Round 2, Board 3

[inquiry]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=skjt5htd8cqj98752&s=saq763hak85d764ca]133|200|Scoring: IMP

EW stay out of the auction.

 

This was a hard slam to bid in the "non-bidding contest" world 2 out of 98 pairs). In fact 21% didn't even make it to 4♠ in a large tournament. Forum bidders did much better, as everyone bid game or better, and 7 pairs bid the slam.

 

[/hv]

 

6S =10; 5S = 4

 

 

6SS ant590 - crayzeejim

6SN Flycycle/Wackojack

6SS hrothgar/Free

6SS jdonn/gib

6S lobowolf/bkjswan

6SS rogerClee/cherdano

6SS tylere / bid_em_up

4SS bluecalm/redds

4SS East4Evil/sohcahtoa

4SS elianna/awm

4SS gnasher/catch22

4SS jlall/hanp

4SS karlson/threenobob

5SS kfay/jchiu

4SS kristen33/jillybean

4SS mbodell - javabean

5Ss olegru - driver733

5SS peachy/lg62

4SS sallyally/joylson

4SS Siegmund/MSchmahl

4SS tlgoodwin/timg

[hrothgar]

Sigh..

 

Three boards in and we're tied with GIB...

[bluecalm]

I don't get the scoring.

If it's based on MP expectancy how 6♠ is that much better than 4♠ ?

 

Compare this to first board where 6NT gets 7 for some reason.

[shyams]

I don't get the scoring.

If it's based on MP expectancy how 6♠ is that much better than 4♠ ?

I think 6♠ goes down only if ♣ are 4-1 or worse (West length) plus ♠ are 3-1 (East length) plus opps cash a ♦ on the opening lead. Too remote?

[bluecalm]

Hmm ok, I retract my comment. Maybe it should be 10-5 but it close.

Assuming 20% of the field bid 6♠ and 80% bid 4♠ indeed 4♠ gets 4points while 6♠ gets 9 so it's close enough.

[Free]

Sigh..

 

Three boards in and we're tied with GIB...

Yeah, that's because of my mistake on board 1. But ok, we don't have to give GIB much credit, it's Josh who does all the thinking ;)

[JLOGIC]

Just curious what people are doing in this type of spot. I obv think it's likely in a bidding contest when it goes 1S p ? that we can make a slam. However in real life I would always bid 1S p 4S with this hand, despite that being a very poor bidding contest bid (since I'm not preempting them). I have decided just to make my real bid and not operate and bid 2C on a hand like this, but I'm not sure if that's right.

[karlson]

I also tried to bid the way I would bid normally at the table. As extreme evidence of this, on board 13 (xxx xx AKQxxx Ax) our auction started 1♦ (unbalanced) - 2♦ (natural 4-9) and I bid a blocking 3♦. I also bid 4♠ over 1♠ on this hand.

[Siegmund]

My partner chose the leap to 4S. I confess to berating him after the hand, thinking that was a horrendous underbid. If I had been North I would have called it a limit raise; also available in our system was an artificial 2NT showing 7-10, 4-card support, and an unbalanced hand, which I think is a bit of an underbid but was what my partner said he would have done if he had it to do over again.

 

A much easier hand to bid if West would overcall and make fit-jumps available!

[gnasher]

I bid 4♠ too. It's dangerous to try to second-guess the problem-setter, even if I wanted to.

[bluecalm]

For us:

 

1♣ - 1♦

1♠ - 3♣

4♠ - pass

 

1♣ = 16+

1♦ = 0-7

1♠ = 4+♠ forcing one round

3♣ = fit jump

 

I think 1♦ is debatable, maybe someone who plays precision longer than me could comment on it.

Then we didn't have much of system. 2NT would 4+♠ with shortness and 3♣ is a fit jump. Jumps to 4m would be very strong splinters (super maximum).

Could anyone comment on those agreements as well as decisions taken ?

[Ant590]

James decided to only bid 2♠ as responder, but made up for it by cuebidding diamonds after I made a game try showing a short club (I didn't like showing this, in hindsight a long-trial in ♥ is clearly better). We pretty much always cue on the way to game with extras.

 

Once I wet my pants, I checked for keycards and bid 6.

[TylerE]

I wouldn't 1♦ this playing precision.

[hanp]

I thought for quite a while after 1S - 4S. I was sure I would pass at the table, but in a bidding contest it seems Justin is 90% to have short diamonds so maybe I should bid 5C? On the other hand, partner might already have done something that the problem setter did not expect? I misguessed and passed.

 

There was another hand where I had a similar problem. I had something like x KQxxx Axxx Qxx and the auction went 1H - (4S) - 5C. I thought for a long time about bidding 6C, only because it is a bidding contest. But again partner might have been quite minimal and correctly guessed to bid?

 

Both times I passed and was very annoyed with the situation. It's surprising that so few of the challenge the champs contestants end up in a mental hospital, I know I will.

[bluecalm]

. I had something like x KQxxx Axxx Qxx and the auction went 1H - (4S) - 5C. I thought for a long time about bidding 6

 

I was in the same situation and already had a feeling that in this contest slams make and games not :)

I was very tempted by 6♣ but decided to make normal action of passing.

[JLOGIC]

I thought for quite a while after 1S - 4S. I was sure I would pass at the table, but in a bidding contest it seems Justin is 90% to have short diamonds so maybe I should bid 5C? On the other hand, partner might already have done something that the problem setter did not expect? I misguessed and passed.

 

There was another hand where I had a similar problem. I had something like x KQxxx Axxx Qxx and the auction went 1H - (4S) - 5C. I thought for a long time about bidding 6C, only because it is a bidding contest. But again partner might have been quite minimal and correctly guessed to bid?

 

Both times I passed and was very annoyed with the situation. It's surprising that so few of the challenge the champs contestants end up in a mental hospital, I know I will.

I think you have to pass in both cases for the reason you mentioned. If we are trying to outguess the problems then it is up to me not to bid 4S, and not to bid 5C on the other ones, but in my view/style/whatever they are both such normal bids that I had to make them. Next round maybe I'll go for the win or maybe not, we should discuss it.

[Wackojack]

Playing my partner's strong club system:

1♣ 2♣

2♦ 2♠

3♠ 4♦

4N 5♦

6♠

 

1♣ = 17+

2♣ = 8+GF, 5+♣ & possible 4M

2♦ = do you have a 4 card M?

2♠ = yes ♠

3♠ = 4+♠ support

4♦ = control denying ♣ control

4NT = 0314

5♦ = 1 could be K♠ (then ♦Kx or x) OR A♦) either way:

6♠

Still by no means certain but ruff heart and diamond losers in dummy or establish clubs looks like a good bet.

[kayin801]

I bid the north hand and after my partner opened 1♣ 16+, I showed 4 spades and longer clubs with 0-2 controls. I wonder if I should continue after partner's signoff in 4♠ though since I don't have to have 2 singletons in the other suits.

[jdonn]

I responded 2NT, but I have a special interest in this partnership with making myself captain whenever possible. From there it went 3♣, 3♠, 4♦ (help suit slam try) and I bid keycard lol.

[Mbodell]

We had a 50/50 chance of finding the slam. Our auction was:

 

1♣-1♦ ; strong (16 or 18 +), 0-7 or more without 2 controls

1♠-3nt ; 4+ spades F1, 6+ points, 4+ spades with shortness

4♣ ; shortness ask

 

And now I can either show the diamond shortness or the hearts shortness. We play submarine shortness so 4♦ shows hearts and 4♠ would show diamonds. I decided to bid 4♦ to show hearts because:

 

1. It keeps the auction low in case partner wants to try 4♥

2. It feels like the major may be more important to show as partner likely has length there (given no opponents bidding, opponents bid majors more IME)

3. There was some chance my partner would forget/disagree about the submarine shortness and thus I cover myself if he takes me for diamond shortness (he confirmed after the auction that he thought it was hearts as well)

 

Obviously the S hand looks pretty good upon hearing the diamond shortness, but not so good after hearing the heart shortness, so we ended up in 4♠. In the first round I also had to decide which red stiff to show, and choose the one that ended up leading to the wrong result (although that one had further bids from partner and I that I think were unwise before we hit the very wrong spot).

[bid_em_up]

This was a hard slam to bid in the "non-bidding contest" world 2 out of 98 pairs). In fact 21% didn't even make it to 4♠ in a large tournament.

I'm curious to know what kind of tournament this was?

[Mbodell]

This was a hard slam to bid in the "non-bidding contest" world 2 out of 98 pairs). In fact 21% didn't even make it to 4♠ in a large tournament.

I'm curious to know what kind of tournament this was?

It also brings up an interesting question about how to grade the matchpointed field results. Are we supposed to assume that the field is day 3 of the platinum pairs? A club 299er game? Likely something in between, but where? For some of the contracts (like 7♣ versus 6nt on the first board, this one, the one with 6♦ versus 6♠) it will make a big difference.

 

My assumption has been sort of regional pair game strength field (I.e., average good field, but nothing special).

[gnasher]

It also brings up an interesting question about how to grade the matchpointed field results.  Are we supposed to assume that the field is day 3 of the platinum pairs?  A club 299er game?  Likely something in between, but where?

I think we should assume a similar field to the one taking part in the bidding competiton.

 

In fact, you could score it based on the actual contracts reached, in combination with the expected number of tricks in each contract. You'd have to have a set of weighted scenarios to cater for different layouts of the cards.

[Cascade]

Just curious what people are doing in this type of spot. I obv think it's likely in a bidding contest when it goes 1S p ? that we can make a slam. However in real life I would always bid 1S p 4S with this hand, despite that being a very poor bidding contest bid (since I'm not preempting them). I have decided just to make my real bid and not operate and bid 2C on a hand like this, but I'm not sure if that's right.

Even in a bidding contest you might need to pre-empt. Some of the hands had instructions like "...bids 2♥ if possible".

 

We didn't make the deadline but we have bid the hands since.

 

We have an invitational plus splinter available and I chose to splinter with this hand - yes hands with two singletons are a problem. Fortuitiously i chose to splinter in diamonds and partner would not stop bidding after that.