-11 IMPs

[hrothgar]

Here's a hand where partner and I lost 11 IMPs

 

[hv=d=s&n=s6532hk32dat3ckq3&w=sj4hq97dk875ct987&e=saqt987hjt86d96c4&s=skha54dqj42caj652]399|300|Scoring: IMPs[/hv]

 

The auction was a prosaic 1N - (P) - 3N. The opening lead was the Jack of Spades to the Ace, at whcih point the opps ran the first 6 Spade tricks.

 

Who gets the charge?

 

1. South for not opening 1!C

2. West for finding a stellar opening lead?

[Guest Jlall]

what a random lead. did east tank or something over 3N? lol. auction was fine, sh*t happens.

[EricK]

West is almost entirely to blame for this result.

 

Eric

[david_c]

West gets the credit. But, as South, you can't ignore this type of swing completely. One effect of this sort of 1NT opening is that it often gives LHO a guess on opening lead. If they happen to guess right, then that's a bad hand for the 1NT opening, and you have to make sure there are enough good hands to make up for it.

[McBruce]

Assuming standardish methods, what response was South afraid of?

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 2♦

1♣ - 1♥ - 2♥

1♣ - 1♠ - 1NT or maybe 2♣ if you prefer

1♣ - 1NT - 2NT

 

Am I missing something here? None of these rebids are the type that would scare me too much.

 

hrothgar, from your learned commentary elsewhere on these forums, I'm sure the South player informed the opponents that your agreements were that 1NT might contain a singleton in a hand with potential awkward rebids. Perhaps that led to the speculative lead by West!

[inquiry]

South should step up and take the blame. When you open 1NT with a singleton, if it goes horribly bad, be a "man" (or a lady), apologize and move on. BTW, I would open south hand..... 1NT.

[mike777]

what a random lead. did east tank or something over 3N? lol. auction was fine, sh*t happens.

ditto

[mike777]

South should step up and take the blame. When you open 1NT with a singleton, if it goes sour, be a "man" (or a lady), apologize and move on. BTW, I would open south hand..... 1NT.

Take no blame at the table, say nothing.

 

 

Feel free to buy the beer in bar later.

[mikeh]

I do not see any need to open 1N with the south hand. The stiff K is not, so far, pulling its full weight, so I have no trouble with 1♣ followed by 1N over the only problem response: 1♠.

 

However, while I strongly dislike 1N with a stiff (I doubt that I have made that bid for at least 10 years, and never regretted it), I would not beat up a South for this: this truly is a sh*t happens result.

 

Blame: 35% S, 25% W, 40% random... and that may be letting 'random' off easy

[hrothgar]

Assuming standardish methods, what response was South afraid of?

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 2♦

1♣ - 1♥ - 2♥

1♣ - 1♠ - 1NT or maybe 2♣ if you prefer

1♣ - 1NT - 2NT

 

Am I missing something here?  None of these rebids are the type that would scare me too much.

I was worried about a 1♠ response. If partner shows 4 Spades, the stiff King revalues significantly. Accordingly, I dislike a NT rebid. I also really dislike rebidding 2♣ on a mediocre 5 card suit. In all honesty, the hand doesn't strike me as quite strong enough for a 1NT opening. On a normal day, I would have opened this 1♦ and rebid 2♣. However, I was firmly in "the zone" so I gave myself an extra queen which definitely makes it strong enough for 1NT.

 

Partner was not amused by 3NT contract and start talking about the virtues of a 5♣ contract after the auction 1♣ - (P) - 2N. I was a little miffed, particularly since the field was making 3NT by South after a variety of less fortuitous leads.

[hrothgar]

hrothgar, from your learned commentary elsewhere on these forums, I'm sure the South player informed the opponents that your agreements were that 1NT might contain a singleton in a hand with potential awkward rebids. Perhaps that led to the speculative lead by West!

I was playing with a pickup partner against a pair that knows me from the forums.

I certainly had no agreement with partner to open 1NT with singletons. From my perspective choosing the least awkward opening is "just bridge"...

 

Had I been playing in an estbalished partnership, I would have an obligation to alert. However, had I been playing in an established partnership I'd be playing MOSCITO and wouldn't need to distort the natural NT opening as much.

[pclayton]

I don't mind devalueing the K♠ even if pard does find a spade call over 1♣. Again, if I can open the hand 1♣ I don't want to go out of my way to misprepresent my pattern.

 

On the subject hand, two things might happen in 3N. Either the spade call will make it impossible for West to lead one, or, East gets to make a lead directing double, whereby I'll bet your pard makes a doubt showing xx. You might get out to 5♣, which looks touch and go, but should come home with careful play.

 

Strange hand.

[Guest Jlall]

Partner was not amused by 3NT contract and start talking about the virtues of a 5♣ contract after the auction 1♣ - (P) - 2N.

2N is certainly a sensible bid over 1C as opposed to 1S, but south would bid 3N over 2N right? With stiff K theres no need to try for 5 of a minor. If they are going to make random leads, we'll say east will lead the ace of spades ;)

[mikestar]

West might have reasoned his way to the spade lead. The diamond on Kxxx can easily blow a trick without creating length winners to compensate. The club on T987 is 100% safe but unlikely to be productive. So it is reasonable to take a shot at hitting partner's major. Qxx is more useful if it is right, but less likely to hit partner than Jx and more likely to blow a trick. Qxx has a fair chance to be a defensive trick if NS have the hearts if West doesn't lead it for them, while Jx is likely dead anyway if NS have the spades.

 

So J♠ is a good lead when East has the spades and may be a fair passive lead if he doesn't. If West is aware that you will open 1NT with a stiff, particularly a stiff spade (most frequent rebid issues), this increases the appeal of the lead.

[mikestar]

With regard to the evaluation question, I don't think this hand is strong enough for 1NT, assuming the frequently used 15-17 range. South has fifteen HCP plus a point for the 5-card club sauit, but for NT evaluation should deduct a point for the unguaredd King and another for the stiff. Stiffs are always a detriment in NT--if it is an enemy suit, it is likely to be a weakness, if it is partner's suit, it becomes harder to develop partner's suit. I evalute this hand as 14 points.

 

Now a spade bid removes the unguarded honor issue but the stiff itself is still a detriment. OK now South's hand is 15+ and a bit strong for a 1NT rebid. So I see Richard's point, but I would prefer to choose the potential underbid if partner responds in spades to the certain overbid by opening 1NT. The overbid gets worse if you open 1NT and partner transfers to spades. Give partner ♠AJxxxx and you can see how much poorer K stiff is than Kx.

[Fluffy]

West to blame fully. I would rather rebid 2♦ after 1♣-1♠ than 1NT ;)

[HeartA]

To open 1NT with singleton is master-mind. South deserves such result.

[hotShot]

Some think opening 1NT with a singleton pays off most of the time.

It it does not work, you just pay and move on.

.

[hrothgar]

To open 1NT with singleton is master-mind. South deserves such result.

Better to mastermind than not to think at all...

 

Any bid that you make with this hand risks an awkward auction.

Opening 1♣ is evey bit as much a position as opening 1NT

[Echognome]

Although 1NT would not be my choice for opening, I certainly do not fault it. I don't think ♠J was such a random choice. Auction has gone 1N - 3N. West wants to lead a major and hearts doesn't look to be such a good shot. Why not try to hit partner's major? Why no one else found the lead? I don't know. A bit unlucky for South.

[Guest Jlall]

I hear all of this talk about leading majors and hitting partner on these auctions. There are a reason textbook leads are textbook leads, and that "4th from your longest and strongest" rules exist. They are percentage leads on "normal" auctions such as this. You have limited info, but know they have at least 24 HCP and that dummy PROBABLY won't have a 4 card major. That makes majors preferable in close cases, but it does not mean leading a major is always correct. Whenever it goes 1N-3N I "know" partner has length in the major if I have a singleton. Do I then lead this singleton to "hit" partner? No, that would be silly. If I had a yarborough I might try to hit partner as I'll never get in if I try to set up my long suit, but here I have 6 points. I have a possible entry in EVERY suit.

 

Things like hitting partner and leading short majors are misguided imo. They can work, as can any lead at any time, but if they were the long run winners the textbooks would say "lead top from your shortest major." Going against "rules" like this is fine, but there should at least be some reason, and no I don't consider the auction going 1N-3N a reason. So yes, this lead could obviously work, and did work, but I consider the fact that it worked to be random.

[Echognome]

I am not using this hand as a justification for the lead. I just don't see a better lead. Tysen talked earlier about leading from a three card major in preference to a four card major (if the 4 card major is bad). Here I don't have anything that looks like it's going to set up. I have 2 balanced hands opposite each other and I have a balanced hand. Looks like partner must be fairly balanced as well. Also, I know partner has 4+ spades and I don't think any of my own suits look that attractive. I would have made this a decision between diamonds and spades, but I don't see what's wrong going for the jackpot lead of a spade, when there is not another obvious lead. Give me a small fifth diamond and I will be leading that.

[Guest Jlall]

I don't see what's wrong going for the jackpot lead of a spade, when there is not another obvious lead.

I guess it's just me but 4 card sequences are "obvious" leads. They are both passive and have good potential to set up tricks.

 

I am just of the point of view that going for a "jackpot" lead without some strong clues from the bidding is a losing bet. Obviously I would have been wrong here.

[hrothgar]

I hear all of this talk about leading majors and hitting partner on these auctions. There are a reason textbook leads are textbook leads, and that "4th from your longest and strongest" rules exist. They are percentage leads on "normal" auctions such as this.

I'll note in passing that there are other textbooks out there...

 

Case in point: Paul Marston has long been an advocate of canape leads versus NT and often leads from his second best suit.

[Echognome]

Obviously I would have been wrong here.

I don't really find that relevant to the argument, that is, whether it was right or wrong on this hand. My only point was that I felt that the clues from the bidding suggested that leading the ♠J could very well be the winning choice. On power auctions to 3NT, it is likely that the opponents hold from 25-29 hcp. You hold 6, leaving your partner from 5-9 points. By leading the ♠J, I am gambling on partner holding 5+ spades and either very good spades or say Q10xxx and an outside entry or two. If he holds fewer, it is not likely to be the winning lead.

 

Your other example about holding a singleton would very much depend on the rest of my hand. Give me a 1-4-4-4 three count and on the same auction I'm leading my singleton spade. I want to help set up partner's hand rather than my own. You give me the same hand a scattered 8 or 9 count and I'll be leading my own best suit.