dellache

1NT... weak.

Hi Justin, thanx for your interesting post (as often). I definitely think you have a slightly better line if you assume they play spades randomly (or if you prefer, change the ♠9 into ♠2 for the sake of the demonstration : no more falscarding guess). We suppose East has got the ♠Q. Then as you demonstrated, the basis of the winning line decomposes into : base-a-(main) play diamonds, check if you can score 4 of them ; base-b-(secondary) if not (you have made 3 diamonds but cannot score the 4th one), hook spades, hope they are 3-3 and that the holder of the 4th diamond cannot cash it (s/he doesn't have ♥A). Having said that, instead of playing ♦ to Jack, you can also play diamond to Ace (gaining stiff Q, tiny improvement) and play small to the 10. You still make if West has the short Diamond Queen or diamonds are 3-3 (if the Queen appears, it's obvious, otherwise cashing then the K does no harm). Now the fact that you got a ♣Q lead should come into account. One of the advantages of the diamond suit is that you can score the slam if the Q is short (subcases of base-a). If you place West with QJT of clubs, West is usually the shortest side in diamonds (we don't care about 3-3 for the time being). Also, when West has the long DQ, East is now a favourite to hold both ♠Q and ♥Ace (actually this is not so simple but the remaining cases belong to base-b, and are of second order). Well, the most important fact is that the "big" subcase of one oppo having the short ♦Qx should convince you to hook against West. It's not quite possible to compute this at the table. Elementary arithmetics will show you that : - if you assume West has ♣QJT : - hooking against West wins 18.1% of the time (actually 413930/2376192 cases) - while hooking against East wins only 17.3% of the time (only 410294) - if you assume West has just ♣QJ without Ten, hooking against West is still 17.4% versus 17.2%. Not a big deal but what :P. Cheers,

Any hand with which I can bid game in my own suit, if pard bids 4MV (MV being my void). Then, if I suppose pard has (9)10-11 HCP and a six-carder MV to do that : - If I have spades and they are playable facing a singleton (at least AK109xx), I would DBL any time my range is above my max range for overcalling 1S ; Actually, I may DBL 1C on AK109xx Void KQxx AJx (yuck). - If I don't have spades, I'll need to bid 5X in my own suit. Then my decision will depend on another factor : 1. did partner pass ? and 2. In our style, do we open all 6 carder (with a Multi or whatsoever). Depending on this I will balance the probability of partner bidding 4S and the probability of being left in 1Red or 2C. I guess that if pard didnot pass, I would double on any hand I would have opened with a strong 2♣ bid. Cheers.

1- Yes this is still support. I would pass. 2- I pass over 2♠. Over 1♠ it's not obvious, we may have game. But I really don't see a convenient bid. That's the problem with 4441. Let's pass.

That's the opposite of what I said. In general, the LOWER the contract, the MORE advantage declarer has in real-life. No that's not the contrary it's just another formulation (let's call it the dual formulation) of what you said : - you say "the lower the contract, the higher the advantage for declarer of playing SD" ; - I said "the higher the contract, the higher the advantage for declarer of playing DD". Quoting the example in my previous post : declarer has almost ever the advantage playing the slams double dummy. Two different formulations of the same obvious fact. Glad we agree. Cheers.

2NT.

This 4333 hand is not really much more than just above a limit raise. My goals will be : 1- to try to play 3NT facing a 5332 hand with honors everywhere ; 2- to suggest 6♥ only if pard has short spades and around (17)18 HCP ; OR if 5-5 in the rounded suits and short diamonds (I have 4 cover cards) ; 3- to play 4♥ unless pard is mini with short ♣. (I would really like to play a relay system for this hand). - If 2NT is GF-fit and asks for strength/shortness, and if I can control the sequence that would be my choice. - if not, I would bid whatever shows a min-game hand with 3 trumps (1NT...4♥) - the only bid I would surely NOT make is 1♠ : I don't want to play in 4♠, and I really want pard to upgrade a spade singleton/void ! OK, now that I wrongly :( decided to bid 1♠ and hear 2NT, my next call is 4♥. Exit the singleton ♦/♠ : we are left to play with BAL facing BAL, 17-18(19) facing 12 dull, and I don't want to suggest slam even if pard is Max. I also reject 3NT now, because with so much strength I don't believe we will go down in 4♥, while 3NT is sometimes in jeopardy. I would consider anything else as an overbid now.

I would probably bid 3♥ and hate it : - if 3♥ is meant as semi-preemptive I really hate my collection of honor cards ; - if 3♥ is meant as game-going, this hand really sucks. If you insist, the only other call I would consider is PASS, as weird as it sounds.

Hi fluffy, Warning : my answers may seem a bit harsh. They are not intended to. 1- I bet you haven't been working with SD/DD-simulators a lot. I did. I have been co-developing "dealer" (which is now used to simulate boards on the new BBO webbased-platform) with Hans van Staveren and others a few years ago. What do we really know about SD versus DD evaluation now ? A lot, even if not much has been published yet. Eugene has already said that the higher the contract, the more the balance will be in favour of declarer (if you think about the extremes, barring the lead, declarer has almost ever the advantage playing the slams double dummy). That's of course true. My personal experience when I still had time to do research was that the trigger was around 10 tricks on offense (3 on defense). To do that, I did a large scale comparison DD versus average human results on OKbridge (I didnot know BBO at that time). The other way to do that properly is to make a fast "visual" DD versus SD comparison on a particular deal. Let's say you are sampling 10000 boards and study them DD. Take the 100 first ones, check the results one by one single dummy using common sense. There will be a bias, but it's now rather easy to evaluate it. For the deal we are talking about, I already told that the DD advantage was in favour of the declarer (he always guesses trumps, or spades when he has AT when he needs it). That's the answer to your first point. 2- The second point is typical to what I call magical approach of Bridge. Points schmoints, so just counting your points and your trumps cannot be expert bridge and is of dubious value. We all would like to believe this, and that's why sometimes we accept to bid game on a 3♦ trial-bid with xxx Ax AKJTx Kxx. "Sry Pard, I know I had only 15HCP and a 2 card fit, BUT I had prime cards, a good 5cm, no isolated quacks.". :( On the proposed deal, the best way to evaluate for South is to look at the honors he has in front of the stiff clubs... he doesn't know about. Then of course you could downgrade/upgrade your hand looking at your stiff honor combinations, dull shape etc. The Dealer simulator already does that for you :D if you call K&R evaluation instead of HCP. If you think the simple criteria "trumps + strength" sucks, what else do you suggest ? I would be glad to program it and run a new sim :) Cheers.

A fast sim with the best sim ever :) cpp 20091025.dea | dpp | dealer [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]Low [space] [space] [space]7 [space] [space] [space]8 [space] [space] [space]9 [space] [space] [space]10 [space] [space] High [space] [space] [space] Sum Reject [space] [space] [space]52 [space] [space]290 [space] 1247 [space] 1891 [space] [space]1000 [space] [space] [space]162 [space] [space] [space]4642 Accept [space] [space] [space] 5 [space] [space] 79 [space] [space]563 [space] 1822 [space] [space]2067 [space] [space] [space]822 [space] [space] [space]5358 Sum [space] [space] [space] [space] 57 [space] [space]369 [space] 1810 [space] 3713 [space] [space]3067 [space] [space] [space]984 [space] [space] 10000 Generated 166176 hands Produced 10000 hands Time needed 237.01 sec 10000 boards, South opens 1NT (including some 5422 with guarded doubletons), and South accepts 3♦ when : 1. has 4+♥, or2. Has 3+♥ and 16+HCP, or 3. 17HCP. I think understanding the above table is easy (x-axis = tricks by south in Hearts, Y axis = south accepts/rejects invitation). Results tell you that (double dummy) : a- when south accepts, he plays a 53.9% game (more than even money at this vul, maybe I was pessimistic in my previous post, but see below) ; b- when south rejects he plays 3♥ making 8 tricks 26% of the time. c- cost for the rejected 3♦ bid is (342*-2 + 1247*-4 = -5672 Imps) d- cost when 4♥ fails : (2385*-5+84*-3 = -12177 Imps) e- gain when 4♥ makes : +6*(3067+984) = 17334 f- average gain of the 3♦ bid (c+d+e) = -0.05 imps per board. (Here we compare the 3♦ bid to the case where south must transfer 2♦ into 2♥ and play there). So 3♦ is not so costly at first but we didnot take into account the fact that : - rapid check of single dummy boards on these cases seem to give advantage to declarer (so -0.05imp rather optimistic) ; - declarer will also get doubled in 4♥ some of the time ; - there is another strategy : bid 2♦ in the hope of hearing 2NT/3♥ as the original poster suggested. I won't bug you with another figures, but here's is the result of the second strategy (bid 2♦, and bid 4♥ if pard shows 4+♥) : you gain 0.36 imp per board this time. Altogether, bidding 2♦ then 4♥ facing a 4 carder is probably at least 0.4 imp above the direct 3♦ strategy. The morale of this is : "beware of the hidden cost of trial bids if you can stay low". Hence I would give 60% of the blame to south (slight overbid), 40% to north (min+ hand, short trumps), and 100% to the pair, not taking full advantage of their system. (don't know what the standard is on this board, so apologies if this is too long). Cheers.

I would bid 2♦ with no second thoughts, this is real garbage, with a lot of losers. I very much doubt the game will in average be more than 50% when pard accepts. Even 4 aces is not enough in itself to play a good game NV. The problem with 3♦ is that you also will play a 50% 3♥ partial when he rejects the invitation, when you could play safely in 2♥. When that happens you also lose 4IMPs (so lose 2 Imps in average). So your "investment" in trying for game must be compensated by playing a game ABOVE 50% when he accepts. The question which arises is : will your LHO balance 2♥ ? I don't think so. So let's try first to score 110/140 in our column. Moreover, bidding 2♦, with your system, you still get the chance partner bids 2NT (if I can't show my club shortness on this I'll of course bid 4♥ now) or 3♥, on which I think bidding 4♥ is now even money.

At this position, I only bid 2♣ with sound values (otherwise bid 3♣). This allows pard with a passed hand to bid with 8+HCP. Hence I would double with more strength, compensating the fact that my holdings in the pointed suits are flawed. To answer your question, change the ♣J into a ♣K, and I would double (admitedly sometimes reaching a poor final result), bidding 3♣ next if possible, 3NT over 3♠, and 5♣ over 4♠.

... unless, as I said above, West plays the ♠Queen on the second round (thoughtful), and East the ♥J on the third round (easy). Good defenders should do that because after the start, the situation is clear even if it was south relaying. BTW, we still don't know who was the relayer :)

A Nespresso 3NT. Pass is just tolerable. Anything else is an attempt to destroy partnership's trust in the long term.

I would bid 4♠ and bid it fast, as if I'm sure to make it (avoid a Double). An Ace, an extra spade, our honors seem to be well placed, and pard may optimize dummy play because of the bidding inferences. I would pass at MP maybe, on a very windy day.

Of course we NEVER have any postmortem at the table. Actually, we never say a word and focus to stay pokerface all the time, especially when we double them into 2♠ making +1. But we DO have bloody postmortems at the end of the event :) .

Pass over 2♦, and a "Nespresso" 4M after 2M (what else ?)

Annoying hand : look for slam and take the risk of 2♣ (3♣) Bid (5♣) ? I think I would. Let's bid 2♣, and see how it develops.

As Justin pointed out, the right play in diamonds seems now to bang down the Ace. But actually, all this really looks fishy. What does West have in Hearts ? I don't really believe West has KQJ♥ not holding the ♦K : of course, underleading KQJ seems attractive when lacking both minor Kings (I don't really think it's such a difficult play, if you take your time at trick 3). But what about the lead ? Would LHO really lead ♠Q when holding ♥KQJ ? Possible but unlikely. So what about ♥KQx ? This time, West maybe concerned about declarer letting it desperatly run to Jx in a "noplay" contract (if declarer has a heart loser, very possible on the auction, it will not disapear). It's also unlikely. So what about ♥K(J)x ? This looks impossible. West would fire back a Club and wait. We first conclude that East has the Heart King, but let's go on with West-hearts. What about ♥QJ ? This may look ridiculous again, unless East convinced his pard by playing a big spade on the Jack. I would like to know the spade spots played by East. In west seat, playing a heart back is necessary in case East has a void, and south ♥Kx. That would make a lot of sense to West : "if pard didnot overtake in Spades, he WANTS me to lead something." OK now, at the table, if East really played big spades spots at trick 1-2, I would consider 1. that he was happy to hold the ♥K and show it (uselessly) to pard, and 2. West felt his pard might ruff a Heart next, and took his chance. How long did West take to switch ? What kind of players are they ? So let's lead the ♦Q and bang down the ♦Ace. A last remark : one may object that EW had a sure way to defeat the contract when West has the stiff trump King : overtake in spades, and play for the uppercut. I really think it's an impossible defense to find for East. If South has the ♦AK (likely on the bidding), East will finish with egg on his face each time South had also xx in Hearts.

♣5.

I'd bid 2♣ : 1. a tad too weak for 3♣ 2. if you bid 3♣, you'll struggle then to differentiate between 5-5, 6-4 and 5-4. 3. if you bid 3♣, finding the 6-2 Heart fit will be more difficult. If pard has 8+HCP he MUST bid 2♦ to keep the sequence alive, even with 3424. (I would be more annoyed with ♥Kx)

♦A at MP, x♣ at IMPs. 1. They can easily make 13 tricks on this sequence. 2. Sometimes we make the first two tricks in ♦. At Imps, I would consider reason 2 alone to be too borderline in itself, compared to the risk of giving the 12th. Always difficult in the postmortem with pards when you choose wrong :lol: .

I see basically two lines: LINE A (straightforward) : Play K♦, ruff the Ace, Cash K♣, play J♣ and finesse. If it loses you are down. Otherwise, Cash ♠A (catering for a stiff K/Q) and proceed to establish spades. There are variants depending on the ♣Q appearing on 1st or 2nd round, and what happens on the spade ace and continuation. All in all, the chances of making with line A are around 1/3 of the time. LINE B (depends on many factors) : play as Andy suggested. The size of the trump spots allow for an automatic endplay if you guess which Major to play at trick 8 (if West cannot follow suit at trick 8, you make 100%). If you guess wrong (or if there's no right guess, West being 34xx) you still make if West has the ♣Q9(x). The problem with line B is that success depends strongly on your ability to guess the Major suits, and that in turn depends on the bidding sequence and opponent strength : 1. How often will you get the count on the ♥K ? 2. Is the oppo with Hxx in spades able to play his honor on the second round (producing an useless clash). If not, you can use restricted choice theory to guess the spades 2/3 of the time ; 3. Will East think about playing the 10♥ on the 3rd round when he has 107xx ? If not, you'll get restricted choice theory about the lead when West plays ♥J9x : if he had the 10, you would infer that he may have led ♥J from JT9x. Same story if east has got the J7xx. 4. BTW, Hearts will be 4-3 more than 62% of the time, also because West didnot lead one. If you compute percentages, you will see that if E/W play their major cards randomly, LINE B will succeed much less often than line A. But in real play, if they play "honestly"(!), line B becomes a little tad better than line A. Choosing between the 2 lines you need to be at the table (against some defenders, East maybe nervous if he has Q♣ and ♦A). If I'm in the zone and the opponents not, I would choose line B. Also, if you make by choosing line B, East having the ♣Q, you might get a psychological advantage. I hope I didnot overlook something, otherwise all the stuff above will look ridiculous :lol: . Regarding 6♠, I didnot really think about it. I would try to maximize my chances in the trump suit, playing twice toward AJ10. For that I'll need 2 entries to dummy, and I'll take a 1st round finesse against W in clubs. Chances of success depend again on oppos : is West strong enough to : 1. [Difficult] duck the 1st spade w/ Hx when he has Qxx in ♣, I'll probably fail. Club to 10, spade to Jack, making the trick twice. Club to Ace spade to 10 losing to K/Q and back comes the Club ruff. 2. [also difficult] insert the ♣Q when I play toward the A10, I'm not able to reach dummy twice. Interesting hand :).

It looks as if you bid 3♦ whenever you have a diamond fit : this poses a difficult problem because you can still play in 3 strains (NT,♦,♥), at 4 different levels (3NT, 4♥, 5♦, 6Red). Then the 3♠ bid will of course be nebulous (to say the least), and there's of course no way of solving all the possible hands : you have to make some bets. It leads that one probably should bid 3♦ ONLY with specific hands (the choice I've made with one of my pards, playing SAYC+gadgets, being to bid 3♦ with significant extras, mildly slamish). I don't know how to solve your problem if you bid 3♦. If opener bids 2♥ instead, I'll bid a nebulous 2♠ (natural or strength), and will be pleased to hear 3♦. Now the 5 losers hand becomes enormous. I would now bid 4♣ expressing my enthousiasm. The fact that South didnot bid 3♦ in first place now allows him to view his hand as maximal, and slam will be easily reached after BW. You suggested an alternative : play a relay system, those hands become bread and butter.

I would surely bid 8Y unless we are (:D The opponent who interferes has lost the match.