cherdanno

Even if you think it's 62%, shouldn't it get 7 instead of 10 (62% out of 12 even if everybody else is in partscore)? Again, this is assuming scoring is based on MP expectancy, rather than "best spot gets 10".

Agree with all of this.

I think 3N on the auction P P P 3C P 3N (or after an auction where East systemically opens 1♣) is still better than 5♣. South didn't open 1♦ in third, I don't think he is much more than 33% to lead diamonds (and even if he does, diamonds might be 4-4). So 3N does much better than 5♣ in direct comparison, but of course 5♣ always beats the part scores, making it a bit closer.

I would have thought 5♣ gets a trump lead quite often, after which it seems to be less than 30% to make. Even without that, the danger of a diamond overruff seems quite big (given the 1♦ opening). My scoring would have been s.th. like 5C=5, 4C=7 (on a top of 12).

Heh I was going to say a simulation boosts declarer play in 3N, as DDD (double dummy declarer) will always know whether to set up diamonds or clubs, and whether to drop some queens.

I realize this point is moot, since nobody bid 4C, but I want to make it anyway to clarify how the scores are being assigned. At The Bridge World's CTC, the scores are based on strict matchpoint expectancy. I.e., if you expect to score 60% of the matchpoints on average, then you get a 7 (top or 12). Assuming we are using the same principle here, I don't understand the 10 for 4♣. Anytime the games are making, 4♣ will score a near-zero, say 10% for winning against the slams. Anytime the games go down, you score 100%. So we should assign 4♣ a weighted average of the two, depending on how often the games are making - seems closer to average than a top to me, s.th. like a 7. So again, I just posted this to understand whether scores are assigned by the same principle as in CTC.

Uhm, we are discussing explaining the 1♦ opening. Obviously, no good player would need the additional information to conclude that opener is likely short in spades. On the other hand, if this particular opponent is only able to come to this conclusion if he knows that we can't be 15+ balanced (which is a special partnership agreement between my partner and me), then he is certainly entitled to that information. Don't give a bridge lesson, just describe your agreement for 1♦.

Partner has 5 hearts, and RHO made a weak jump overcall in a suit other than hearts. What do you think are the odds that RHO has ♥AQx?

It's white/white at matchpoints, and partner has a heart singleton. I don't think this double promises the world, a nice 15 count would be fully sufficient. Since 15 counts are more commont than 18 counts I think it is against the odds to force to game. I am torn between pass and 2♠. Of course if 2H makes it is right to pull, and when it's down one it is right to pull more often than not (as 2S will usually make). Of course 2H can be down 2 or more when partner is a little bit stronger or when the cards are lying bad for the opponents, but overall I think bidding 2S is right.

Ok, so I think BBF honor code requires winning the whole thing after you have knocked out another BBFer?

Vugraph will start tomorrow, with the semi-finals. Hope lots of you watch, since this is a new event to be shown on Vugraph. I am wondering who persuaded the ACBL to broadcast this event B) :P Thanks ;)

"4+ diamonds, 12-14 if balanced"

I especially like those with neither vowels nor consonants. But no vowels is an ok second.

Actually, did we show a diamond void? Might we not bid the same way with 4=5=1=3 to find a possible 5-3 club fit (and help partner evaluate)?

OleBerg? I can understand making a passed-hand takeout double with a doubleton major, but not with a doubleton major AND three cards in their suit. And would you also suggest that North should pass if you had seen that the South hand has 4225 shape?

"upside-down carding". If you want to be short, "upside-down".

Disagree with both Rik and Wayne. Of course opener can suggest the 5-2 fit -- obviously responder won't pass without 5 good hearts. But opener won't bid 4♥ any time he has Ax or Kx - whenever he has good diamonds he will prefer NT over hearts. Of course, given that he opened 2NT, has 5 diamonds, and that we have 11 hcp with none in diamonds, opener is extremely likely to have good diamonds, so this whole discussion isn't overly helpful.

clee over one

Are you saying that LTC merits a more respectful dismissal? Yes, as a matter of fact. If LTC fans posting on BBF would write things "This hand has 8 losers but 4-card support for a 9-card fit so that our 2 doubletons are really likely to be useful" then maybe loser count would deserve a respective dismissal. But since instead the most egregiously wrong hand evaluations are very often supported by "this is an x loser hand!", I prefer the flippant dismissal. Maybe it will convince someone; more likely than that it won't, but at least we can have a little fun at the expense of one of the most annoying classes of posts on BBF.

Do you jump to 3D to show your great diamond suit, your great club support, or your lack of major suit values?

Once everyone is bidding the same hands, I don't see the point of having an upper and lower bracket. Btw, Ben, did you get the results for Roger and myself?

I believe GIB is mostly giving count. But for example with 4 cards, that means playing the second-lowest, followed by the lowest.

A moderate hand with 3 spades may tank to decide between bidding 2NT and 3S. I have never seen anyone tank with 3 spades and pass.

I forgot the hand already you can use it.

Uuuuh yes! X and 4♥ are both blindingly obvious. I consider double blindingly obvious with the tank. For a player who is prepared to pass it with the tank, are you sure for such a player double is blindingly obvious if there was no tank? Yes I am 100% sure. I mean N/S are not beginners or intermediates according to the original post. Everybody knows that you double 2S in this situation with a 1444 13 count. I really don't understand how you can question this. OTOH, how to factor in RHO's tank is not something that bridge players discuss very often. What can RHO have? Typically a good hand with short spades, which could make doubling very dangerous (especially given how bad some of our suits are). In situations that bridge players don't discuss that often, their actions will vary a lot more than in frequently encountered situations, and even very good players will sometimes do things that other very good players would consider blatant errors.