effervesce

Avatar should win the awards for Most Overused Plot Ever and Most Obvious Plot Ever

No more posts here thanks there are other threads to hijack now.

Ok I've analysed the hands 51-100 and I get 51 - opener cuebids 52 - good, any non-spade 53 - good, any lead 54 - good, non-spade 55 - lightner double 56 - responder does not cuebid 5D 57 - good, spade only 58 - good, non-spade 59 - good, diamond only 60 - good, spade only 61 - good, non-spade 62 - responder does not cuebid 5D 63 - lightner X for dummy's sidesuit? 64 - good, non-spade 65 - good, any 66 - responder does not cuebid 5D 67 - opener cuebids 68 - good, club only 69 - opener cuebids 70 - opener cuebids 71 - good, non-spade lead 72 - opener cuebids 73 - opener cuebids 75 - lightner X? 76 - good, non-spade lead 77 - opener cuebids 78 - good, club only lead 79 - opener cuebids 80 - good, diamond only lead 81 - good, spade only lead 82 - good, spade only lead 83 - dont think responder bids 5D 84 - opener cuebids 85 - good, club only lead 86 - dont think responder cuebids 5D 87 - dont think responder cuebids 5D 88 - good, spade only lead 89 - good, spade only lead 90 - opener cuebids 91 - good, spade only lead 92 - opener cuebids 93 - good, non-spade only 94 - good, spade only 95 - opener cuebids 96 - lightner X! 97 - opener cuebids 98 - good, non-spade lead only 99 - lightner X? 100 - lightner X! 24 hands qualify, of which 7 only a spade works, 2 any lead, 8 non-spade, 2 diamond only, 3 club only Summary: out of 41 qualifying hands from the first 100 hands from Karlson's link , 15 only a spade works, 14 only a non-spade works, 2 diamond only, 4 club only, 4 any lead. And that's without taking into account any double-dummy bias; the hands only includes hands that are double-dummy down; other hands that may be single-dummy down since declarer may not pick the diamond suit (made more likely since partner's possible diamond honor(s) are over dummy's) and we may require a spade lead to set up a quick trick that is needed to be cashed when partner comes in with a diamond (or any other) trick before disappearing on dummy's diamonds (or elsewhere). I don't suppose you could post up some hands where responder has a singleton diamond to analyse? I'd imagine it'd make a spade lead significantly worse than when dummy has a diamond suit. Another interesting re-analysis is for opener having 3-4♥ for the superaccept - I'd imagine many players/expert partnerships would allow superaccepts to have only 3 card support over 2NT then responder transferring over 2NT. If the 2♣ opener is allowed to have only 3 hearts, then the likelihood that a spade lead risks a spade trick evaporating into thin air decreases (eg less chance of declarer having doubleton spade AQ for example and increasing chance of AQJ where a spade lead won't blow a trick anyway).

Ok kalson, I manually analysed the first 50 hands of your link (from the post above). Given the constraints that opener would cuebid if missing a 1st/2nd round control in a suit (ie opener cuebids in a suit if missing AK in another suit), and my analysis of hands that would cuebid 5D as responder (if responder only bids 5D as showing a suit), I get the following results 1 - good, spade only lead 2 - good, spade only lead 3 - opener does not superaccept 4H - cuebids 3S 4 - opener cuebids 3S 5 - opener cuebids 4C 6 - opener cuebids 4C 7 - opener cuebids 4C 8 - opener cuebids 4C 9 - opener cuebids 4C 10 - good, non-spade 11 - cuebids 4C 12 - cuebids 4C 13 - cuebids 3S 14 - cuebids 4C 15 - good, spade only lead 16 - cuebids 3S 17 - good, spade only lead 18 - cuebids 4C 19 - good, non-spade 20 - dont think responder would cuebid 5D over 4H 21 - good, non-spade 22 - good, spade only lead 23 - good, spade only 24 - opener cuebids 25 - good, any lead 26 - opener cuebids 27 - opener cuebids 28 - good, spade only lead 29 - good, non-spade 30 - opener cuebids 31 - opener cuebids 32 - good, non-spade 33 - opener cuebids 34 - opener cuebids 35 - opener cuebids 36 - opener cuebids 37 - opener cuebids 38 - dont think responder would cuebid 5D 39 - opener cuebids 40 - good, spade only lead 41 - partner will lightner double! 42 - good, any lead 43 - opener cuebids 44 - good, non-spade 45 - opener cuebids 46 - dont think responder would cuebid 5D 47 - opener cuebids 48 - opener cuebids 49 - good, club only lead 50 - opener cuebids That is, only 17 hands of the 50 qualify. Of the 17, 8 only a spade will beat it, 6 any non-spade, one only a club lead, 2 any lead. Now, this is even with significant bias in the hands you gave - all of these are settable double dummy. When single dummy, ie when declarer won't know the diamond layout, I'd bet there are many more hands where a spade lead is best compared to other leads where a spade lead is necessary to set up a trick before spades are pitched on diamonds. With responder having hearts+diamonds I'll have to disagree with you and say that there would be a HUGE double dummy bias.

Out of interest, after the transfer, superaccept, what did their 5♦ bid mean (apart from cuebid)? Possible options: 1) Looking for a specific control (perhaps denying a club control) 2) Shortage 3) A sidesuit I'd rule out option 1, since opener superaccepted: on a 2♣ opener the superaccept direct to 4♥ should show a control in each suit, as otherwise the opener could have cuebid something else as a superaccept. Two is possible, and possibly the best method. For option 3, where it shows a sidesuit, I think a spade lead would be much better than what the previous simulations have suggested as a passive lead can lead to spade losers being ditched on dummy's diamonds.

The doubleton diamond and singleton in pard's suit make X by far most attractive option.

Agree with 4♥ first round and double 4♠.

Stupid question here - why can't we let declarer claim the number of tricks he wanted - "take as many tricks as you want" - so if the defenders want 13, then declarer gets 0; if the defenders only want down 5, then give declarer down 5... What's wrong with taking declarer's claim literally?

Meh. Agreements, etcetera etcetera.... Does double show extras, vs penalties, desire not to bid more, yada yada yada... Agree with X on this hand though - 5m is quite high given our shape, and 4441s dont play as well as they look, especially if we only have a 8 card fit.

lol. Nice pickup.

absolutely right there is no way partner could have[hv=s=sxhkxxxxxdxxxcxxx]133|100|[/hv] so game is completely out of reach <sarcasm off> pooltuna my old friend: this was my contention: My hand got worse after RHO opened 1S. To rephrase, suppose these two different scenarios: a. RHO opened 1H b. RHO opened 1S In which case is this hand stronger? Why? Why not? I think my hand is clearly better if RHO opens 1H than 1S. Do you disagree? Um, gwnn, what you've said is absolutely true, but you're making the wrong comparison (strawman argument). The comparison is NOT between a 1♥ and 1♠ opening by RHO; its a comparison between what the hand is worth when RHO bids 1♠ vs passing. It is true that we will have transportation problems given dummy will not have all that many points; but also given that RHO has most of the points most things would be onside. Thus I'd decide to not downgrade the hand and still think of it as a '22HCP' hand, which I'd have evaluated the hand as if RHO had passed.

And your rebid after X?

Apparently non-zero as it happened that we do have 5 spade tricks on this hand =)

Then that's where we disagree. Heck, I'd value it closer to 23 than 19-21 especially given it was a 1♠ opening before me. What I meant by "dont want to give partner a hard decision" is that partner will not know that game is right on JTxx hearts, JTxx clubs. It makes it easier for him to evaluate to bid 3NT on other hands, given that he won't, unlike you, think that Kxx hearts and JTxx clubs is enough for game when I rebid 2NT on another, different '19-21' hand.

If partner has around a 4 count - eg K hearts, JT of clubs- will partner bid game? Heck, JTxx hearts and JTxx clubs is a game I want to be in... The hand looks stronger than a simple 21 count to me-its more like 22. And I'm not taking the large number of honors in spades as a negative- its good that we have a stack of spade stops. There is a non-zero chance that LHO will lead a spade too. One of the reasons why aces (and, to a lesser extent kings) are undervalued in the standard 4-3-2-1 count is that they improve the value of other cards you and partner have in that suit. Jacks and tens that partner would otherwise value as worthless become gold.

Im a passer. Most hands that we have game on, partner will bid on in passout seat - for example, balanced 15ish count with club stopper partner will bid 3NT, over which you can bid 4♣ then 4♠ showing a two-suiter (hopefully).

X and 3NT for me. Don't need much from partner to get game, and don't want to give partner a hard decision whether to bid game or not with a few points.

1♦. What's so bad about this hand that you want to pass a probable + score? If you played a strong club system with 10-15 limited openers, or a 10-12 mini-NT there could be a case for pass...

With that hand you can bid 3♦ to show the diamond fit - no need yet to rush to 3NT or 5m.

Does 4♥ show a suit? And if so, what would South do if he didn't have heart support and wanted to play in 4NT? Oops forgot about 4NT being to play. Yeah you're right you can't keycard after that start.

I'd blame the 3♠ opener. However, north's pass over 3♠ is awful. I'd bid 3NT with the north hand. Then south bids 4♦, north might possibly bid 4♥ after which south can keycard and bid the grand.

Against small slams in a suit, usually an aggressive lead in an unbid suit is best. See Benito Garozzo "games may be quietly defended, but slams must be ATTACKED." (exceptions for 6NT and 7x where a passive lead would often be best).

3♣ for both for me-just patterning out.

Agree with cherdanno - on the multi auction 2♦ - 2♠-3x - 4♥ the opps have shown a huge heart fit, and on this auction you should look to bid 4♠ over it if you have a hand with some spades - it will either be a good sac or will make. Both players really should have bid 4♠ over 4♥.

1NT. If I convert a double at the 1 lvl, my partner will play me for having a trump stack and will lead a trump (as they should)-partner would expect something closer to KQJT8 than this hand. But this is MPs w/r so KQT9x will do in a pinch.