Bizarre hand #1

[ArtK78]

So, you are playing in a Sectional Swiss Team. It is round 5 of 6. Your team took the idea of the Swiss Gambit (lose an early match to get better draws for the rest of the day) to an extreme by losing the first match by 56 IMPs (!). Since then, you have been doing well, winning matches 2, 3 and 4 by large margins to crawl back into the event.

 

You are having an up and down match against a reasonable team. This is the last board of the match.

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sakj9xxxhdakqxxxc]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1♣) - ?[/hv]

 

RHO opens the bidding with 1♣.

 

(1) What is your plan of attack?

(2) If you bid 1♠, LHO bids 3♥ preemptive and that is passed back to you. Now what?

[TylerE]

As a simple soul at heart I'm strongly temped to just shootout 6♠.

[kfay]

Well I'm definitely starting with 1♠.

 

Over 3♥ now I've actually got a decision. I guess I'll bid 4♥ and if partner bids 4♠ I'll bid blackwood (to find the Q... no way I can find out about the ♦J), if he does something else I'll just bid 6♦.

[manudude03]

1♠ for me, after 3H comes back to me, I'll bid 6♦. Hopefully this emphasises spades more than any 2 suit overcall, and will hopefully provoke partner to bid 7♠ with the Queen.

[Fluffy]

1♠, if parnter doesn't support, 7♦ next.

[HeavyDluxe]

1♠ seems automatic.

 

Over 3♥. Well, I think the two areas I suck the most are bidding judgment with freaky hands and in competitive auctions. So, this sucks a lot.

 

I like Kevin's plan of 4♥ having heard it, though I think I wouldn't have done that in the seat.

[Cascade]

1♠, if parnter doesn't support, 7♦ next.

me too ... wtp?

[Flameous]

I think I'll start with 2C Michael's. Even though it's extremely unlikely 1S would be passed around, the chance exists so why not to avoid it. I'm going to bid atleast to the 6 level anyways so I'll try to find out partners better suit.

[kfay]

1♠, if parnter doesn't support, 7♦ next.

me too ... wtp?

Yeah maybe I'm being a little wimpy but the problem is going down in a grand when we're cold for small. I think it's clearly pretty easy to see if partner has the queen of spades. Barring that I don't see why we should take a leap of faith since partner obviously has clubs and hearts on this hand and suffer a slam swing when the person at the other table decides to pussy-foot.

 

Everyone always says that nobody knows how to bid these freak hands. But one thing that I have heard much mention of is that it's important to be the declarer... the exact level is secondary.

 

I'm not saying I dislike 7♦, probably we can make grand. But I'm practically certain that we'll make 6. I'm not a gambler.

[qwery_hi]

1♠, if parnter doesn't support, 7♦ next.

me too ... wtp?

Yeah maybe I'm being a little wimpy but the problem is going down in a grand when we're cold for small. I think it's clearly pretty easy to see if partner has the queen of spades. Barring that I don't see why we should take a leap of faith since partner obviously has clubs and hearts on this hand and suffer a slam swing when the person at the other table decides to pussy-foot.

 

Everyone always says that nobody knows how to bid these freak hands. But one thing that I have heard much mention of is that it's important to be the declarer... the exact level is secondary.

 

I'm not saying I dislike 7♦, probably we can make grand. But I'm practically certain that we'll make 6. I'm not a gambler.

I agree with 1 ♠ and 6♦. Partner may find a raise to 7 with either the Q♠ or (less probable) the J♦.

[ASkolnick]

1♠ followed by 6♦. Good chance things are breaking badly.

[Cascade]

1♠ followed by 6♦. Good chance things are breaking badly.

On what do you base this?

[Cascade]

Simulation suggests that 7♠ or 7♦ is likely to make around 80% of the time - 836 times out of 1000 one or both slams made double dummy. Yes sometimes this will include dropping a doubleton ♠Q offside when you do have an entry but there will also be occasional hands where partner has an ace in an otherwise entryless dummy and they lead the wrong suit and you can now take a winning spadde finesse that you would not have been able to take.

 

We are never going to find for sure in the bidding partner's ♦J for an entry to take the odds on spade finesse or the ♠Q and sometimes we might not even be able to find partner's four-small spade or diamond support - which is likely all we need.

 

Thinking of avoiding a swing by bidding on to a small slam is flawed in that the opponent might bid the grand.

[Fluffy]

if aprtner has opposite 2 suiter all the best, I prefer that he has 1 spade and 2 diamonds than 2 spades and 2 diamonds.

[Cascade]

if aprtner has opposite 2 suiter all the best, I prefer that he has 1 spade and 2 diamonds than 2 spades and 2 diamonds.

In my simulation:

 

RHO a 1♣ opener - 12-14 Bal, 18-19 Bal, 11+ 4=4=1=4, 5+ clubs unBAL, usually no 5-card major;

 

LHO 6-9 HCP 7 hearts;

 

RHO loosely (this is harder to program automatically) no heart raise. I used some graduated scale based on HCP and heart length. So RHO raised freely with four hearts but almost never with no hearts.

 

Average number of spades for partner: 2.47

Average number of diamonds for partner: 3.075

 

Only 12.2% of the time did partner have fewer than two cards in both of your suits.

[Fluffy]

more than 3 diamonds!, oh well, that's to be expected, opponents are bidding clubs and hearts, what is partner suposed to hold!.

 

Also partner might double when he has 5 hearts, this probably takes away a couple of your bad cases in the simulation.

[Hanoi5]

1♠ and 6♦ for me.

[Cascade]

more than 3 diamonds!, oh well, that's to be expected, opponents are bidding clubs and hearts, what is partner suposed to hold!.

 

Also partner might double when he has 5 hearts, this probably takes away a couple of your bad cases in the simulation.

There are probably some good cases that I should have taken out too - partner didn't raise spades nor take some other action.

[rogerclee]

1♠, if parnter doesn't support, 7♦ next.

yes

[Hairy_Scot]

Based on the responses so far it looks like Ghestem is out of favour or not widely used, yet this would appear to be an ideal hand on which to use it.

Pard will know your suits, and if ops come back in over the 3♣ you still have time to force with a ♠ bid.

If ghestem not an option, then 1♠ followed by 6♦ would be my choice.

[ArtK78]

Based on the responses so far it looks like Ghestem is out of favour or not widely used, yet this would appear to be an ideal hand on which to use it.

Pard will know your suits, and if ops come back in over the 3♣ you still have time to force with a ♠ bid.

If ghestem not an option, then 1♠ followed by 6♦ would be my choice.

Yes - Ghestem is the obvious call with 12 tricks in hand.

 

I may be in a minority, but I believe that the main point of this hand is to not let the opponents know that you have two suits. You do not want to encourage a sacrifice when you expect to make at least 12 tricks in one of your two suits.

 

I decided that making a small slam in spades and giving up the chance of finding a grand slam in diamonds was worth it if I could convince the opponents not to sacrifice against 6♠. So, when 3♥ came back to me I bid 6♠. It turns out that 7♦ is cold, as partner has a single spade and Jxx of diamonds. The Qx of spades is offside, so you will most likely go down in 7♠ if you bid it. I made 12 tricks in spades.

 

A bad result? HARDLY! Our teammates were allowed to play in 6♥x down 800. I don't understand why my hand allowed the opponents to play in 6♥x, but that is not the point. The point is that while 7♦ makes, there is no way that the opponents are going to allow you to play it there. They are white against red at IMPs. How can they not take out insurance against a grand? 7♥x goes for 1100, and I scored 1430 in 6♠.

 

The opps are less likely to sac against 6♠, because they have no idea what is making on the hand. On the one hand, how can they know that I am making 6♠? On the other hand, how can they know that I am not making 7♠? The 6♠ bid, concealing the diamonds, makes it very difficult for them to work out that it is right for them to bid 7♥.

 

Everyone that I gave this hand to bid either 6♦ or 7♦ on their next turn to bid. It is my contention that the opps will sac over either one once they know that you have a massive 2 suited hand and that your slam bid is not a shot in the dark.

[Cascade]

There is something to be said for going plus by playing the hand with this sort of hand.

 

However

 

1. You don't know 6♠ is making - this will be a disaster if you cannot make 12 tricks but have a slam in diamonds

 

2. The opponent's haven't announced a fit so it is far from certain that they will sacrifice.

 

3. If I bid 1♠ then 7♦ on this sort of hand I do not know that a grand is making. If I knew I might be able to take some other action rather than risking 1♠ being passed out. I am happy for the opponents to dive when I cannot make 7♦.

 

4. It will be hard for the opponents to dive over 7♠ which must have excellent prospects. Showing both suits and bidding to at least 7♦ will give me the best chance of getting to 7♠ when that is the top spot (other than just bashing 7♠.

[mikeh]

I don't understand why, at round one, we should be planning a way to stop the opps bidding 7♥. Rho opened a club, not a heart, and while it is true, it seems, that LHO held 7 of them, the odds of that are precisely balanced by the odds of our partner holding 7 of them... which would make the save questionable at best B)

 

Moreover, last time I checked, spades outranked hearts...so why not involve partner... ? Yes, on the actual hand, settling for 6♠ worked, but that is a pretty weak argument

[Hairy_Scot]

Yes - Ghestem is the obvious call with 12 tricks in hand.

 

I may be in a minority, but I believe that the main point of this hand is to not let the opponents know that you have two suits.  You do not want to encourage a sacrifice when you expect to make at least 12 tricks in one of your two suits.

 

I can understand not opening the door for a potential sac, but at this early stage in the bidding I believe it best to give pard as much info as possible (even if it means giving opps the same info). The Ghestem 3♣ crowds opps a bit and gives pard the opportunity to show support. OK, if pard bids his preference then the wrong hand may wind up as dummy, but at least you know where the fit is.

There is also no certainty at this early point that the opps will sac, and since I would have no idea of their holding I can see no sense in assuming that a sac will be attempted.

[Cascade]

Yes - Ghestem is the obvious call with 12 tricks in hand.

 

I may be in a minority, but I believe that the main point of this hand is to not let the opponents know that you have two suits.  You do not want to encourage a sacrifice when you expect to make at least 12 tricks in one of your two suits.

 

I can understand not opening the door for a potential sac, but at this early stage in the bidding I believe it best to give pard as much info as possible (even if it means giving opps the same info). The Ghestem 3♣ crowds opps a bit and gives pard the opportunity to show support. OK, if pard bids his preference then the wrong hand may wind up as dummy, but at least you know where the fit is.

There is also no certainty at this early point that the opps will sac, and since I would have no idea of their holding I can see no sense in assuming that a sac will be attempted.

If you bid Ghestem and then bid 6♠ will partner interpret this as offering a choice of Grands? (assuming partner passes over some heart bid)