Free Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 This hand was a great one tonight, it gained us +12.8 imps, and helped for our victory in FOT :D . [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sahkjtdqj7caq7532&w=sjt874h4dk942ct94&e=skq32hq652dt6cj86&s=s965ha9873da853ck]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Our bidding (MOSCITO, opps quiet): S - N1♦ - 1♥1♠ - 1NT2♣ - 2♦3♦ - 3♥3♠ - 4♣4♠ - 4NT5♣ - 6♥pass North (me) only bid relays.1♦ = 9-15HCP, 4+♥, can have longer m1♠ = minimum hand, unbal, 5+♥2♣ = 5+♥-4+♦ or any 5440 with 5♥3♦ = 3-5-4-13♠ = 6 Slam Points (A=3, K=2, Q=1, singleton K/Q=0)4♠ = 1/2 tophonours in ♥ and ♦, none in ♠5♣ = no second top honour in ♥ From 1♠ on, I knew I would play at least 4♥, and that the contract would be rightsided (thanks to my 1♥ relay bid :D ). So I choose to collect some more info, you never know p has singleton in ♣ and nothing in ♠. After the distribution was shown (3♦ bid) I was already quite excited. Still far under 4♥, I decided to ask for more info. The worst answer came: 6SP (= minimum requirements). I thought, if p has ♥Q and ♦AK we still make slam, so I continued to ask further info. Denial cuebids showed 1 or 2 tophonours in ♦ and none in ♠ (great), and exactly 1 tophonour in ♥, so p had either both red Aces, or ♥A+♦KQ or ♥Q+♦AK. I forgot to ask even more info, and blasted into 6♥ to play. The lead was ♠K, my worst nightmare, and dummy's 2 Aces weren't the greatest tophonours I wanted, but the ♣K was a nice bonus. I played ♣ to the K to unblock that suit, and continued with a ♥ to my hand. My RHO was thinking a bit before playing a card, and I was a bit confused. Who has to think what to throw with some cards from Q6542? Also, I already planned to finesse my LHO's ♥Q. So I didn't want to change my first thought to regret it later, and played ♥K. Ufff, my LHO had another ♥, so trumps were at most (and probably) 4-1. Since both Richard and I had a singleton, I was almost sure trumps were 4-1. Nobody bid ♠ in between, ♦ would probably fall 4-2, so my calculations were my LHO (East) had a 4-4-2-3 or 4-4-4-1, and my RHO (West) had a 5-1-4-3 or 5-1-2-5. The last case seemed quite impossible, so I played ♣ for 3-3 to discard my ♠s. First I had to check the ♥, so I played the J, not covered, and RHO discarded a ♠. Now I knew what to do. Play ♣, discard my ♠ in dummy, and continue with the finesse in ♥. With ♦QJ I had a sure re-entry in my hand to cash the final ♣ tricks, so no worries. My LHO didn't cover my ♥10, so I played ♦ to the Ace, ♥A and small ♦ to my hand. This was the situation: [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sahkjtdqj7caq7532&w=sjt874h4dk942ct94&e=skq32hq652dt6cj86&s=s965ha9873da853ck]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] I played ♦ to my Q, the K didn't appear, to make an overtrick :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 (I will note that I asked Free to post this) Had I been declaring, I would have misguessed the trump positing and gone down 1, so I wanted him to explain his reasoning behind the line of play that he chose. BTW, the scary thing is that we had a longer auction later in the event... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulhar Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 What is FOT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted July 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 What is FOT? Friends Of Topflight :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Well done, but I am surprised you got no interference on the hand. I suspect that if you were playing against players used to relays, a 1S lead directing overcall by East, followed by a raise to 2/3 S is automatic, regardless of vulnerability.This would certainly happen if you played here!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Personally, my favorite hand was the following [hv=d=n&v=w&n=st9432haj42dtcq76&w=sakqh9873dkj9cj43&e=sj8hq5d76432ck952&s=s765hkt6daq85cat8]399|300|[/hv] 2♥ - (P) - P - (X)(P) - (3♦) - X - (P)All pass Free Opened 2H with the North hand, showing a preemptive hand with 4+ Hearts and either 4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs. I decided to pass with a solid 13 Count. If Free was at the top of his range, we might have play at game, however, I preferred to pass smoothly and hope that the opponents would make an ill advised balancing decision. Sure enough, LHO decided that he had to protect, resulting in +800 on a part score hand :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted July 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Yeah, this is one of the stereotype biddings that the system is designed for :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 If south would cleverly pass with a bust hand and no ♥;s willing to take down 8 (-400 versus opponents cold game and/or slam), this presents WEST with a very difficult problem. His partner may have passed over 2♥ BECAUSE he held hearts. If NS were vul, this would be easy pass hand with WEST, even if EW was not. But at this combination, both pass and bid carries potential problems. 2H will make, but cost you an imp (3S makes). But you turned potential -1 imp into nice pickup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 2H will make, but cost you an imp (3S makes). But you turned potential -1 imp into nice pickup. As I've noted in the past, MOSCITO isn't designed to find the optimal contract.Rather, its designed to reach an acceptable contract as quickly as possible, forcing the last guess on the opponents. The methods can create some significant swings, the epxected value seems to be positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Ufff, my LHO had another ♥, so trumps were at most (and probably) 4-1. Since both Richard and I had a singleton, I was almost sure trumps were 4-1. Could you just explain the logic here? Also, query: Does the singleton King of Clubs feature anywhere in the evaluation of opener's hand, ie as a qualification for opening? Does he have to have (or most likely have) the King of Clubs, by the time the bidding has got to 5C? You say that the presence of the King of Clubs came as a nice surprise, so perhaps he did not have to have it. And I suggest that if he did not have it (and you have not asked about it) then slam is rather a poor spot. Feel free to disagree with me on that - it is a complex layout. If his holding the King of Clubs is simply a probability of 1/7 (there being 7 missing clubs to occupy opener's singleton) then I should have thought it is one to stay out of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Personally, my favorite hand was the following I think it is a bit of a shame that you posted the whole hand up front. I would have preferred to see a poll in which only West's hand is shown, plus the first three calls of the auction, with explanation of the 2H opener, and then ask do you protect (and with what)? After a few responses, then post the hand. I know that I would vote to pass it out, but it is easy to say that seeing all 4 hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Also, query: Does the singleton King of Clubs feature anywhere in the evaluation of opener's hand, ie as a qualification for opening? Does he have to have (or most likely have) the King of Clubs, by the time the bidding has got to 5C? You say that the presence of the King of Clubs came as a nice surprise, so perhaps he did not have to have it. Holding ♠ xxx♥ Axxxx♦ Axxx♣ x Red versus White I might very well have preferred a 2♦. Free wasn't gaurunteed anything extra, however, it wouldn't have been unreasonable to expect some Jacks or some such... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Well, Free had both the (useful) red Jacks. The Jack of Spades would have been garbage. The Jack of Clubs would be of some use, if the right play is to finesse in Clubs. It is all too complicated for my little brain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trpltrbl Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Ufff, my LHO had another ♥, so trumps were at most (and probably) 4-1. Since both Richard and I had a singleton, I was almost sure trumps were 4-1. Could you just explain the logic here? Law of symetry.It is not a garantee, but it helps out a lot. Mike :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trpltrbl Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 I actually watched them play this tournament, and mosquito is nice to get opps of track.But on the 6♥ hand, I am not sure what the correct % play is.My personal feeling says to play J of ♥ at trick 2 and let it run.Is there anybody out there that can tell me the correct % play. And tell me how they got to it ? Mike :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Law of symetry.It is not a garantee Never mind the guarantee. Has it any statistical validity whatsoever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Well, Free had both the (useful) red Jacks. The Jack of Spades would have been garbage. The Jack of Clubs would be of some use, if the right play is to finesse in Clubs. It is all too complicated for my little brain. Without specifically the CLUB king singleton this is a horrible slam. It would require both finessess to be "on" (clubs and hearts) making it around 24 percent. In additiion, rihcard could have held !SK or !SQ or !SJ or maybe !SKJx instead of !CK, and that doesn't help one whit (well !DK gives you a thrird suit to hook in,!Ds.... so you might only need 2/3 hooks and nothing bad happening elsewhere. I have to admit, the need to find out abot the kings is critical here. I am glad they got to slam, but I don't think this is an example of brillinat bidding if they didn;t know aobu the club king. This appears to be a nice auction up to a point and then an educated stab at the right landing place. I think when Free said the spade king was his worse nightmare, he meant the spade king in dummy. Values in spade is bad bad fo r him. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 I think when Free said the spade king was his worse nightmare, he meant the spade king in dummy. Values in spade is bad bad fo r him. Not so. The 4S bid denied a "top" Spade honour (educated guess: A, K or Q).He did say that it was the lead that was the nightmare, and I tend to agree. It means you cannot play 3 rounds of trumps without setting up Spade losers if the opps get on lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trpltrbl Posted July 26, 2004 Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Law of symetry.It is not a garantee Never mind the guarantee. Has it any statistical validity whatsoever? Law of Symetry works for me, maybe only psychological. But it is based on some mathematical formula. I just wish I would paid attention in school instead of chasing girls and go surfing and sailing. O well bet ya I had more fun tho Mike :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted July 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Seems like Ben needs to learn how to read again. :D If you read the explanations of the bidding, you'll see that my p has all or none top honours in ♠. Since I have the Ace, he has NONE. The bidding level was still low enough to investigate this. ♣K wasn't promissed at all. With a small ♣ he could've bid the same. That's why I wouldn't treat this hand as minimum, but skip the 1♠ bid in Richard's place. When I ask for SP and he shows 6 (both his Aces), and later on what specific cards he has, I have to know he has ♣K stiff, otherwise it's a minimum hand. In this bidding sequence, I was a bit optimistic, I admit that, but we needed something big to win, and in these tourneys some stuff is just too good to be true :D I should've asked once more, to see what Richard had in ♦s. If he also showed only 1 top honour, I knew we he had both Aces, and I should signoff in 5♥. But with full trust in my declarer capabilities I blasted into 6♥, ready to apologize when I would go -1. Why do I suspect trumps are 4-1? I've checked this on a lot of hands, and most of the time a stiff never comes alone. You could say, ok, we have both a stiff, so they don't have one anymore. This is however seldom the case, certainly not in online bridge and high-level tourneys. (Sunday I played a tourney, and I played 3 times against a 5-0 trump split!!!). What I've noticed:1) If we have a stiff, they have a stiff2) If we have both a stiff, they usually have 1 or 2 stiffs/voids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodwintr Posted July 27, 2004 Report Share Posted July 27, 2004 I was one of several kibitzers when Free bid and made six hearts, and I confess that as I was watching, I was wondering just why he was getting the trumps right. When he explained to Richard that "it was obvious that trumps were 4-1," I was still wondering. NOW I get it: the Rule of Symmetry! I am reminded of the time, several years ago, when a good friend of mine won the finals of a Regional Knockout by "guessing" successfully to take an anti-percentage finesse for the queen of trumps in a grand slam. When the opponents asked him how he had managed to get that right, he explained with a straight face that, "The queen lies over the jack." I'm told he won a lot of IMPs with the finesse, and a lot more with the remark. . . . TLGoodwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 WD, i think i would go down playing on 3-2 heart (playing AK of heart) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 Terrence Reese first mentioned the "Law of Symmetry" in "Play Bridge With Reese" I discussed this with a mathematician friend - he stated that it has no validity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted July 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 You're right. It's not a law imo, just a guide in tough situations imo. All I can say is that it helped me a lot already, and it will keep helping me in the future I guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted July 28, 2004 Report Share Posted July 28, 2004 The law of symmetry has no basis whatsoever. The fact that I have a singleton and my partner has a singleton has no bearing on how the opponents five spades say are distributed. Each opponent still has 13 cards some (or none) of which will be spades. This is exactly the same if you and your partner both have doubletons. Therefore the chance of a 3-2 break has not altered at all because of your singletons. I have done a simulation of 1000000 hands in which the condition was that NS each have a side suit singleton and an eight card spade fit. Here are the percentages of each break in the simulation compared with the theoretical percentages. Theory Simulation 5-0 3.91% 3.92% 4-1 28.26% 28.23% 3-2 67.83% 67.87%You can see that it is unlikely that your two singletons affect the distribution of the opponents five cards in your 8-card fit. 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.