciding since the ace might pop, or they might showout, or it might be stiff Q, blah blah. I would find it annoying to no end if my opp thought for like a minute before leading up to it and that was the whole hand and it was AQ onside lol. And if it's AQ offside sometimes the defender can work out to say "it doesn't matter" to save the table some time if it's at the end of the hand, but not before it's played (since they might get squeezed or endplayed or something). Another of my favorites is people who have AKJxx opp xxxx and cash the ace, then come to their hand and go into the tank. Why not play one as most of the time it will go queen or showout on your left, you are just wasting time a majority of the time for no reason.

Even without the spade ace if he just has Txxx of hearts then 7H is down if he leads a minor (as he should). Edit: And of course it's always possible that partner has the Jxxx of hearts, I don't think anyone would criticize GSF with the same hand Kurt gave with no HJ. edit again: sorry I miscounted the tricks, obviously if they have the spade ace they just have 13 tricks. I thought they needed 2 ruffs lol. So partner needs Txxx of hearts and the SA to beat it (or Jxxx of hearts).

The problem is if partner has 4 hearts and the spade ace then 7H is down if that's the dummy.

Charlie G is definitely a leading theorist on these matters. Up there with Ms. Josephine.

I know these things shouldn't surprise me anymore, but I still find it difficult to believe I live in a world where someones first thought is to pass out 1H with 7 solid diamonds, an ace, and QTx of hearts.

So with zero he passes obv right?? And yeah we are cold for 7 opp the AQ of spades imo

I think knowing about whether you have a heart control or not is a priority over anything like trump quality

Just for fun: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&andor_type=and&sid=be9dfc20d439fbcd9eda37ee8d18a314&search_author=mike777&search_term=junk&search_app=forums&st=0 Seems like he started experimenting with light openings in 2005 or so. He went back and forth on that vs his old roth/stone style. Seems like Roth is his hero: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&andor_type=and&sid=8ad98b99b00b64672856b4261bc41afa&search_author=mike777&search_term=roth&search_app=forums&st=0 Must be a tough spot and causes situations like this to occur :P