Round 1, Board 8

[inquiry]

[hv=d=w&v=n&w=sqj9hkdakj742cakt&e=s74haq964d3cj9754]266|100|Scoring: MP

Board 8. Bidding Script: NS never bid.

 

Notes: I made a mistake picking this hand, as I thought it was a simple avoid 3NT. First on random NS hands, you don't need to avoid 3NT. Second, it turns out that a surprizing contract seems to offer the best chance for success. This one of the two I had to run ran simulations on to try to figure out the best spot. Four clubs makes most often, but when any of the games make, it gets a worse score, and four hearts made more often than 3NT and or with an extra trick. So, 4♥ won out.

 

4♥ew = 10, 4♣ = 9, 3New = 8, 4N = 6, 5C = 5, 2N = 3, 3D = 2, 4D = 1

 

[/hv]

 

3N W 18

4N W 1

5C W 1

6C W 4

6D W 1

6H E 1

6S E 1

 

 

6S E Hrothgar/Free

6H E Siegmund/MSchmahl

6D W gnasher/catch22

6C W mohitz/akjq

6C W CanadaGrl/Gerardo

6C W jdonn/gib

6C W Flycycle/Wackojack

5C W rogerClee/cherdano

4N W tlgoodwin/timg

3NW cascade kermit

3N W olegru - driver733

3N W Codo-Fluffy

3N W zasanya/ravia6

3N W tylere / bid_em_up

3N W mbodell - javabean

3N W East4Evil/sohcahtoa

3N W jlall/hanp

3N W karlson/threenobob

3N W elianna/awm

3N W peachy/lg62

3N W kristen33/jillybean

3N W lobowolf/bkjswan

3N W bluecalm/redds

3N W kfay/jchiu

3N W ant590 - crayzeejim

3N W sallyally/joylson

3N W helene_t-agusaris

NA 0 j0i/gwnn

NA 0 Tomi2-JHDW

NA 0 Vampyr/Lamford

[Free]

Misunderstanding nr 1 for us, otherwise we'd bid 3NT by E I think.

[cherdanno]

I realize this point is moot, since nobody bid 4C, but I want to make it anyway to clarify how the scores are being assigned.

At The Bridge World's CTC, the scores are based on strict matchpoint expectancy. I.e., if you expect to score 60% of the matchpoints on average, then you get a 7 (top or 12).

 

Assuming we are using the same principle here, I don't understand the 10 for 4♣.

Anytime the games are making, 4♣ will score a near-zero, say 10% for winning against the slams. Anytime the games go down, you score 100%. So we should assign 4♣ a weighted average of the two, depending on how often the games are making - seems closer to average than a top to me, s.th. like a 7.

 

So again, I just posted this to understand whether scores are assigned by the same principle as in CTC.

[Fluffy]

lol this ain't 10 points either. we didn't get any single top except the 26-1 split

 

Ben, IMO a double dummy simulation will boos declarer's play in 4♥ and defence in 3NT (playing a heart to kill the long clubs is far from obvious). So if the simulation was close I suggest you switch scores from one and the other.

[cherdanno]

lol this ain't 10 points either. we didn't get any single top except the 26-1 split

 

Ben, IMO a double dummy simulation will boos declarer's play in 4♥ and defence in 3NT (playing a heart to kill the long clubs is far from obvious). So if the simulation was close I suggest you switch scores from one and the other.

Heh I was going to say a simulation boosts declarer play in 3N, as DDD (double dummy declarer) will always know whether to set up diamonds or clubs, and whether to drop some queens.

[inquiry]

I realize this point is moot, since nobody bid 4C, but I want to make it anyway to clarify how the scores are being assigned.

At The Bridge World's CTC, the scores are based on strict matchpoint expectancy. I.e., if you expect to score 60% of the matchpoints on average, then you get a 7 (top or 12).

 

Assuming we are using the same principle here, I don't understand the 10 for 4♣.

Anytime the games are making, 4♣ will score a near-zero, say 10% for winning against the slams. Anytime the games go down, you score 100%. So we should assign 4♣ a weighted average of the two, depending on how often the games are making - seems closer to average than a top to me, s.th. like a 7.

 

So again, I just posted this to understand whether scores are assigned by the same principle as in CTC.

4♣ is scored high because it will make pretty much all the time. I forget the frequency of the others -- and i prefer not to use simulations but I had no choice on this one.

 

Simulations are a problem because doubleton queens get dropped offside 100% right, defense finds killing lead all the time,etc. If you care to suggest another order of scoring, then lets go there. This hand is one reason only 14 were scored initially. To really do the scoring fairly, i guess one has to do simulations for all boards and then compare of the ones that 4C makes, how does each of the other contracts do, and so forth... get the scores and matchpoint each result. But somehow factor in likely lines of play, which is what I did on other hands.

 

With other good hands available, i am sorry I included this one. But I thought 3NT wouldn't make enough of the time to deserve a good score (if first round of spades is ducked, then you can't take advantage of 4-4 spades, so simulations for that has to be too high). But once I went to simulations, i felt I would score it close to its percentage of making versus the other contracts.

[bluecalm]

I don't want to be in 4♥ here at MP's. Can't imagine that contract would score more than 3NT in real field.

[cherdanno]

Well if the field is in 3N and 3N makes more often than not, then 4♣ can't get a score above 50%. I don't think 3N is quite as good, so my scoring would be s.th. like 3N=7, 4C=6, 5C=5. Anyway, this is not an appeal, just meant as some general thoughts how these should be scored.

[Fluffy]

I don't want to be in 4♥ here at MP's. Can't imagine that contract would score more than 3NT in real field.

I was thinking the same, but then I saw that non spade leads will provide 450 quite often.

[TylerE]

PLus on a bad heart split 4♥ is down with 3N racking. Plus, for 4♥ to beat 3N, someone has to actually *be* in 4♥.

[inquiry]

Well, i think i was very generous to 3NT here, as you can't combine all lines to have a high percentage of success. For instance, one line is to play AK of clubs and a club, which works when spades are blocked or split 4-4. But if you play that way, you go down when spades are not, when perhaps overtaking the king of hearts, cash ace of hearts, hook diamond, and make when diamonds are 3-3 with queen onside. You can combine that chance, with dropping doubleton club queen, but if diamond hook is off, you go down even when spades behave for you.

 

I am willing to change these scores around. IT should be noted, that while no one played 4♥, someone got to 6♥, and my favorite contract of the match, someone got to 6♠ on EW hands.

 

I actually thought I remembered someone landing in 4♥, but I see that didn't happen.

[TylerE]

I just think if the scores are truly supposed to model matchpoint expectancy, then only contracts that it is actually reasonable to reach should factor it. Maybe call 3n 10 (Sure it's not 100%, but don't think many would disagree it's the MP spot), and 4♥ a 12. That surely WOULD be a pure top if anyone bid it, but any imaginable field no one is.

[inquiry]

This hand is very difficult. I dealt 100 of them, and played them in 3NT non-double dummy. The main advantage to double dummy is that anytime spades are blocked or 4-4, you can always set up clubs even if the club queen doesn't fall in two rounds. But I agree 4C can not score as high as I have it... so the corrected scores are:

 

4H =10 (no on bid it anyway)

3N = 7

4C = 5

5C = 4

4N=3

2N=3

3D=2

4D=1