Missed Slam (?)

[pclayton]

[hv=d=e&w=sjxhajtxxxdaxcxxx&e=sakt9xhdkjtxxxcax]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

-------1♦

1♥ - 1♠

2♣ - 3♦

3♥ - 3♠

5♦ - AP

 

2♣ is 'xyz' - the rest is common sense or the lack thereof.

 

Assign the blame for missing slam. If you think it's a slam you don't want to be in, say so.

 

For extra credit, play 6♦ on a club lead.

[Fluffy]

At first glance I didn't like my chances on slam, but after taking the play I guess it is better than 50% at least.

 

win ♣A, ♦K, ♦A, ♥A and run ♠J

 

 

Can't blame you for playing in 5♦, I think I would end up in 3NT.

[pclayton]

Can't blame you for playing in 5♦, I think I would end up in 3NT.

We still won 6 for this. :) Counterparts got all the way to 3♦.

 

On this day, we needed to be miracle workers. In spite of strong sets all day long, it was like we were stuck 2 IMPs / board before we picked up our cards :P

[655321]

Slam is fine - you need to lose a spade and a diamond to go down.

 

You don't have the entries to finesse in both suits, so win the club, draw 2 rounds of trumps finishing in dummy, pitch the club and run the ♠J.

 

I might not bid the slam. Don't know enough about xyz to comment - not sure why East bid 3♦ instead of 2♠. If West has shown values, East could bid one for the road instead of passing 5♦. If West has not shown values and East's 3♦ showed values, then perhaps West could do a bit more.

[pclayton]

Slam is fine - you need to lose a spade and a diamond to go down.

 

You don't have the entries to finesse in both suits, so win the club, draw 2 rounds of trumps finishing in dummy, pitch the club and run the ♠J.

 

I might not bid the slam. Don't know enough about xyz to comment - not sure why East bid 3♦ instead of 2♠.  If West has shown values, East could bid one for the road instead of passing 5♦.  If West has not shown values and East's 3♦ showed values, then perhaps West could do a bit more.

XYZ here means 2♣ is a transfer to 2♦ to sign off or start an invitational sequence. Presumably if East bid 2♦, West would bid 2 or even 3♥.

 

Occasionally, instead of bidding 2♦, opener will do something else. This implies a near max for previous bidding where Opener may think there is still a game opposite a hand that wants to sign off in 2♦.

[cherdano]

I don't understand 3♦, 2♠ or 3♠ seem much better.

I don't like 5♦.

[Guest Jlall]

I think bidding 3D instead of 2S is amazing, why wouldn't east just show his 6-5? That is really ludicrous.

 

I think over 2S west would give it 4D and east would drive but it's not exactly clear.

[benlessard]

Was 1S forcing ? if not then i think i prefer 2S to 1S. 1♠ making 4 is a possibility.

2C was xyz so its "forced to 2D" so a 2S instead of 3D still show goodies right ?

 

edited ( ok now that i know 2S show extras then 5D is terrible, from opener point of view responder could have just wanted to signoff in 2D with (xx,kqxx,xxx,xxxx) so with 2A he has to make a foward move. I would bid 4D if its GF)

 

Of course its a good slam. After club lead ill play AD,AH low spade to the ten. If its working ill ruff A S ruff a H and pull trumps if its off side then i have a re-entry to try the D finesse. If LHO duck a Q 4th then bravo !

[cnszsun]

About the play in 6♦, except the obvious line already suggested by other posters (two rounds of ♦, then ♠ finesse), what about this line:

♠A,K, ruff 3rd♠ with♦A, pitch ♣, then if ♠ not 3-3, return to hand and ruff 4th♠.

[655321]

About the play in 6♦, except the obvious line already suggested by other posters (two rounds of ♦, then ♠ finesse), what about this line:

♠A,K, ruff 3rd♠ with♦A, pitch ♣, then if ♠ not 3-3, return to hand and ruff 4th♠.

This is a tricky line to figure out. My first thought was that it is a bad line, but:

 

You make when spades are 3-3 and: diamonds 3-2, or singleton queen.

 

When spades are 4-2, when you ruff the 4th spade, the doubleton spade hand will always ruff, so, depending on the size of the x in dummy, you need the doubleton spade to have either Qx of diamonds, or xxxx diamond. But you have an extra chance, in that when LHO shows out on the 3rd round of spades, you can ruff low - unless he ruffs the 3rd round in front of you, using up one of his trumps.

 

I think this will still add up to less than the other line, but I am too lazy to do the math. :P

[Cascade]

I have no idea who to assign the blame to since it is very hard to understand the auction after east decides to bid 3♦.

 

What is 3♠? it seems east has denied five spades.

[gnasher]

About the play in 6♦, except the obvious line already suggested by other posters (two rounds of ♦, then ♠ finesse), what about this line:

♠A,K, ruff 3rd♠ with♦A, pitch ♣, then if ♠ not 3-3, return to hand and ruff 4th♠.

I think Benlessard's line is better than either of these.

[cnszsun]

About the play in 6♦, except the obvious line already suggested by other posters (two rounds of ♦, then ♠ finesse), what about this line:

♠A,K, ruff 3rd♠ with♦A, pitch ♣, then if ♠ not 3-3, return to hand and ruff 4th♠.

I think Benlessard's line is better than either of these.

Benlessard's line would fail when north holds ♠Qxxx and ♦Qxx because south could ruff 3rd ♠s, and still one trump loser is there.

I'm not good at math, so it's just my feeling that these lines are close.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I prefer 2S instead of 3D, assuming this would

show 65, if 2S is the default rebid, and 3D showed

64, than 3D is of course better.

 

I am not sure, I would reach 6D after 2S, but

partner would at least be more willing to cooperate,

given the Ace of diamonds, the Jack of spades and

the spade shortage.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Finch]

I don't understand why opener didn't bid 2S instead of 3D.

 

As for the line in 6D on a club lead, the 'obvious' line of win, two rounds of diamonds, spade finesse needs

 

- singleton or doubleton DQ (33%)

or

- diamonds not 5-0 and not singleton or doubleton DQ (63.3%) plus spades 4-2/3-3 with the queen onside (42%) which combines to 26%

 

giving a total chance of about 59%, so you do just about want to be in it, even subtracting layouts such as spades 6-0 and losing a diamond trick.

 

benlessard's line is more complicated to evaluate. It loses to the 'obvious' line when LHO is 2-2 in the pointy suits

[pclayton]

We decided to split the blame between 2♠ and 5♦.

 

Personally, I like 3♥ over 2♠, and then diamond support. I think this confirms responder's intentions with 2♣. A direct diamond raise sounds like a hand that was going to raise diamonds initially.

 

5♦ forces opener to guess. 6♦ is a good guess, but its still a guess. Perhaps the 4♦ bidder thought it might not be forcing, but this hand looks pretty good opposite a non-minimum 5-6.

[han]

I would also like to express my amazement at East's bidding. Not really worth to assign blame.

[cherdano]

We decided to split the blame between 2♠ and 5♦.

 

Personally, I like 3♥ over 2♠, and then diamond support. I think this confirms responder's intentions with 2♣. A direct diamond raise sounds like a hand that was going to raise diamonds initially.

 

5♦ forces opener to guess. 6♦ is a good guess, but its still a guess. Perhaps the 4♦ bidder thought it might not be forcing, but this hand looks pretty good opposite a non-minimum 5-6.

Uh, opener has certainly denied a 6-5 with his sequence. 3♠ doesn't show a 5th spade any more, it is either a stall towards 3N or a cue.

[pclayton]

We decided to split the blame between 2♠ and 5♦.

 

Personally, I like 3♥ over 2♠, and then diamond support. I think this confirms responder's intentions with 2♣. A direct diamond raise sounds like a hand that was going to raise diamonds initially.

 

5♦ forces opener to guess. 6♦ is a good guess, but its still a guess. Perhaps the 4♦ bidder thought it might not be forcing, but this hand looks pretty good opposite a non-minimum 5-6.

Uh, opener has certainly denied a 6-5 with his sequence. 3♠ doesn't show a 5th spade any more, it is either a stall towards 3N or a cue.

I think 3♠ shows something like AKQx x AKxxxx xx. Stall toward 3N is correct (or a grope toward a 4-3).

 

I can't see how its a cue.

 

Agree that it denies 5♠

[skjaeran]

Agree with all those who doesn't understand 3♦. Not bidding 2♠ to show 5-6 is a mystery to me also. Hard to assign blame to west after this misere.