Defend of Sacrifice ?

[sathyab]

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

3d 4c 5d 5h

p 6d p 6h

all pass[/hv]

[gwnn]

huh? pass. there's a very good chance they're off cashing AK in a suit. there's also a very good chance of going for a huge number if we bid 7D.

 

anyway I think the question is not if I have defense or not. At IMPs it's not very good to bid 7 over 6 with a 5332 just because we don't have defense.

[Pict]

Naive optimist/realist - I believe the AK of clubs stand up.

[rogerclee]

I would double for a club lead, since I think there are too many hands where dummy has 4 spade tricks and declarer can pitch a club.

 

How likely is it that the 5H bidder has club shortness? I'm not sure, but note that he would be very inclined to double instead of commit with 5H with a lot of hands with club shortness because club shortness is great for defense. I just think he simply has 2+ clubs more than he has shortness.

 

Of course given that x wasn't even an option I have UI that it's not right on this hand, heh.

[jjbrr]

I would double for a club lead, since I think there are too many hands where dummy has 4 spade tricks and declarer can pitch a club.

 

How likely is it that the 5H bidder has club shortness? I'm not sure, but note that he would be very inclined to double instead of commit with 5H with a lot of hands because club shortness is great for defense. I just think he simply has 2+ clubs more than he has shortness.

 

Of course given that x wasn't even an option I have UI that it's not right on this hand, heh.

I also wanted to double. But we have UI that the title of the poll is "So, you think you have defense?" So clearly 7♦ goes for less than 1430.

[pooltuna]

I would double for a club lead, since I think there are too many hands where dummy has 4 spade tricks and declarer can pitch a club.

 

How likely is it that the 5H bidder has club shortness? I'm not sure, but note that he would be very inclined to double instead of commit with 5H with a lot of hands because club shortness is great for defense. I just think he simply has 2+ clubs more than he has shortness.

 

Of course given that x wasn't even an option I have UI that it's not right on this hand, heh.

I also wanted to double. But we have UI that the title of the poll is "So, you think you have defense?" So clearly 7♦ goes for less than 1430.

If I am not mistaken when you double it is not for lead direction <_<

[PhantomSac]

If RHO has a diamond void and didn't X 3D, I expect he has at least 7 clubs, probably 7330. With 6430 I think he'd double 3D for sure.

 

RHO having the diamond ace is possible but unlikely, and even then he'd have doubled 3D most likely, even with 2416.

 

Best case scenario partner has 3 clubs and 7 diamonds and we're down only 3 for 500 in 7D, with 6H cold. How likely is this? If partner has 2173, it leaves them with 5611 and 3307, or 4711 and 4207. If parnter has 3073 there are a lot more possible shapes, but how likely is partner to open these 3D rather than 4D w/r? Depends on partner, but I'd expect most people to open 3D with that. If he's 3172 we go for 800, but we beat their slam most likely.

 

The missing spades makes it seem really likely that partner has 3 spades though, in which case him having 3 clubs is not that likely if he has seven diamonds. However if he has 6 diamonds, 3163 is almost surely his shape, possibly even 3064. If he's 3163 then we are gonna go for 800.

 

How likely is parnter to have 6 diamonds rather than 7 w/r? Again, depends on partner. Probably most people are more likely to have 6 than 7 though? Also depends if we had a weak 2D bid available.

 

It just seems like 3163+2173+3073>>3172. I don't think shapes where parnter has a doubleton heart like 3262 are that likely given their bidding.

 

Since saving looks like 800 most times, and doubling will cost 1660 or gain 200, we don't need saving to be right that much more often than doubling in general. I think I would save.

[rogerclee]

Convincing post, I'm on board with 7D now.

[PhantomSac]

Also the reason to double is fear that dummy has the DA and declarer is void and pitches his club. The club going away on the spade is a very specific layout.

 

RHO 4207, LHO 3712 or something. What hands are consistent with that? Maybe:

 

AKQx Ax --- QJT9xxx opp Jxx KQT9xxx x xx, but the bidding would not be clear with those hands (note dummy has 1 heart honor so our jack doesn't set up, and declarer has an entry with the SJ).

 

If you include hands with 4 spades for partner, maybe it's more likely though. Anyways X is obv just in case on the spades, and just in case dummy has the DA, but the latter is way more likely for why we need the club lead immediately.

 

It seems like RHO having 3 hearts for his 6D bid is much more likely given his lack of AK of clubs.

[sathyab]

I think I would save.

Sure with Id such as yours why does it surprise me that you'd save ?:(

[eyhung]

I usually don't save very often in these situations but assuming good opponents, I would have bid 7♦ over 6♦. RHO is missing the AK of his long suit, and yet he's made a grand slam try in hearts instead of simply raising to 6H on a hope and prayer. He must have first-round control of diamonds plus other slammish cards (at least two of spade ace / heart AKQ, maybe more) to make this try. In fact, as Justin pointed out, since RHO is known to have control + short diamonds and yet didn't double, he probably has extreme club length too. So my high clubs are unlikely to stand up and I'll take insurance. Bidding over 6♦ has the extra advantage that opponents may feel pressured to bid 7♥.

[sathyab]

 

I think I would save.

Right on the money :(

 

The problem with saving as you pointed out though is that when you can beat it a trick is when you're going for 800.

 

I didn't think that a ♣ loser could disappear, so I saved IMPs by not doubling, but lost a lot more IMPs by not saving :lol: Here's what RHO had:

 

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=s8xxxhdaqxxxxcxxx&w=saqjxhqtxxxxdjtcx&e=skxhakxxdcqjtxxxx&s=sxxxhjxxdkxxxxcak]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

How he figured partner for all the cards he had including a ♣ control for bidding 5♥ under pressure, we'll never know, but he apparently did.

 

At the other table dealer didn't even open 2♦, let alone 3♦. It went 1♣-1♦-1♥-5♦-5♥- all pass.

[gnasher]

I don't care how good the opponents are: we've forced them to guess, and I don't see why we should assume they've guessed right. Especially when we have quite strong evidence that they haven't.

 

On this hand we *know* that RHO is hoping that he's opposite either a club honour or club shortage, and we *know* that one of his two chances hasn't come in. LHO's bidding doesn't suggest club shortage - it suggests diamond shortage, which we already know he's got.

 

Saving isn't at all cheap. If 6♥ is going down, and we save for 800, we've converted +13 into -4, for a net loss of 17 IMPs (assuming teammates scored +650). The expected gain from a succesful save is 9 or 12, depending on what teammates did. That's one of the most expensive insurance policies I've ever come across.

 

Put me down for a Lightner double.

[gnasher]

If I am not mistaken when you double it is not for lead direction :(

But you are, in fact, mistaken. The opponents have bid slam voluntarily, so this is a clearcut Lightner-double position.

[jdonn]

Saving isn't at all cheap.  If 6♥ is going down, and we save for 800, we've converted +13 into -4, for a net loss of 17 IMPs (assuming teammates scored +650).  The expected gain from a succesful save is 9 or 12, depending on what teammates did.  That's one of the most expensive insurance policies I've ever come across.

I don't think this is a fair comparison. If we save we might go for 500. Teammates might score +1430. They might even bid 7 over our save, being focused on the diamond control rather than the club control.

 

Frankly I find this a very tough problem, but remembering they not only bid slam but tried for a grand inclines me to save. Also that it may even be a good save against game.

[eyhung]

gnasher, I think your 17 opposite 9-12 IMP odds estimate is misleading when we have no idea what the other table will be doing, or exactly how many tricks we'd be losing in 7♦. -500 is a possibility, for example, so we might lose only 10 imps from a phantom sac. And if you and I held the held the same hand in a match with the same enemy bidding, I'd be winning 15 IMPs from you (you'd be going -1660 while I'd be going -500), yet I didn't see "win 15" as one of your save upside scenarios.

 

What it boils down to is that I feel the slam is making significantly more than 50% of the time, so I feel the odds are on my side.

[PhantomSac]

I don't care how good the opponents are: we've forced them to guess, and I don't see why we should assume they've guessed right. Especially when we have quite strong evidence that they haven't.

Obv if you think they've guessed wrong most of the time or even close to but a bit less than half the time you should not save.

 

IMO they have guessed right most of the time because given partners short hearts, and RHOs 7 card club suit, partner will have 3 clubs a lot. IMO it is just a question of how often partner will have 3 clubs.

 

If partner has a heart void it's always right to save unless he's 4072 (seems quite unlikely). Partner might have a heart void a fair amount of time given that they went nuts without the AK of their long suit.

 

If partner has a stiff heart and you think partner has 6 diamonds for a w/r 3D a lot, then he will almost always have 3 clubs. Given your preempting style I am surprised you don't think partner has 1-6 in the reds that often.

 

Partner having a doubleton heart doesn't make sense to me given how nuts they went with a bad suit and a hand only worth 4C to begin with.

 

So even though I think they've guessed wrong some of the time, I think most of the time they have gotten it right, so why shouldn't we save in that case?

[sathyab]

I don't care how good the opponents are: we've forced them to guess, and I don't see why we should assume they've guessed right.  Especially when we have quite strong evidence that they haven't.

Obv if you think they've guessed wrong most of the time or even close to but a bit less than half the time you should not save.

 

IMO they have guessed right most of the time because given partners short hearts, and RHOs 7 card club suit, partner will have 3 clubs a lot. IMO it is just a question of how often partner will have 3 clubs.

 

If partner has a heart void it's always right to save unless he's 4072 (seems quite unlikely). Partner might have a heart void a fair amount of time given that they went nuts without the AK of their long suit.

 

If partner has a stiff heart and you think partner has 6 diamonds for a w/r 3D a lot, then he will almost always have 3 clubs. Given your preempting style I am surprised you don't think partner has 1-6 in the reds that often.

 

Partner having a doubleton heart doesn't make sense to me given how nuts they went with a bad suit and a hand only worth 4C to begin with.

 

So even though I think they've guessed wrong some of the time, I think most of the time they have gotten it right, so why shouldn't we save in that case?

Another way of looking at it is, that for his cue-bid RHO is almost sure to have a ♦ void. Now if partner has seven ♦s, LHO has one. Chances of a stiff in both minors is considerably less than 1-2. If partner has only 6♦ on the other hand (and we did have a weak 2♦ available), now the odds of partner having 3 ♣s is higher. But are these considerations compelling enough to risk turning a small plus to a fairly big minus ?

[gnasher]

Frankly I find this a very tough problem, but remembering they not only bid slam but tried for a grand inclines me to save.

"They" didn't try for grand slam. RHO tried for a grand slam. RHO is the one with the club length. His decision to make a grand-slam try cannot have been influenced by knowledge of club shortage opposite, because he couldn't have known about it.

 

Putting it more succinctly, it would be illogical to say "RHO made a grand-slam try, so LHO is likely to have a singleton club."

 

Also that it may even be a good save against game.

They're not in game. At the moment they're in 6♥. If 6♥ is going down, our current expectation is +100. -800 or -500 is a lousy save against +100.

 

gnasher, I think your 17 opposite 9-12 IMP odds estimate is misleading when we have no idea what the other table will be doing, or exactly how many tricks we'd be losing in 7♦. -500 is a possibility, for example, so we might lose only 10 imps from a phantom sac. And if you and I held the held the same hand in a match with the same enemy bidding, I'd be winning 15 IMPs from you (you'd be going -1660 while I'd be going -500), yet I didn't see "win 15" as one of your save upside scenarios.

Yes, if you think -500 is likely, that improves your odds:

 

If 6♥ is going down and teammates score +650, double leads to +13 and saving leads to -4. Net result of saving = -17

If 6♥ is going down and teammates score +300, double leads to +11 and saving leads to -5. Net result of saving = -16

If 6♥ is making and teammates score +1430, double leads to -6 and saving leads to 14. Net result of saving = 20

If 6♥ is making and teammates score +500, double leads to -15 and saving leads to 0. Net result of saving = 15

[gnasher]

Given your preempting style I am surprised you don't think partner has 1-6 in the reds that often.

When someone gives me a bridge problem, I answer it in the context in which it was given. In this case that means that I assume I'm opposite a typical member of these forums. If the original posted wanted to know what I'd do opposite me, he'd have said so.

[PhantomSac]

Given your preempting style I am surprised you don't think partner has 1-6 in the reds that often.

When someone gives me a bridge problem, I answer it in the context in which it was given. In this case that means that I assume I'm opposite a typical member of these forums. If the original posted wanted to know what I'd do opposite me, he'd have said so.

Heh fair enough, I think having 6 card suits is fairly normal for most people w/r, but it depends a lot who it is I guess.

[jdonn]

Frankly I find this a very tough problem, but remembering they not only bid slam but tried for a grand inclines me to save.

"They" didn't try for grand slam. RHO tried for a grand slam. RHO is the one with the club length. His decision to make a grand-slam try cannot have been influenced by knowledge of club shortage opposite, because he couldn't have known about it.

 

Putting it more succinctly, it would be illogical to say "RHO made a grand-slam try, so LHO is likely to have a singleton club."

It would be quite logical to say "RHO tried for a grand, therefore he is likely to have more of the missing assets that LHO might have had than otherwise, therefore to justify his 5♥ bid LHO is more likely to have longer hearts and thus shorter clubs."

 

It would also be quite logical to say "RHO tried for a grand, therefore he is more likely to have read his partner for club shortage due to longer clubs in his own hand than otherwise."

 

It would also be quite logical to say "RHO tried for a grand, therefore any of the small chances to beat a small slam other than 2 clubs tricks have essentially vanished."

 

It would also be quite logical to say "RHO tried for a grand, therefore they are more likely than otherwise to wrongly bid a grand over my sacrifice."

 

Also that it may even be a good save against game.

They're not in game. At the moment they're in 6♥. If 6♥ is going down, our current expectation is +100. -800 or -500 is a lousy save against +100.

My comment was quite obviously in reference to where the other table might be, not in reference to where our table is now.

[gnasher]

Also that it may even be a good save against game.

They're not in game. At the moment they're in 6♥. If 6♥ is going down, our current expectation is +100. -800 or -500 is a lousy save against +100.

My comment was quite obviously in reference to where the other table might be, not in reference to where our table is now.

Yes, but my point is that whether it's a good save against game isn't relevant. The result of saving isn't

 

  IMPs([score at the other table] - [score if we save])

 

It is

 

  IMPs([score at the other table] - [score if we save]) - IMPs([score at the other table] - [score if we don't save])

 

Anyway, even if we incorrectly consider only what happens at the other table, if teammates score +650 when par was +300, -500 isn't a good save: it's just a waste of four of the eight IMPs that our teammates had won.

[jdonn]

Well I do admit it would have been a better point by me if the scoring were matchpoints. Although I find it awfully frustrating when you correct my use of the word "they" as referring to one opponent, then say things like "it's just a waste of four of the eight IMPs that our teammates had won." when our teammates hadn't won any imps (obviously that takes a score from each table, not a score from one table against par).

[gnasher]

Sorry, I didn't mean to seem picky. I was only trying to emphasise that the grand-slam try was a solo effort rather than a combined one.