xcurt

Dble. Even if partner has the worst-case hand, SKQJxxxxx and out, they still haven't managed 11 tricks. Clubs are locked up, hearts are more likely to be on my right (x46x can balance with double), and if they need to ruff spades I can overruff the dummy. Do not agree with the idea of not punishing partner. If we don't double the opponents when they guess wrong they can bid over our preempts with all sorts of hands with good values but maybe no clear source of tricks. These hands want to name trumps if partner fits and defend otherwise.

I bid as shown and passed 5♦x. Unfortunately my LHO was sandbagging... [hv=d=e&v=n&n=skqxhkj98xdxxxcak&w=shxdaqj9xxxxcjt9x&e=sjt9haqtdktcxxxxx&s=sa8xxxxxh7xxxdcqx]399|300|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] -550.

First off, since I was the first to list some methods, I didn't mean to offend or denigrate anyone's game and I apologize if I did so. Second, I thought Frances' post was generally in response to how do you assess whether you want to play with someone you don't know. It's a particular problem on BBO because it's big, it's international, and the self-ratings are not accurate. That's the problem I was trying to address.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa8xxxxxh7xxxdcqx]133|100|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] RHO You LHO CHO Pass - Pass - 3♦ - 3♥ Pass - 4♦ - Pass - 4♥ Pass - Pass 5♦ - Dble Pass - ? a: agree with not opening this hand some number of spades? b: agree with 4♦ or something else (what?) c: agree with passing 4♥? d: what now?

I'd be curious to know what these are B) Stolen bid doubles is probably the biggest red flag for me. 2♦ mini-Roman (unless playing classical Precision) is another one. Playing weak jump shifts gives me pause.* A related class of indicators is the order in which people list conventions in their profile or start ratting off when filling out a card. Better players know that the most important situations to have agreements about are those that happen frequently (and there is more than one reasonable treatment), eg what's a minimum opening in a minor? in a major? what low-level doubles are penalty?, what happens when they overcall our 1NT? What does an overcall look like? when is a card attitude and when is it count? People that list three conventions in their profile, and the third one is Namyats, I don't want to play with. Curt *I won't argue they are unplayable. I simply argue that there is a Bayesian argument that p(weak|plays wjs) can be lower-bounded in the absence of other information given that p(plays wjs|weak) is pretty high.

I didn't GIB this, but I don't think you can beat 5♠. Assume a high heart lead (forced else declarer just sets up the diamond suit, east cannot profitably unblock). Declarer wins, ruffs a heart, and then runs 5 rounds of trumps leading to: [hv=d=n&v=e&n=sakq9542hjda75ck6&w=sj83ht875dt6cq432&e=s7hkq32dkj9caj987&s=st6ha964dq8432ct5]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Now a low diamond forces east to duck, whereupon declarer rounds up: heart ruff, diamond ace, diamond.

Then you're not redoubling frequently enough -- or you judge really really well. Anyway say we pull and reach an 8-card fit, and (somewhat optimistically) partner has 1 trick and 1 tempo (ie can prevent 1 tap) in the pointed suits. In clubs the best we can do then is lose the top tricks and take our hearts, -500. On a bad day, we're going to find hearts where we are taking 6 tricks since we make no long clubs, -1100. Pulling looks very wrong.

Are you saying thhat you plan to pass the redouble ? I'd need to be at the table to decide, but I would definitely not auto-pull. Note that the redouble is going to gain 5 IMPs in my scenario when right and cost 1 or 2 IMPs in my scenario when wrong. Therefore in theory RHO should almost always redouble, and we should almost always leave it in since the redouble doesn't give us much new information about RHOs hand. In my experience very few people would auto redouble on an odds basis, so I would consider pulling if I got a read.

Something not yet mentioned is that the pot odds are pretty good. Let's assume -630 from the other table (of course if the normal defense beats this it's hard to see how double can hurt unless partner leads the wrong short suit). No double -> push Double (and no redouble) 10 tricks -> lose 8 9 tricks -> lose 3 8 tricks -> win 13 7 tricks -> win 15 (I admit this is a rare outcome) Double and redouble 10 tricks -> (-1400) lose 13 9 tricks -> (-1000) lose 8 8 tricks -> (+400) win 14 7 tricks -> (+1000) win 17 Of course you need to assign probabilities to these outcomes and you really need the implied odds factoring RHOs ability to redouble with various hands but you only need to go from never beating it to beating it a little less than half the time even if RHO only redoubles when it's correct to do so. Finally, in a Swiss match you might need better odds on the beat because match length and the VP table both favor frequency of gain over size of gain.

Even if true, that sort of ignores the fact (well fact to me) that a diamond lead IS wrong waaaaaay more often than a heart lead is wrong. On your list of 3 times each lead loses, where occurence 1 and 2 are the same for each lead, those two possibilities are extremely more likely on the diamond ace lead than on the heart ace lead. Are you saying they're more likely to ruff off the ♦A than the ♥A? Edit -- also if one of them is void in diamonds, we're almost certainly already headed for a bad score.

Light it up. Loses when partner has no 4th round diamond stopper Gains (a lot) when partner would make a disaster lead (very likely looking at our hand) and we could otherwise beat them In theory this is correct. In practice this action never seems to work for me as advertised.

I think it is because the lead was posted as part of the problem, and since the heart ace is such an obvious lead it is unlikely to be right. If you had this hand at the table you would not get this strange "feeling" because you would not know it is a forum problem hand. This is a common phenomenon. I agree that the ♥A is the reflex lead and of course the ringing bell is always a possibility but I want to lead it because I think I can recover from the ♦A being wrong more often that I can recover from the ♥A being wrong. The ♦A can lose like so: # They ruff it and the tempo was important # We set up their king for a pitch in the other hand AND we have a slow trick in that suit # It blows a trick in the diamond suit. There are too many cases in the diamond suit to enumerate them all but holding 5 and not 4 makes a big difference since lacking intermediates odds are we don't have a third-round winner to protect as one of the other hands must hold a doubleton or shorter The ♥A can lose like so: # They ruff it and the tempo was important # We set up their king for a pitch in the other hand AND we have a slow trick in that suit # Partner is ruffing diamond(s) and cashing the ♥A attacks our entry to get a(nother) ruff I think that the vig lies with leading the ♦A.

Thanks Frances for a more reasoned reply. "Randomly going on tilt" is a pretty good description of this psyche. Also, keep in mind that a sectional typically doesn't have the menu of events that a regional does and so the Sunday Swiss is going to have some LOLs playing for enjoyment and social aspects as well as for blood. By the way I'm not anti-psyche or anything*, I just think that it's just not right in the situation described by the OP. * A little history. In the 1997 Las Vegas regional I psyched Ogust and went -250 against the field's +1430. Yeah both strong notrumps forgot to double. That led to a director telling me I was a "cheater." This led to several very good players going off on the directorial staff. In the end I got a letter of apology from Gary Blaiss out of it...

??????? Is there an element of bad sportsmanship in finessing when you are out of the event too? Yes you have to play for the drop only.

I would definitely double but I think I want to lead the ♦A. Don't ask me why.

Lots going on here, but I want to add that there's an element of poor sportsmanship in psyching once you're definitely out of the event. And who knows, in an A/X Swiss the psycher might have had a randomizing impact on the X winner or some such. So I have a little sympathy for the opponents frustration -- although none for their behavior.

Wow. Put that in your notes so you can shove it in the committee's face if partner tanks and tries to bar you! But certainly I double as a PH. And when partner shotguns a pass and this hand checks it out? This is a good hypothetical example of why committees have to be very wary of claims that "we always do ..." when the suggested action is far from "normal."

Isn't this backwards? 2♠ is more likely to be a real suit. Also, we can take the tap with small trumps.* Playing hearts we're unlikely to make any spade tricks unless partner has a nice fit for spades as well (or more hearts than is consistent with bidding only 2♥). I would pass 2♥. I don't consider this close. But why is this a problem? If we're stuck over partner's most likely reply then maybe we should not have bid 2♣ in the first place. * ♠Axx and the ♥T makes 4♠ on 3-2 trumps and 3-3 hearts, or 4-2 with the HJ falling (edit -- assuming we can get enough clubs out of the dummy before they ruff in to avoid 4 fast losers)

Second the thought about not posting the full hand so fast. Agree with more bidding from us. Partner has small diamonds and may only have small hearts. He's very unlikely to cooperate since he rates to have no prime red feature and he won't have enough highcard to go with takeover Blackwood.

It's mandatory to push them off the white 1NT at mps. I would have bid 2♠ over 1NT last turn. I'll guess to pull 2♥ to 2♠ now. Agree with Jlall about 2♠ the first time but I've come around to preferring some form of intermediate or conventional jump overcalls since the preemptive value at the 2-level is so much less once the opponents have named one suit.

On the 7303 it's between bashing 6♠ and exploring. Exploring will help them with the lead but I think given they may find the club lead anyway, and we are might make anywhere from 10 to 13 tricks in spades, exploring should be the percentage action. On the other hand, I'll cue 5♠. I don't really see another choice or how this is any worse than bidding 6♦ directly. If partner makes a greedy matchpoint pass I'll discuss it with him later.

I've learned through painful experience not to make penalty redoubles unless you have them totally dead-to-rights. They almost always have some surprise other than the surprise you were expecting and you just concede extra penalties when you go set. That said, there's a lot of blame to go around on this, even if the 2♠ opening is within the partnership style red/red. I don't even know where to begin, but since the most likely strain for slam is spades, why did responder start introducing another suit? And how was opener supposed to field 5♠? Responder should be extracting information through torture bids not showing his hand.

Oh **** I read the auction as a reverse auction.

Why did i encourage partner with 3♣?

I guess I would bid 3NT. I would reason this way in the auction. At other tables RHO will check and we will probably be bidding 1♠-1NT; over which this hand is either driving to 4♠ or 3NT. I can play 3NT from my side instead of partner's, protecting my kings and maybe getting a spade lead helping me when partner void, so I'm going to push or beat other pairs with this action. It's nice to be free rolling at matchpoints.