grrigg Posted January 30, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Actually if your suit is AKJ10xxxx (10 included) then you have 60% chance of picking up the suit opposite a singleton. There are 80 singleton deals: 5 possible singletons x 16 layouts of the other 4 cards. You pick up all layouts where partner's singleton is the Queen (if 10 isnt there then you would lose on two 4-0 breaks). For the other 4 singletons it doesnt matter what they are. You pick up all 2-2 breaks = 6 deals from 16 and any queen singleton which is 2 more deals. So the suit runs on 8/16 deals where its a non-Queen singleton. So the total number of deals with running suit is 4x8+16=48. Finally 48/80=6/10=60%. Voila. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Not all splits are equally likely (which makes it a bit more than 60%) but with singleton people mean a small singleton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 You can also look at RHO's face. If he looks puzzled when pard explains 3NT as "gambling", then he's got the ♦Q. How much does that increase the odds?? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 3NT gambling. For me this is a running suit opposite "not a void". In fact the director was called on me when I bid a gambling on: ♠x♥Qx♦AKJTxxxx♣Qx as opps didn't think this was a "solid suit without side Ace or King". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 your opponents had every right to call the director, because it's not a solid suit. I'm with justin on this: if you have agreed to play that the 3NT opener shows a solid minor, then stick to having a solid minor. I require AKQ to 8, or AKQJ to seven, or maybe AKQ10 to seven if I'm feeling frisky. This hand I would open 4D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 The problem is that I learned bridge from a Dutch book for junior bridge and it clearly states a solid suit as one where you pick up the suit > 50% if partner has a small 1, i.e. AKQxxxx(x) or AKJxxxxx. So my agreement with a German partner was "solid suit" and we never discussed otherwise, why should we it is my responsability what I bid anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I would never open 3N with AKQxxxx Is this really true? That would be the first time I have ever heard someone say this. Do you open 1 with these? yes you can ask jdonn and drg for confirmation . Yes it's true, he is the soundest gambling 3NTer I have ever met and he never does it on AKQ2222. He is also the only one I've ever met who significantly takes vulnerability and whether in 1st or 2nd seat into account, so vul in 2nd he is even sounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 he might as well use 3NT opener for something else........... LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Hi, for me the min. would be AKQxxxx. This suit is solid and running, becausepartner wont pass 3NT unless he hasat least a diamond. And I guess I would also open with AKJxxxxx for the same reason, if partner passes,we will have 9 cards, and there is a highexpectation that the suit will run. The above are dead min for the call. With kind regardsMarlowe PS: To answer the question, it is either 3NT or 4D.Although I more and more believe that one should drop 3NT as gambling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant590 Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 In the words of a good friend of mine: "3NT... it's gambling, ain't it?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 I am happy to open 3NT with AKQ5432, but in any case one third of the time the 'xxxx' will include the J or the T, making the difference even larger than 15%, i.e. responder can expect the suit to run opposite a singleton 70%+ of the time. Hi, this thinking is incorrect since it's not a question of whether you pass AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx/AKQxxxx, or open those. You can easily open AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx and pass AKQxxxx if you want to. So AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx are irrelevant to the subject of AKQxxxx. Hey Justin, sorry for repeating myself once again, but why do you waste your time playing bridge? You would make a hell of an applied math teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lechcold Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 3NT gambling. For me this is a running suit opposite "not a void". In fact the director was called on me when I bid a gambling on: ♠x♥Qx♦AKJTxxxx♣Qx as opps didn't think this was a "solid suit without side Ace or King". why the hell opps did call the director? Really very strange. Interesting what director said. BTW: 3N with "solid suit, no side ace or king" is - in my opinion - one of the worst conventions. If 3N become final contract - you play it from wrong side. Opps have a lot of informations about your hand and defence is easy. If they outbid you - the dummy play is also easy for the same reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 I am happy to open 3NT with AKQ5432, but in any case one third of the time the 'xxxx' will include the J or the T, making the difference even larger than 15%, i.e. responder can expect the suit to run opposite a singleton 70%+ of the time. Hi, this thinking is incorrect since it's not a question of whether you pass AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx/AKQxxxx, or open those. You can easily open AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx and pass AKQxxxx if you want to. So AKQJxxx/AKQTxxx are irrelevant to the subject of AKQxxxx. Hey Justin, sorry for repeating myself once again, but why do you waste your time playing bridge? You would make a hell of an applied math teacher. lol, bridge is more lucrative...and being a teacher requires finishing school? :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.