Hand Evaluation

[42]

The following is a hand where my partner and I have completely different opinions on hand evaluation, as it seems.

System: Polish Club modified

Important team match

Dealer: South

N/S vulnarable

 

I hope that viewing the complete hand right now does not influence your objectivity ;)

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sat973hda653caqt5&w=sj6hat852dkq94c64&n=skq85hj43d87cj873&e=s42hkq976djt2ck92]399|300[/hv]

 

Bidding so far:

South opens 1♠ (pass) 2♠ (pass)

 

Problem A: South has to decide whether to show via Rosenkranz Two-Way Game Tries

a) a short suit trial in ♥

b) a long suit trial in ♦

c) a long suit trial in ♣

or

d) to jump directly to 4♠

--> Question: Which is the best action and why? (Without knowing all hands as you do...)

 

Problem B: assume that South decided to bid

i) --> a) = a short suit trial in ♥

ii) --> b) = a long suit trial in ♦

--> Question: How should North evaluate his hand in each of both cases? Why?

 

C: Do "loser count" or "distribution points" affect your bidding?

 

D₁: Do you prefer "Long Suit Trials" or "Help Suit Trials"? D₂: Would LST or HST lead to a different result from North in this hand?

 

TIA!

[gwnn]

I would bid 4♠ as south because I think I can make 4♠. Game tries are overrated anyway.

[the hog]

This is hard. I would not bid 4S as I regard that as a butcher's bid. Try making 4S opposite a normal raise simple raise if pd has some H values. I would probably make a gt in Ds or better a short suit try in H if that was available. Pd would likely refuse.

[Fluffy]

If you play short suit then you evidently use them when you have shortness and honnors on both on the other suits help, not on this hand because this is a 4♠ drive for me, 2♠, 2♦, 1♣ losers and partner is expected to cover from 2 to 3.

 

So IMO 4♠ is best, then trial in with short hearts and then trial in a long suit (not sure wich one is best).

 

d) for first answer

 

I wrote this without even looking at north's hand. Now I will look at it for the next question:

 

 

IMO north is close between directly acepting game opposite both heart shortness and long diamonds or bidding something in the middle (like a 3♥ last train if avaible). 4-2 side suit fits are very good whnen having 4 trumps to ruff twice, so I think opposite lond diamonds I'll drive to game. Opposite heart shortness if you can show last train I'd do last train, but if unavaible I'd bid game.

 

 

Loser trick count affects my view for south's hand, not for norths.

 

 

North has a better hand opposite a bid that shows about 3.8 average diamonds (LST) than opposite 3.4 average diamonds (HST). I don't like HST much but haven't tried them enough to compare.

[Hanoi5]

The problem here is probably the system. If North had been able to show the 4th card in support of spades South would gladly go to game. Not knowing about it bidding 4♠ is still a possibility but a LST in diamonds is also a possibility. I think North should accept the try, having 4 good spades. I might be biased by looking at all four hands so maybe it is better to post these probleam showing only one hand (and a couple of days or weeks later the other) or just the two hands involved, the bidding and ATB.

[helene_t]

Maybe LST in ♦ is better when North has three trumps while an LST in ♣ is better when North has four trumps. Because the main disadvantage of the LST in ♦ is that North will not cooperate when he has a singleton. Even a doubleton ♦ is useful when North has four trumps.

 

If we were playing ultra-thin raises so that South has an invite only then I would prefer the short suit trial. However it is not ideal since North will not devaluate ♥A as much as we would like him to.

 

Anyway, I just blast 4♠. South has four losers using modified LST so it is a clear game bid.

[Trinidad]

I would jump to game, since I have play opposite a "3333" distribution with 4 queens. (I am aware that partner is supposed to have 13 cards and that I hold the ♣Q myself.)

If I would invite, I would certainly show the short hearts, rather than a long suit in a minor. After all, the heart shortness is the main characteristic of the hand. In that case, North should accept. He has very little wasted in hearts (only a jack) and a four card trump suit. North should realise that he could have held the same hand with the majors reversed. That makes it clear to accept.

 

Rik

[paulg]

If you believe the hand is worth an invitation, then I think it is clear that you should show short hearts in your system - otherwise I suggest getting rid of the short-suit tries as you'll never use them.

[jmcw]

If P values are in the minors and/or trumps then game prospects are improved. OTOH if his values are in ♥, game success will not be improved.

Making a short try seems best since partner will likely reject when he has wasted values in ♥ and accept when his values are elsewhere.

 

However, as some have noted, a jump to game seems best, the opps will have less info and you will likely have a decent shot to make.

 

As North, I would reject HS,LS tries in minors, accept short in ♥.

[Cyberyeti]

Will make the short suit try in ♥ first.

 

Jxxx, xxxx, Kx, KJx seems to offer decent play for a slam so I'm certainly bidding at least 4.

 

86xx, KJxx, Qx, xxx wouldn't be great, but if trumps are 2-2 or there's a stiff honour, a lot else has to be wrong for me not to make this.

[hotShot]

I bid 4♠, it will make more often than not and I intend not to help opps to find a better lead or defense with more information about our hands.

[42]

Thx all so far!

Last train is not available...

 

How I decided:

I gave it a long thought before bidding LST in ♦. My 'internal' arguments for that:

- although I felt :rolleyes: that 4♠ will make, I had only A109xx in ♠ and could imagine some bad surprises on the N - Hand like ♠Qxx ♥QJx.. ♦Jxx ♣... How will I reach the table for finessing, for example? So I refused the immediate 4♠ bid

- a void instead of a singleton in ♥ So even with (a maximum AND) wasted honnors in ♥ but some help in ♦ I will make game. For me the key-suit was ♦ - and so went declaring

 

Partner (N) bid 3♠ and this was the final contract, made 6... The dummy was a complete surprise for me!

 

I on North's place would have accepted anyway because of:

- 4 trumps with the Mariage (S invited without those honnors, so must have an interesting hand)

- doubleton in the long suit ♦ --> ruffs available because of the 4 trumps

- known 9 cards, so the "problem" does not lie in ♣ or ♥, the strength of the S-hand must be outside from trumps and diamonds (perhaps longer ♠s or something good in ♣ or ♥, then the Js probably aren't wasted)

 

Partners arguments against mine and for his sign-off:

- 9 losers (Me: I hate this, IMO losers are overrated :P )

- N is a minimum hand (Me: I don't think so)

- wasted Js in ♣ and ♥

- "You must clearly bid SST in ♥ to learn whether N has wasted honnors/points or not!" (Me: Who ever said that a SST has always priority?? If so, it is senseless to be able to chose between SST and LST, no?)

 

Where should I give in and accept that I was wrong?

[rbforster]

Short suit try in hearts for me. It would help to know what your normal 2S raise promises to know whether North's relatively weak hand would still accept or not in context. I would lean towards accepting the heart try, since there's little wasted in hearts and North has an extra trump.

[gwnn]

Your partner has a clear accept. He has a little ♦ help (a small doubleton) and 4 good spades.

[Cyberyeti]

I really dislike the 3♦ bid, in my view I want partner to value diamond honours, Qxx is not a great holding, xxxx may be a good holding (what do you want partner to do with Kxxx, xxxx, xxxx, K for example). I'd much rather have KJ9x for the game try where any honour is good. If I bid 3♣, if partner has the K♦ and not a bust, will he not bid 3♦ here ?

 

I think if you're going to make a game try, (I'm bidding game anyway), short suit in ♥ is best, followed by long suit in ♣ where an honour is truly useful followed by long suit in ♦.

[helene_t]

What holdings are good opposite a long suit trial?

 

Opposite KJxx any honour is good. Opposite xxxx shortness is good. Opposite Axxx a king or shortness is good.

 

I don't like a style in which a trial could be any of those. I like it to show the king and/or the queen so that an honour would be helpful and shortness not.

[pooltuna]

This is hard. I would not bid 4S as I regard that as a butcher's bid. Try making 4S opposite a normal raise simple raise if pd has some H values. I would probably make a gt in Ds or better a short suit try in H if that was available. Pd would likely refuse.

 

so the new acronym for a cutter of meat is "gwnn" :) But I do agree that a check on partner's ♥ wastage is called for.

[Phil]

What holdings are good opposite a long suit trial?

 

Opposite KJxx any honour is good. Opposite xxxx shortness is good. Opposite Axxx a king or shortness is good.

 

I don't like a style in which a trial could be any of those. I like it to show the king and/or the queen so that an honour would be helpful and shortness not.

 

Agree. Opposite a LS trial, partner should upgrade K's / Q's and shortness in the LS. xxxx is not an appropriate holding for a long suit trial.

 

4♠ over 2♠ is an overbid and we are NV. Why throw away 5 IMPs? Besides, 5440 shapes are overrated.

 

I like 3♣. If partner accepts, great. If partner counter accepts with 3♦, thats positive news too. If partner bids 3♥, that is terrible, and I would signoff and hope I make 3.

[blackshoe]

First off, Rosenkranz Game Tries are actually three way: 3♣ is a two way bid, either a short suit try in clubs, or a "power" try. Responder then has a way to accept one but not the other (and vice versa). On this hand you could make a power try, which basically looks for good trumps, which responder has. In fact, he would accept either try, so should just bid 4♠ over 3♣.

 

If you aren't playing the full system (only two way tries) I would make a short suit try in hearts, which responder should also accept.

 

3♣: 10, 3♥: 8, 2NT followed by 3♦: 7, 4♠, 5.

[han]

Seems like an obvious 4S to me.

[Free]

I would bid 3♥, it's usually easier to evaluate your hand after a SST imo. North has a clear accept over this.

 

4♠ is also acceptable since we're V in a team match...

[the hog]

The following is a hand where my partner and I have completely different opinions on hand evaluation, as it seems.

System: Polish Club modified

Important team match

Dealer: South

N/S vulnarable

 

I hope that viewing the complete hand right now does not influence your objectivity ;)

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sat973hda653caqt5&w=sj6hat852dkq94c64&n=skq85hj43d87cj873&e=s42hkq976djt2ck92]399|300[/hv]

 

Bidding so far:

South opens 1♠ (pass) 2♠ (pass)

 

Problem A: South has to decide whether to show via Rosenkranz Two-Way Game Tries

a) a short suit trial in ♥

b) a long suit trial in ♦

c) a long suit trial in ♣

or

d) to jump directly to 4♠

--> Question: Which is the best action and why? (Without knowing all hands as you do...)

 

Problem B: assume that South decided to bid

i) --> a) = a short suit trial in ♥

ii) --> b) = a long suit trial in ♦

--> Question: How should North evaluate his hand in each of both cases? Why?

 

C: Do "loser count" or "distribution points" affect your bidding?

 

D₁: Do you prefer "Long Suit Trials" or "Help Suit Trials"? D₂: Would LST or HST lead to a different result from North in this hand?

 

TIA!

 

I wonder how the 4S bidders will like their contract if partner tables

Qxx

KJxx

xxxx

xx

or similar

Why throw away IMPs when you have the option of numerous game tries?

[chasetb]

Without a doubt I would make a SSGT in ♥. The Club suit doesn't need much (any?) help from partner, and Diamonds aren't too much a worry. I prefer Help Suit tries compared to Long Suit tries, because part of the time they are the same thing, and part of the time when you or partner use a LSGT and it is turned down, you will make 4 because the wrong suit was asked about.

[mcphee]

I do not see game being good if partner has just 3 trumps unless you find a lot of help in your minors. Even facing a 3 card constructive raise the pump would easily spell defeat.

[phil_20686]

I wonder how the 4S bidders will like their contract if partner tables

Qxx

KJxx

xxxx

xx

or similar

Why throw away IMPs when you have the option of numerous game tries?

 

I have been assuming that the 4S bidder think that north plays constructive raises, 8-10 with 3 cards or 7-10 with 4 cards. Or some such. I think that is "forum std" in 2/1 type systems.

 

If 2S was intended to be 4-9 as a simple raise then obviously south does not have a game drive. I am guessing OP has not posted enough to realise that the range of a 2S bid is something that people might play differently.

 

I would make a short suit game try opposite a simple raise. Opposite a constructive raise it is probably worth 4S but it is is pretty close.