How Many Spades

[JLOGIC]

I would pass. I would open 2S if vul but not vul this hand is too good imo. I am glad that after passing every bid I make is not a fit showing non jump to my partner!

[JLOGIC]

Seriously? So, Rainer just stumbled upon the actual hand?

 

lol, I guess I'll just stop posting in lamford threads, didn't realize he was just trolling us.

[JLOGIC]

So lamford, you happened to hold basically the exact same hand rainer gave in a recent thread, which happened to be yours, which made you happen to remember that you held that hand a few months ago, where you chose to pass and caught a layout where 6S is percentage and it got passed out, because the oppps had stiff K opposite stiff Q of spades? AND on top of that, your opponents somehow got to slam on this board? That is all truly remarkable man. It's like one in 10 million probably. In the future, tell your partner to open in third seat white with JTxx Axxx KQxx x to avoid this problem! He would hate for it to be passed out, and the suit he gets to open is fine. Next time you "remember" such hands, try harder to construct a layout where this would happen, or just be less ambitious and create a layout where it gets passed out and you make 4S, or it goes 1H p 4H and you don't know what to do or something.

[Zelandakh]

It's like one in 10 million probably.

An old saying from a game I once played which used a decahedral die to determine random outcomes: "1 in a million chances happen 1 time in 10!" :)

[han]

Darn, I was just about to post that your fictitious partner's pass with J10xx Axxx KQxx x in third seat was terrible, but JLOGIC beat me to it.

[rhm]

I hate 3♠ far more than I did on the other one. Pass seems the best description.

 

I would pass. I would open 2S if vul but not vul this hand is too good imo. I am glad that after passing every bid I make is not a fit showing non jump to my partner!

That game in ♠ will be good is certainly a life possibility on this hand.

Do you believe it will be easier to reach 4♠ after PASS than opening this hand with any number of spades?

 

I am not claiming that a 2♠ bid is ideal.

However, is it really sensible to have a category of hands, vulnerability notwithstanding, which are not strong enough to open with a one bid but which are too good to open with a weak two bid?

If the range gets too wide non vulnerable, I would rather raise my minimum requirements for a weak two.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

In the future, tell your partner to open in third seat white with JTxx Axxx KQxx x to avoid this problem!

I did, but he said that he would have opened 1S on my hand. He said he would have opened with KQxx in either major. He made the hand 11.4 on K&R, and he liked to have 12 in third seat at love all where missing game was unlikely and less expensive. He thought the missed slam was just bad luck.

[lamford]

That is all truly remarkable man. It's like one in 10 million probably.

You haven't lived man. I once won a backgammon game with winning chances of around 10^-20. And that was watched by the president of the London "Double Five" club, and recorded.

 

http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbbs_config.pl?noframes;read=87552

 

gives the position, although not with a nice diagram. And it needs no backgammon ability to understand, so no apologies for including it here.

 

That missed slam was at least a trillion times more likely.

[wank]

i think people worry too much about suit quality for pre-empts. it's far more important imo to look for playability in other major(s).

 

so i'd open 3♠ perfectly happily.

[jallerton]

Thanks all. I did pass and my second choice would have been 1♠. Partner had ♠J10xx ♥Axxx ♦KQxx ♣x. Our room went all pass. The opponents had ♠K ♥ KJxx ♦ xxx ♣KJxxx opposite ♠ Q ♥ Q10xx ♦ Jxx ♣ AQxxx. Understandably the latter hand threw it in. The other room bid to the 52% 6♠, after an interesting gadget; 2NT was either a bad pre-empt in a minor or a flawed pre-empt in a major. I thought it was unusual to have a good slam bid in one room, and a pass out in the other. Maybe I just live too sheltered a life.

 

You implied in an earlier post that this hand came from an EBU event. Therefore, your failure to opening the bidding should (somewhat luckily) not have cost on this occasion. The "interesting gadget" is not a permitted convention even at EBU Level 5, so the board should have been scored as 3 IMPs to your team, not 14 to your opponents.

[lamford]

You implied in an earlier post that this hand came from an EBU event.

I was posing the problem as a general one, and commented (wrongly) that the rule of 19 would apply in England, and this was corrected to the rule of 18 by gordontd. The actual hand, as I mentioned elsewhere, was A9xxxxx x xx Axx, opposite J10xx Axxx x KQxx and was played in a small club game in Przedmieście Szczebrzeszyńskie which I visited after being in Poznan; there were only eight players there and we decided to play a match. I presume that the convention was level 5 in Poland - the arbiter spoke excellent English, but was unaware of the EBU level system, but confirmed it was permitted - and they bid 2NT*-3D (Pass or Correct)-3S-4C*-4H*-4NT-5S(2+either the queen or extra length)-6S.

[lamford]

It's like one in 10 million probably.

I would query your logic, which is similar to the pronouncements of Sir Roy Meadow in the UK on the various cot-deaths caused by SIDS (Sudden instant death syndrome - nothing to with Stayman in doubt bids). His evidence caused the convinction of two or three innocent mothers, and the judge in one case, quoting his statistics, said that the chance of two cot-deaths in the same family in the same year was over a million to one. The true figure is around 61% that somewhere in the UK there will be two cot deaths in the same family in the same year, even though the chance of a cot-death at all in any year for any infant is around 1 in 10,000.

 

Take this hand. 7-3-2-1 hands are around 1.9%, the most common distribution with a seven-card suit. And "How Many Spades?" would hardly be appropriate for a 4-3-3-3 hand, so the hand started - arising from discussion of whether a psyche was fielded - in another thread in the Laws forum, entitled Is there a joker?. That was stated to be a constructed hand, made up for the purpose of deciding whether everyone could have their bid. It was put on the forum because people argued, and persuaded me, that it was a 3S opener. Rainer commented that he would rather have two aces than all those soft values. He would hardly say "I would rather have KJ in both suits than those soft values, so the "creation" of a similar hand arose from a natural comment. No psychic element. It was completely normal that this should remind me of the other hand; indeed I think I would have a sieve-like memory if I did not recall it. None of the hands was particularly abnormal. And the fact that the king and queen of spades were singleton was more likely than not. Around 52%. So, given that the theme of the thread was what to open when holding seven spades, it was not particularly unlikely that someone would say that they preferred aces to the soft values that were shown.

 

But I do think I attract unlikely hands. I played a handful of times with a strong player Glyn Liggins. On one occasion he asked me how to play a 5NT opener. I replied "One loser hand, void in both majors". That evening, I picked up such a hand. A lady doubled 7C and was thinking what to lead. "Neither of your aces is cashing, ma'am", he correctly remarked. A year later, I picked up void void AKJxxx AKQxxxx, third in hand, but partner opened 6S as dealer with AKQxxxxxx none Qxxx none. The person in the pass-out seat with J109x AKxxxxxxx none none had to bid 7H to make, rather than his actual choice of Double. This was a teams-of-eight event, so I can get loads of witnesses. It was hand-dealt at the table. Lo and behold a year later, two friends Fegarty and Freake had void void AKQxxxx KQJxxx and this time played quietly in a cold 6C. The coincidence of three 5NT openers is certainly unlikely. So much so that you no doubt think I have made it up, as I have a habit of doing. But Liggins, Fegarty and Freake could all confirm the facts.

[JLOGIC]

Cool, I think you just make stuff up

[rduran1216]

despite the troll attempt, spotless 7321 with spades and two bullets does not have an opening call that accurately describes it. I will pass and compete later to avoid the pitfalls of any other opening

[mike777]

♠ A9xxxxx ♥x ♦Axx ♣xx. Love all (neither side vulnerable), IMPs. Your go. And apologies, Free, if you think this belongs in the beginner section.

 

 

 

Just short of a one spade opening for me but very close.

 

I will pass for now but close.

 

--

 

 

Also just short of a 4s opener for me...close.

 

 

far too good for 2s or 3s at this vul.

 

--

 

 

the very rare hand that I dont have a decent opening bid for...I hope to catch up after pass but....

 

--

 

 

with all of that said I can live with one spade or pass

[jallerton]

You implied in an earlier post that this hand came from an EBU event. Therefore, your failure to opening the bidding should (somewhat luckily) not have cost on this occasion. The "interesting gadget" is not a permitted convention even at EBU Level 5, so the board should have been scored as 3 IMPs to your team, not 14 to your opponents.

 

I was posing the problem as a general one, and commented (wrongly) that the rule of 19 would apply in England, and this was corrected to the rule of 18 by gordontd. The actual hand, as I mentioned elsewhere, was A9xxxxx x xx Axx, opposite J10xx Axxx x KQxx and was played in a small club game in Przedmieście Szczebrzeszyńskie which I visited after being in Poznan; there were only eight players there and we decided to play a match. I presume that the convention was level 5 in Poland - the arbiter spoke excellent English, but was unaware of the EBU level system, but confirmed it was permitted - and they bid 2NT*-3D (Pass or Correct)-3S-4C*-4H*-4NT-5S(2+either the queen or extra length)-6S.

 

At the point where you made this comment, only a poster from the Netherlands had suggested opening 1♠. If the deal had really occurred in Poland, any regulations existing in the UK would have been of no relevance.

 

Cool, I think you just make stuff up

 

Whatever gave you that idea? If you look at the Laws and Rulings section of the forum, you'll be amazed quite how many disputed claims "happen" at Paul's local club.

[lamford]

If the deal had really occurred in Poland, any regulations existing in the UK would have been of no relevance.

I don't think that follows. What to open if it is illegal to have an agreement to open 1S is of interest as well. I don't know what the rules are in other jurisdictions and wrongly thought it was rule of 19 in most events in the UK, when it would be more of a problem. But you are right, I should have stated: "You are playing in Przedmieście Szczebrzeszyńskie and you suspect that your opponent in the other room can open this hand 2NT showing, inter alia, a flawed pre-empt in spades. What do you do?" That would allow readers to be prepared for a similar situation after reading the thread.