From both sides of the table - part I

[mr1303]

[hv=pc=n&s=sht532dakq653cq63&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1h2d4h5dp]133|200[/hv]

 

Any thoughts here? Is pass automatic?

[Cyberyeti]

No it's not automatic, partner appears to be void in hearts, but are you prepared to guess which black suit partner has AKJ and which suit he has J.

 

On balance I think KJ/A/AJ in both is more likely which looks like enough for 6.

[mikeh]

I'll bid the slam so long as LHO is a least semi-trustworthy and they are not playing a forcing club method (where LHO could hold a good hand). I hardly need anything. Heart void, 5 trump and the A of clubs makes this an excellent slam since the odds (slightly) favour the club K being onside.

 

If LHO is known to be completely random, such that we cannot safely infer anything about the hearts (yes, I've seen club players do this with KQx in hearts), then I pass.

[gnasher]

I hardly need anything. Heart void, 5 trump and the A of clubs makes this an excellent slam

Why should he have all that? Given that partner has a heart void, he'll compete over 4♥ on any hand with four diamonds. He also probably has spade length, so whatever honours he has are more likely to be in spades than in clubs. LHO is at adverse, and he has only four trumps, so he is likely to have some values outside.

[PhilKing]

Would not consider bidding slam unless 50 imps down with 8 to go.

 

Why should we even make game? We could easily have 3 losers in clubs.

[ggwhiz]

It's auto for me. That's too many heart losers to take care of after drawing two rounds of trumps on a hand where pard might already be diving.

[mikeh]

Why should he have all that? Given that partner has a heart void, he'll compete over 4♥ on any hand with four diamonds. He also probably has spade length, so whatever honours he has are more likely to be in spades than in clubs. LHO is at adverse, and he has only four trumps, so he is likely to have some values outside.

 

I accept all of that but:

 

in a non-big club method, LHO showed a weak hand with long hearts...yes, we can reason only 4, but that merely suggests some shape, and we can infer that he has a stiff or void in diamonds. A void in diamonds would encourage him to preempt to the max.

 

if partner also had crap, guess what kind of hand rho has. How can partner have nothing and rho didn't act...his pass wasn't forcing so he needs to do something with values.

 

I am very surprised that you believe it to be plausible that the opps have 25-26 hcp and we're playing 5♦ undoubled. This includes some hands on which 5♦ is cold...there are times when rho has to risk -550 in order to either protect his perceived equity in 4♥ or attempt to get to 5♥.

 

Even if we have 3 club losers, we will often get a heart lead and maybe we can get some pitches on his spades.

 

I hardly think that hoping he has the club Ace or compensating values is asking for so much that it should be described as 'all that'!

[Codo]

I would still pass.. I still do not understand why spade values are less likely then club values in partners hand. Actually I guess they are more likely...

[gnasher]

in a non-big club method, LHO showed a weak hand with long hearts...yes, we can reason only 4, but that merely suggests some shape, and we can infer that he has a stiff or void in diamonds. A void in diamonds would encourage him to preempt to the max.

 

if partner also had crap, guess what kind of hand rho has. How can partner have nothing and rho didn't act...his pass wasn't forcing so he needs to do something with values.

 

I am very surprised that you believe it to be plausible that the opps have 25-26 hcp and we're playing 5♦ undoubled. This includes some hands on which 5♦ is cold...there are times when rho has to risk -550 in order to either protect his perceived equity in 4♥ or attempt to get to 5♥.

I didn't suggest that the opponents had anything like this much strength. The auction seems consistent with LHO having an 8-count with a singleton, partner having an 8-count with a void, and RHO having a 13-count. I just don't see why partner's 8-count should include ♣A, rather than, say, ♠AQ and ♣Q, or ♠AQ and the minor-suit jacks.

 

You seem to be argung that if the oponents didn't double us in 5♦, we must be making 6. It seems to me likely that they haven't doubled us (yet) because a lot of their strength is in hearts, and LHO has a bit more than he might have.

 

I hardly think that hoping he has the club Ace or compensating values is asking for so much that it should be described as 'all that'!

Didn't you say that you wanted him to have five trumps as well?

[mikeh]

I didn't suggest that the opponents had anything like this much strength. The auction seems consistent with LHO having an 8-count with a singleton, partner having an 8-count with a void, and RHO having a 13-count. I just don't see why partner's 8-count should include ♣A, rather than, say, ♠AQ and ♣Q, or ♠AQ and the minor-suit jacks.

 

 

maybe you should rethink that example...personally, I suspect that you'd find a way to avoid losing 2 club tricks with Qxx opposite Qxx....my choice would be call for a redeal :D

 

Now, if it were A spades, without the Q or even the jack, and the club K, I think I like my chances.

 

Give partner an 8 count with a heart void. Yes, if his hand is spade AK, we need a red suit lead, but my opps don't always make the right lead.

 

I can't do a simulation from this computer. I may do one on the weekend. I suspect that if I give partner an 8 count and 5 diamonds, slam will make most of the time, and very heavily so if we stipulate a red suit lead. I suspct that slam will make most of the time opposite 4 diamonds and the lead of a heart of a black suit in which partner holds the A or (in spades) KQ or even KJ.

 

If I do, I'll publish the constraints and the results. If they prove me wrong, I'll be happy to admit it because I will have learned something. How about you?

 

Personally, I doubt that LHO has a stiff and an 8 count. Maybe that would be 4♥ in the UK, but I think it would be far from clear in NA...some might do it but many would find another call. Otoh, I think that limiting RHO to 13 is not fair either....I think his range is 11-15 or so. Either way, I am comfortable with an expectation of about 8 hcp opposite.

[cherdano]

I think expecting partner to have 5 trumps is optimistic. Four trumps are more likely than five, and I don't see partner passing with 4 trumps and a heart void.

[MrAce]

MikeH has some good and convincing points, as well as Andy.

 

If partner was coming from pass, i would lean towards slam more, because i for one, would bid 4♠ over 4♥ with partners hand with spade values for lead purposes or helping pd to evaluate his hand better, and after all we could have a spade fit. But he is not coming from pass and can't bid 4♠ as often as when he is coming from pass. But i think this is an unimportant detail.

 

I would not bid 6♦ because i also think expecting 5th ♦ is optimistic. Also Mike can win when opponents bid 6♥, but at these colors and with only 9 trumps i think the chance of them saving is very slim if not zero. So bidding it and hoping to be rescued when it is wrong by opponents, will not be the case here either.

[mikeh]

I ran a simulation. I only ran 200 hands because I didn't want double dummy analysis, where the defenders always make the right lead, and declarer 'guesses' everything.

 

My constraints were:

 

Dealer 11-15, exactly 5 hearts, and no more than 4 spades or 5 clubs.

 

Partner: exactly 8 hcp and fewer than 7 spades (since I thought that most hands with 4 diamonds and 7 spades would bid 4♠). and I gave partner 4+ diamonds.

 

I made no constraints for LHO, but obviously the RHO/CHO constraints create boundaries for his hand.

 

I then analyzed by eye.

 

I found that slam was cold, on any lead, on what seemed to me to be normal play, 93 times out of 200.

 

I found that slam was beaten only by a trump lead on 17 hands (actually, on 18 but on the 18th, leader had no trumps :P )

 

I found that slam never made on any rational defence 52 times.

 

On a lot of those (10), the only lead to beat it was the club A, so I assumed that LHO would always lead the club A against a slam if he had it. That way assured defeat of 10 contracts that would make (due to the spades, either on top or ruffing hook or ruffing out) with any other lead. The flip side of that was that the lead of the club A let through 3 contracts where any other lead beats slam (typical: Qxx opposite Kxx with no spade pitch). I counted those 3 as 'always make' since I had counted the 10 successful club leads as 'always beat'.

 

On 38 hands I couldn't tell. For example, there were several hands where it took a club lead from nothing or from the K. I suspect that in real life the usual lead would be something else, but I counted all these hands as 'don't know'.

 

There were also a few hands where I could see options for declarer. One example was a 2 way hook for the club J. Guess right and make, guess wrong and fail. I put those as 'can't tell'.

 

 

Let's be generous to the passers amongst us and assume that we'd fail on 60% of the 'can't tell', and 100% of the times they have to lead a trump (sometimes with a black A as an option).

 

We still make slam on the 93 cold hands and 15 of the 38 'can't tell', for 108 makes against 92 fails, which means bidding is the long term winner.

 

 

Of course, all this does is move the lines of the debate, even if (say) Andy were to accept the results. I have had to assume precisely 8 hcp for partner and obviously he may have fewer...or more. I chose the 8 because Andy had suggested that such was a reasonable expectation, and he thought that slam would be against the odds on that basis.

 

My simulation suggests that it isn't. Make the 'can't tell' 50-50, and we make 112 times, failing 88. We are not vulnerable, so over the course of 200 hands, we'd pick up 240 imps by bidding slam, or 1.2 imps a board, which seems to me to be a significant edge.

 

My view is that at the end of the day it isn't possible to 'prove' definitively that bidding is better than passing, so I guess the answer to the OP (is it automatic) is: no, but it may well work out.

[gnasher]

Of course, all this does is move the lines of the debate, even if (say) Andy were to accept the results. I have had to assume precisely 8 hcp for partner and obviously he may have fewer...or more. I chose the 8 because Andy had suggested that such was a reasonable expectation, and he thought that slam would be against the odds on that basis.

I'm unlikely to accept any simulation results without seeing some hands, especially as you seem not to have constrained LHO's hand to match his bidding.

 

The distribution 8-8-13 was just an example of how the high cards might be distributed in a way that is consistent with the bidding so far. I probably didn't make this very clear, but I don't necessarily expect partner to have as much as an 8-count, and he certainly hasn't suggested any values.

 

Our reason for believing that he has values is that LHO didn't splinter and RHO didn't double 5♦. Hence I don't think it's right for your simulation to assume that partner has any particular strength. The obvious constraints to use are:

- LHO has less than the minimum for a splinter (whatever you think that is), and too much for a raise to the three-level (whatever you think that is)

- RHO has at least an opening hand, and not three quick tricks (or whatever you think he needs to double 5♦).

Edited November 24, 2012 by gnasher

[bigbenvic]

I pass with my regular partner as we would bid 5♣ as a Fit Non Jump, where he has clubs that are leadable ie AK. If he cant bid 5♣ then I have a club loser, possibly a heart loser (he could have a stiff heart) and my source of tricks may not be there with trumps potentially breaking bad.

 

With none of these agreements I would have to consider the field, the type of match, what I know about the 4H bidder and then hopefully make a decision. I reckon it's close. These often end in 2 off doubled when you go one more off trying to make 12, when 11 was achievable.

 

I will pass without any further info than given.