Fluffy Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [hv=pc=n&s=s72ha73dak752cq94&n=sj83hkq8dq6cajt53&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp2cp2np3nppp]266|200[/hv] LHO leads ♥5 (4th best) opponents unknown but probably advanced wich minor should you tackle first playing MPs? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I'd play clubs at trick two. The finesse is better odds than the 3-3 diamond break and I go down fewer when the diamonds are not favourable. I think the auction and first trick will mean that they will almost always play spades when they get in, so exposing the likely spade weakness through club strength is not an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I must be missing something. Since to me this looks like a textbook example of combining the chances. Test the diamonds and if they don't break, try the club finesse. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 + 1 for Helene_t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I must be missing something. Since to me this looks like a textbook example of combining the chances. Test the diamonds and if they don't break, try the club finesse.If that were the "right" answer then Fluffy would not have posted the hand. Since this is on the forums we can surmise that the trick here is probably to get out for fewer undertricks than the rest. Of course Fluffy might just be playing games with us but I am pretty confident that he would have found this line. If playing on clubs before diamonds really is good MP play then it just reinforces the "MP is not real bridge" argument I hear from time to time (one of the best players in the local club said this to me only Saturday). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Against a lot of opponents can we not combine our chances by looking for a count signal on the first 2 rounds of ♦ (or even the first round)? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 hmm Poul's plan beats mine when the club finesse is on and the diamonds break. (Poul 13, Helene 9). Poul's plan beats mine when the club finesse if off and the diamonds don't break (Poul 8, Helene 7). My plan wins when the diamonds break and the ♣K is stiff offside (Poul 8, Helene 13). My plan wins when the diamonds break and the club finesse is off (Poul 8, Helene 9). We are equal when the diamonds don't break and the club finesse is on (Poul 11, Helene 11). Poul wins more often than I do so maybe he is right. But even at MP my plan could still be best if a substantial part of the field is in a different contract, or get a spade lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 But even at MP my plan could still be best if a substantial part of the field is in a different contract, or get a spade lead.In this specific case it does look like a normal contract and even the weak notrumpers auction, 1NT-3NT, is liable to get the same lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 If that were the "right" answer then Fluffy would not have posted the hand. Since this is on the forums we can surmise that the trick here is probably to get out for fewer undertricks than the rest. Of course Fluffy might just be playing games with us but I am pretty confident that he would have found this line. If playing on clubs before diamonds really is good MP play then it just reinforces the "MP is not real bridge" argument I hear from time to time (one of the best players in the local club said this to me only Saturday).Admittedly it sounds weird but after some crude number crunching, I think hooking the club first does gain more often. At the table I might spend a few moments observing the ops, the guy with the ♣K may be a bit more tense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcD Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 i would have to trust a lot my table presence not to play on clubs at trick 2 : basically playing on diamonds trying to combine chances is better at mp about 20% of the times (dia 3-3 + k club offside ) while we seem to play the field contract and i have no reason to believe that the heart lead is not normal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkham Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I'd play diamonds first just to try and make the contract. Other tables may have got a spade lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 At the table I might spend a few moments observing the ops, the guy with the ♣K may be a bit more tense.This is illegal according to most interpretations of the laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 In this specific case it does look like a normal contract and even the weak notrumpers auction, 1NT-3NT, is liable to get the same lead. Maybe it went 1♦-2N-3N at some other tables. Maybe opening leader has equal length in the majors and guessed wrong this time. They have 8 spades and 7 hearts, maybe opening leader made a poor opening lead choice for whatever reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 This is illegal according to most interpretations of the laws.Really? Which laws and whose interpretations? I know that I cannot look at how they sort their cards or where they pull them from, but I thought that ordinary behavioral clues are entirely AI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Behavioral clues are AI, but specifically looking for them is illegal. 74C5 "looking intently at any other player during the auction and play, or at another player’s hand as for the purpose of seeing his cards or of observing the place from which he draws a card (but it is appropriate to act on information acquired by unintentionally seeing an opponent’s card*)." A longish thread, http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/39904-mannerisms-with-screens/ ... What "intently" really means is not really established. edit: I overplayed my hand with my first post but still something to keep in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 A longish thread, http://www.bridgebas...s-with-screens/ ... What "intently" really means is not really established.I don't think that's a fair summary of the discussion. The meaning of "intently" was already known to almost everyone who participated in the discussion. A small number of people argued that it meant the same as "intentionally", but they were beaten into silence by English-speakers wielding dictionaries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benlessard Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Playing Clubs first is clear cut. If the club finesse is on it doesnt matter what you do unless a fairly big misdefense 50% If the club finesse is off and D break 16%. If the club finesse is off and D dont break 34% its costing you an extra under trick in almost all the case (even if S are 5-3 and they lead S at the other table). So you need more that 50% of people not in the same contract or not getting the same lead to even think about maximizing making the contract at hte cost of 1/2 odds of getting a bad MP score. Here many people will be in 3Nt and even if they got a S lead maximizing the odds of making the contract doesnt compensate twice the odds of the extra undertrick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I don't think that's a fair summary of the discussion. The meaning of "intently" was already known to almost everyone who participated in the discussion. A small number of people argued that it meant the same as "intentionally", but they were beaten into silence by English-speakers wielding dictionaries.Some people argued that intently is intentionally, some others argued that it means 'for a long time' and some others sait that it is eagerly. I think spending a few moments with the sole purpose of observing which opponent is more nervous comes dangerously close to 'intently' either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Some people argued that intently is intentionally, some others argued that it means 'for a long time' and some others sait that it is eagerly. I think spending a few moments with the sole purpose of observing which opponent is more nervous comes dangerously close to 'intently' either way.To me, looking "intently" implies an abnormally high level of attention. I don't think a casual glance of perhaps 2-3 seconds rises to this level. I know we have directors here, have you ever ruled on a situation of this type? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Sorry for derailing your thread Fluffy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Interesting hand to discuss decisions at matchpoints. What is the likely contract elsewhere? -- I think all will agree 3 NT will probably be bid at most tables. So how do you best play the hand at MPs? Two major possibilities are being discussed -- combining chances by playing on ♦s or playing for the ♣ finesse immediately. Combining chances increases the overall probability of making 9 tricks to 68% while risking an additional undertrick. Taking the immediate ♣ finesse reduces the probability of making the contract to 50%, but also risks 1 less undertrick. It seems like a simple decision. But, is it? If ♦ do break 3-3, do you simply cash out for 9 tricks, or, do you now take the ♣ finesse for an additional trick(s)? Clearly, at IMPS, combining chances and cashing out is right. But at MPs, any time the ♣ finesse is right, you are making at least 11 tricks (and even 13 tricks when ♦s also break). So cashing out gets you a poor score versus those who find the winning finesse. Another issue is if there is a way to avoid a ♠ switch should you take the ♣ finesse. So I think I'm playing the hand as follows. Win the ♥ lead in dummy with the ♥ K. Cash the ♦ Q and ♦ K. Then I'm leading a low Club and finessing ♣ J from dummy. Hopefully, if the ♣ K is off side, this reveals the least about my other high card holdings and gives RHO more to think upon before switching. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted July 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Sorry for derailing your thread Fluffy. When I saw those many responses I though there was a lot of debate upon wich minor to tackle first, a bit dissapointing to see the reality, but anyway its fine. There is no way to asses the total merits of one line over another since the spade switch might be clear or not and depends on the players. I posted the hand because I didn't know what to do at the table, in the end I opted for one line, then I switched to other and even played spades myself to muddy the waters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 In a bad standard game, lead the Q of clubs. If they don't cover (or at least think about it), they don't have it. Clear cut in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Kindly post the full hand for us now. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 i am skeptical that our sequence is the most common. There seems tobe a much greater chance 3n would be played by p than by us (bidding2n with club support and 2 little spades being a tad umm eccentric). Helene_T hits on the combined chance of dia first followed by theclub finesse and I think this is best precisely because we got lucky"right-siding" 3n and we have a legitimate chance of making it wheremost will probably be wondering how many tricks they are going downwhen a spade hits the table. Maximizing our chances at taking 9 tricksseems to be the winner here. Playing on clubs first is doing nothing morethan returning the ball to the opps when the club is wrong and never giving the 33 dia break a chance. Think of it this way----if 3n makes (club finesse or no) we are probably goingto get a good score when we avoided a spade lead. It seems logical to tryand maximize or chances at keeping that good score by attacking dia first. 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.