LMP, session 5

[han]

We played better on the second day and qualified for the finals as 62nd. I would have settled for this beforehand, but now that we are in the finals and I'm slowly starting to play well, I have good hopes that we can get a decent finish.

 

Moreover, my partner tells me that he has read the notes, good news :P ! We should have settled for less complicated agreements, my partner is not used to playing modern treatments and it has cost us quite a bit on the previous two days. But it is too late to change now, and hopefully we won't have any disasters today.

 

We are east this set.

 

1. my partner's hand: ♠J74♥J9♦AQJ♣87643, E dealer, both.

 

1H - (1S) - ??

 

2. ♠AK73♥J10♦Q5♣KQJ96, S dealer, none

 

1H - 2C

2D - 2S

3C - 3NT

6NT - ??

 

3. We had the following auction:

 

1C - (p) - 1S - (2H)

Dbl* - (p) - 3D

 

With 4 spades and longer diamonds east responds 1S when less than invitational. Is 3D forcing? [Of course, we had no agreement]

 

4. ♠J10♥A1052♦AQ85♣J32, N dealer, none

 

(p) - 1D - (2C) - 2S

(p) - ??

 

5. A play problem:

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skqha1097daj983ck7&e=sa10764hk5d7caj942]266|100|Scoring: MP

- 1S

2D - 2S

3H - 3NT

4S[/hv]

 

My partner thought that 2S showed 6. I'm not sure what 3H was all about, but the contract was good.

 

South lead the 10 of clubs. It seems best to take the club king, but I let it ride to my jack, cashed the KQ of spades (both following) and cashed the club king, south ruffing.

 

South now played a low diamond, how do you continue?

[joshs]

We played better on the second day and qualified for the finals as 62nd. I would have settled for this beforehand, but now that we are in the finals and I'm slowly starting to play well, I have good hopes that we can get a decent finish.

 

Moreover, my partner tells me that he has read the notes, good news B) ! We should have settled for less complicated agreements, my partner is not used to playing modern treatments and it has cost us quite a bit on the previous two days. But it is too late to change now, and hopefully we won't have any disasters today.

 

We are east this set.

 

1. my partner's hand: ♠J74♥J9♦AQJ♣87643, E dealer, both.

 

1H - (1S) - ??

 

2. ♠AK73♥J10♦Q5♣KQJ96, S dealer, none

 

1H - 2C

2D - 2S

3C - 3NT

6NT - ??

 

3. We had the following auction:

 

1C - (p) - 1S - (2H)

Dbl* - (p) - 3D

 

With 4 spades and longer diamonds east responds 1S when less than invitational. Is 3D forcing? [Of course, we had no agreement]

 

4. ♠J10♥A1052♦AQ85♣J32, N dealer, none

 

(p) - 1D - (2C) - 2S

(p) - ??

 

5. A play problem:

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skqha1097daj983ck7&e=sa10764hk5d7caj942]266|100|Scoring: MP

- 1S

2D - 2S

3H - 3NT

4S[/hv]

 

My partner thought that 2S showed 6. I'm not sure what 3H was all about, but the contract was good.

 

South lead the 10 of clubs. It seems best to take the club king, but I let it ride to my jack, cashed the KQ of spades (both following) and cashed the club king, south ruffing.

 

South now played a low diamond, how do you continue?

1. x

 

2. I prefer 2N to 2S (so you can bid 3S over 3C), but after 6N having understated my hand so far I guess I will try 7C. Partner sounds like a 3 suited 19/20 count and not a tricks hand. Perhaps x AKxxx AKxx Axx plus another J or Q somewhere. Yes if the other card is the heart Q we belong in 7N at pairs...

 

3. Well I have always played support x's as a "raise to 2M with 3 cards". Its standard that new suits below 2M are natural and non forcing. Most play bids above are game tries as if partner had actually bid 2M.

 

4. I really think 2N is right...

 

5. Cashing the SKQ didn't feel right to me. I think I wanted to xruff this hand from the start...

[Guest Jlall]

1) X, what else?

 

2) abstain I know the hand, but 2S is a bad bid imo.

 

3) Yeah it's forcing if you haven't talked about it (new suit at 3 level...) but there are sound arguments for NF and I play that with one person.

 

4) 2N. Thanks for the jack.

 

5) abstain.

[han]

I added hand 1 and 4 because I thought it was funny. He bid 1NT on hand 1, I bid 2NT on 4, both with Jxx in their suit. I don't like 1NT on 1 though, I think the negative double is clear.

 

2. I bid 7C, partner had x AKQxx AKxx Axx. 7NT is of course better with 15 top tricks.

 

Afterwards I suggested (after he asked) that he could have bid 4C and he said that he didn't consider that because he usually plays it as Gerber. This amazed me, I didn't know that there were actually players of his level that use Gerber in such an auction.

 

I'm not sure if we'd get to 7NT after he bids 4C, probably. I'll think about 2S vs 2NT.

 

3. Well, we played 3D with 10 tricks in both diamonds and notrump. Again we both apologized, of course I shouldn't have risked it undiscussed. The good news is that I now discussed it with my regular partner.

 

5. Even though I may have butchered the play so far, it is a nice problem (not for beginners only). I won't give it away yet.

[joshs]

I added hand 1 and 4 because I thought it was funny. He bid 1NT on hand 1, I bid 2NT on 4, both with Jxx in their suit. I don't like 1NT on 1 though, I think the negative double is clear.

 

2. I bid 7C, partner had x AKQxx AKxx Axx. 7NT is of course better with 15 top tricks.

 

Afterwards I suggested (after he asked) that he could have bid 4C and he said that he didn't consider that because he usually plays it as Gerber. This amazed me, I didn't know that there were actually players of his level that use Gerber in such an auction.

 

I'm not sure if we'd get to 7NT after he bids 4C, probably. I'll think about 2S vs 2NT.

 

3. Well, we played 3D with 10 tricks in both diamonds and notrump. Again we both apologized, of course I shouldn't have risked it undiscussed. The good news is that I now discussed it with my regular partner.

 

5. Even though I may have butchered the play so far, it is a nice problem (not for beginners only). I won't give it away yet.

On 2 the options were 2N and 3N. 3N shows the point count (3N shows 15-17) but its slightly offshape. 2N is more flexible but wider ranging. I am really not sure what is the better bid. Now that I recounted the points, I slightly prefer 3N...

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

#1 X

 

#2 7NT wtp, we cannot bid higher than 7NT according to the current rules?

 

#3 Was that X a support double? Prior agreements might help here.

The answer depends on our other agreements, 'if' that was a support

doouble different agreements are in effect.

 

#4 3 spades. Unless I know the overcaller very well, I am not offering to play NT holding Jxx in a freely overcalled suit. Jlall thanked you for the club Jack, I really thank you for the 10 of spades. :rolleyes:

 

Is this an ad for playing weak NTs?

 

#5 I would play partner for something like 3451 after his bidding.

That 3H bid was an attempt to decribe his 3451 'or equivalent' shape.

2S does not promise six on this auction. Have partner write that 100 times.

 

Regards,

Robert

[JanM]

Hand 2 obviously amused my husband, because it was one of only two hands from the LMP he mentioned to me, and he brought it up twice, both times saying "you hold ♠AK73 ♥J10 ♦Q5 ♣KQJ96 and your partner opens 2C, what do you bid?" I suggested a very short auction (7NT) the first time, but he convinced me that partner might have some very shaped hand with a void and we could be off an ace. In fact, Zia tried 2D (waiting!)-2H-2NT-3D-3H-3NT-4S(RKCB hearts, just to make sure!)-5C(1 or 4)-7NT.

 

Chip spent the flight home annotating the hand records from the LMP, so if anyone wants to know what the winners did on a board, just ask :D

[Finch]

 

1. Double. The systemic bid on this shape and these HCP for me is 2C, but the minor suit disparity persuades me to double.

 

2. If 2C was game forcing, I prefer 2NT to 2S. Otherwise, 7NT.

 

3. Yes. It's the same auction as 1C - 1S - 2S - 3D. (which means non-forcing is certainly playable but not undiscussed)

 

4. For me, 2NT is systemic. Weak NT without spade support.

 

5. A play problem:

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skqha1097daj983ck7&e=sa10764hk5d7caj942]266|100|Scoring: MP

- 1S

2D - 2S

3H - 3NT

4S[/hv]

 

 

South lead the 10 of clubs. It seems best to take the club king, but I let it ride to my jack, cashed the KQ of spades (both following) and cashed the club king, south ruffing.

 

South now played a low diamond, how do you continue?

 

I was about to be rude about the play to date, but then I noticed it was matchpoints, and I'm fine with it. Now however I only have 10 tricks and I need 11. I can't see an easy way to 12, which is a pity...

 

Anyway; Ace of diamonds, diamond ruff, Ace of spades discarding a diamond from dummy.

i) If spades were originally 3-3 I can make 11 easily if I guess which is North's 3-card red suit: King of hearts, ace of hearts, ruff his last red card, duck a club.

 

ii) If North started with 2 spades only, or I don't feel like guessing, duck a club at once, discarding a heart from dummy. North's best return is a heart, which I win with the king. This is a 4-card ending, where North has 2 clubs and two red cards and South has 4 red cards.

 

- if North has 2 hearts and no diamonds, I cash the last trump discarding a diamond, which extracts a haert from North, and then the ace of clubs squeezes South in the reds

 

- if North has 2 diamonds and no hearts, or one of each, I am stuck unless South has both diamond honours in which case he is squeezed in the reds.

 

But we can do slightly better than this. Try again:

 

Ace of diamonds, Jack of diamonds. If RHO covers this, we ruff and draw the last trump and concede a club as before, in the extra hope that we have transferred the diamond menace to South.

 

If RHO plays low on the diamond we discard a club from hand and let LHO win. If he plays a diamond back that isolates the menace for us; If he plays a heart back North may not manage to play low when I play the 10 from dummy; and he may not have a trump to return.