Deal #20

[straube]

You are South and dealer. V vs V. Imps. Uncontested auction.

 

...........................JT32

...........................AJ732

...........................3

...........................K65

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

...........................AK4

...........................Q5

...........................A85

...........................AJT83

 

Outcomes

 

5C S SCREAM

3N S Polish Club

5C S Precision by Free

5C S Zelandakh

5C S Silent Club

4S N Moscito (5C?)

4H N relknes

5C S Jasmine Club

3N S OCP

3N S Meckwell Light

4H N IMprecision

5C S TOSR

3N S qplus10

4H N jack502

3N S Unassuming Club

4S N Malfoir (4H?)

 

3N S Pass2000 (forcing pass opening) (5C?)

3N S New Big Club (1N opening)

[straube]

 

 

............................JT32

...........................AJ732

...........................3

...........................K65

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

...........................AK4

...........................Q5

...........................A85

...........................AJT83

 

SCREAM bids this...

 

1C-1N, 16+, GF majors

2C-2H, asking, reverser

2S-2N, asking, higher short

3C-3D, asking, 4513

3H-3S, asking, 5 QPs

3N

 

If other relayers choose 5C, I'll go with that, but I don't think we have the strength to take 11 tricks.

 

ok, amending to choose 5C as final contract per majority relayer opinion.

[antonylee]

Polish:

1♣-1♥ (7+4+♥)

2N-3♠ (18-bad 23 balanced exactly 2♥; natural)

3N

[Free]

The obvious start is:

1♣-1♥ (16+ ; GF 5+♥)

1NT-2♠ (17-18 or 21+ bal, doubleton ♥ ; 5♥-4♠)

 

Now South has some options. He can bid 2NT, 3♣ or 3♥. Bidding 2NT is most flexible because partner will pattern out. Bidding 3♣ commits us to playing ♣ when responder has 3 card support (while we might want to play 4♥ or 4♠ instead), and bidding 3♥ now seems like rushing things. So I'll go with 2NT.

2NT-3♣ (flexible call ; 4♠, 5♥, 3+♣)

 

Again South has some options. I guess bidding 4♣ is most obvious, because responder hasn't shown if he's min or max, so a ♣ slam may be very attractive:

4♣-4♦ (sets trumps ; even number of keycards)

4♠-4NT (expecting 2 keycards* , no ♥ cue, ♠ cue ; last train)

5♣-pass (no ♣Q ; slam doesn't look attractive missing ♣Q and ♥K)

 

(*) should South expect 0 keycards here? Imo looking at North's distribution we should expect 2. However, if you think we should expect 0, then we'll end up in 6♣ after:

1♣-1♥ (16+ ; GF 5+♥)

1NT-2♠ (17-18 or 21+ bal, doubleton ♥ ; 5♥-4♠)

4♣-4♦ (sets trumps ; even number of keycards)

5♣-5NT (expecting 0 keycards? ; 2 keycards without ♣Q)

6♣-pass (signoff)

(or something slower)

 

It's not a pretty auction imo (definitely not the 2nd one), neither player knows if his partner has extras...

 

If South bids 3♣ instead of 2NT, we'll have a similar auction:

1♣-1♥ (16+ ; GF 5+♥)

1NT-2♠ (17-18 or 21+ bal, doubleton ♥ ; 5♥-4♠)

3♣-4♣ (good 5+♣ ; 4♠, 5♥, 3+♣, sets trumps)

4♠-4NT (odd number of keycards, no ♥ cue, ♠ cue ; last train expecting 3 keycards)

5♣-pass (no ♣Q ; slam doesn't look attractive missing ♣Q and ♥K)

 

The last train in both auctions clearly means we're looking for ♣Q, since a ♦ cue is obvious (singleton has been shown) and without a ♥ cue North will just signoff (might even pass 4♠ knowing of a 4-3 fit).

 

I think the first or the last auction is most probable, so we'll end up in 5♣ by South.

[Zelandakh]

The question on this deal seems to be whether we want to play 3NT with Axx opposite partner's stiff. I am not so comfortable with this and it is IMPs, so I think bypassing 3NT is indicated.

 

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 1♥ = 4+ spades, unbal unless 44(32), GF

1♠ = relay, usually 18+

... - 1NT = 4+ hearts

2♣ = relay

... - 2♥ = 4 spades, 5+ hearts, not 3-suited

2♠ = relay

... - 2NT = 5 hearts

3♣ = relay

... - 3♦ = 4513

3♥ = relay

... - 3♠ = min

4♣ = relay (alternative: 3NT)

... - 4♠ = 3 controls

5♣ (partner could still have the magic hand, Qxxx/Axxxx/x/KQx, but there is no space to find out)

 

There is a slight difference between my auction and straube's, in that mine shows 18+ opposite 9+ and his only 16+ opposite 8+. I am not sure if this is enough to tip the balance towards 3NT. My inclination is not, since it makes it even less likely that we have 9 tops before they get in and run diamonds. I am also somewhat interested what the other relayers think here. It seems that all of 3NT, 4♥, 4♠, 5♣ and 6♣ are potential contracts.

[Zelandakh]

should South expect 0 keycards here?

I think 2 is considerably more likely than 0 but if you play Turbo then I think you need some solid rules on these things. In auctions where you are unsure, is it easier to assume the lower number and upgrade or the higher number and downgrade? Out of interest, what would 4♦ for South be over 3♣? If this shows serious slam interest in clubs (in any form) then 4♣ is presumably only a slam try; then 4♦ is clearly 2 since with 0 North would simply sign off. it feels like there ought to be enough options for you here to disambiguate and have a "pretty" auction.

[Hilver]

Hilversumse Klaveren (HK)

 

1NT - 2♦

2♥ - 3NT

 

Explanation:

1NT = 16-18 balanced

2♦ = Jacoby

3NT = GF, 5-card ♥ and 4-card ♠

 

Will opponents lead ♣ or ♦?

 

Jan

[rbforster]

Silent Club:

 

1♣-1N strong; majors unbal GF

2♣-2♦ relay; primary hearts

2♥-2♠ relay; diamond shortness

2N-3♦ relay; 4513

3♥-3♠ relay; min <= 6 QP

4♣-4♥ relay; 1-2 heart cards, no spade card [might as well ask on the way to 5♣]

4♠-5♣ relay; club card, only one heart card

P

 

Once opener relays for shape, he gets the bad news - NT has been wrong sided, and with Axx vs stiff in diamonds, NT looks risky on the likely lead and double dummy defense. Now what?. While his 18 count isn't huge extras, they are control heavy and responder could drop 3N with hands that would easily make slam (8 QPs and no diamond wastage). Asking for values seems clear, hoping for enough extra to try for slam or have more confidence about a club game. When he hears about the min, he has to decide between a risky 3N vs 5♣ on not enough strength (I didn't really consider 4M since the diamond taps are coming in the wrong hand).

 

In the end, the IMPS scoring made me lean towards continuing to relay for honors and planning to go for clubs over NT. On the last relay (4♠), responder seemed very unlikely to have no club cards (requires AK♥ and a stiff diamond Q, which would force us past 5♣ since the 4N answer would make 5♣ a relay), and if he zoomed past 5♣ (showing AK♥ and Q♣) then slam looked decent with a couple club ruffs. As it was, with a single heart honor, opener decided to give up seeing no clear route to slam.

[hrothgar]

1♣ - 1N 1N = unbalanced with 5+ Hearts

2♣ - 2♦ 2♦ = ♥ + (clubs or spades)

2♥ - 2N 2N = Majors

3♣ - 3♦ 3♦ = High shortage

3♥ - 3♠ 3♠ = 4=5=1=3

4♦ - 4♥ 4♦ = end signal 4♥ = nothing extra

4♠ 4♠ = to play

 

I don't like the odds of 3N, especially on a Diamond lead

Unlike my compadres, I rather play the Moysian than 5m

[relknes]

You are South and dealer. V vs V. Imps. Uncontested auction.

 

...........................JT32

...........................AJ732

...........................3

...........................K65

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

?.....................................................?

...........................AK4

...........................Q5

...........................A85

...........................AJT83

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3N

 

Translation:

S: 16+, N: 9+ points, 5+ hearts

S: balanced, N: new minor forcing

S: denies 3 hearts or 4 spades, N: 9-11 points, to play

 

edit: after looking at the hands, I wonder if north should have tried a game in hearts on the 5-2 fit. The auction would then continue:

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3♥

3N - 4♥

 

Translation:

S: 16+, N: 9+ points, 5+ hearts

S: balanced, N: new minor forcing

S: denies 3 hearts or 4 spades, N: setting trump, 0-3 controls (usually 6 hearts and 4 spades)

S: 7+ controls, asking for 2 of top 3 trump, N: denies 2 of top 3 trump

 

Knowing what North knows about the South hand, would people set trump on the 5-2 fit because of the singleton, or would you just make the 3N bid? After all, South's possible shapes in the minors are 5-3, 4-4, and 3-5, and we seem ok in NT oposite the first two, so maybe the 3N bid wasn't so bad. The problem is that any bid other than 3♥ or 3N would show either 4+ controls or 12+ points, so we can't really explore the minors here without extras.

 

Re-edit: I will leave intact the trail of my idiocy above. With some help from Zelandakh, I realized there is a perfectly rational way for North to bid here, that should be much more accurate.

 

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♦

2♥ - 2♠

2N - 3♣

3♥ - 4♥

 

Translation:

S: 16+, N: 9+ points, 5+ hearts

S: balanced, N: transfer

S: 16-19, N: 4+ spades

S: 3 spades, 2 hearts, N: either 4-5-1-3 or 4-5-0-4

S: Hx of hearts, 6+ controls, N: sign off

 

I suppose that South might pick a different game over the board, but I have lost confidence in my ability to be objective on this hand.

[nige1]

#20. You are South and dealer. V vs V. Imps. Uncontested auction.

Jasmine ♣

North ♠ JT32 ♥ AJ732 ♦ 3 ♣ K65: __ 1N 2♠ 3♦ 4♠

South ♠ AK4 ♥ Q5 ♦ A85 ♣ AJT83: 1♣ 2♣ 2N 4♣ 5♣

• 1♣ = Art, 16+
• 1N = Art, 8+, both Ms.
• 2♣ = Art, relay.
• 2♠ = Art, 5+ ♥ (in principle responder tries to avoid playable unbid suits)*.
  
• 2N = Nat
• 3♦ = Art, 3+ ♣.
  
• 4♣ = Nat, Key ask
• 4♠ = Art, 2 keys.
• 5♣ = Nat. Ambiguous. Min or too few keys.

* Needs refinement.

 

 

Marks, IMO: 5♣ = 10. 4♠ = 9. 3N = 8. 6♣ = 7. 4♥ = 6. Partscores = 2.

[straube]

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3N

 

Translation:

S: 16+, N: 9+ points, 5+ hearts

S: balanced, N: new minor forcing

S: denies 3 hearts or 4 spades, N: 9-11 points, to play

 

edit: after looking at the hands, I wonder if north should have tried a game in hearts on the 5-2 fit. The auction would then continue:

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♣

2♦ - 3♥

3N - 4♥

 

Translation:

S: 16+, N: 9+ points, 5+ hearts

S: balanced, N: new minor forcing

S: denies 3 hearts or 4 spades, N: setting trump, 0-3 controls (usually 6 hearts and 4 spades)

S: 7+ controls, asking for 2 of top 3 trump, N: denies 2 of top 3 trump

 

Knowing what North knows about the South hand, would people set trump on the 5-2 fit because of the singleton, or would you just make the 3N bid? After all, South's possible shapes in the minors are 5-3, 4-4, and 3-5, and we seem ok in NT oposite the first two, so maybe the 3N bid wasn't so bad. The problem is that any bid other than 3♥ or 3N would show either 4+ controls or 12+ points, so we can't really explore the minors here without extras.

 

Personally, I think you should go with your first auction. Unless North is able to show diamond shortness, I think you go with 3N when you fail to find a major suit fit. After all, 4H could be a disaster if South's minor suits were reversed.

 

I'm amending my auction to go with the contract that most relayers seem to select...5C. Not fond of 5-2 fits when I don't know whether the 5-cd suit is good and don't like a Moysian when the 4-cd suit has to take the tap (dummy reversal). If I were South at the table, I'd want to stop in 4C but that's impossible for us...

[akhare]

SCREAM bids this...

 

1C-1N, 16+, GF majors

2C-2H, asking, reverser

2S-2N, asking, higher short

3C-3D, asking, 4513

3H-3S, asking, 5 QPs

3N

 

If other relayers choose 5C, I'll go with that, but I don't think we have the strength to take 11 tricks.

 

I think that 5♣ almost certainly has a better chance than 3N. On the marked ♦ lead, 3N likely comes down to the a little better than 50% ♣ hook.

 

OTOH, we are arguably more likely to take 11 tricks in 5♣ (4 ♣, 2 ruffs, 2♠, 2♥ and the 11th trick coming from either ♥ breaking or the ♠ hook working).

 

Besides, they might lead a black suit on the auction...

[Free]

I think 2 is considerably more likely than 0 but if you play Turbo then I think you need some solid rules on these things. In auctions where you are unsure, is it easier to assume the lower number and upgrade or the higher number and downgrade?

The problems with assuming the lower number are:

- Both players need to assume the same thing. If the captain assumes 0 and signs off while responder assumes 2, we'll miss easy slams.

- You lose a lot of accuracy to bid a possible grand. Cues are useless since we're holding all keycards anyway, the only thing left is asking for trump Q.

We prefer to assume at least 1 keycard whenever that player has shown some positive hand. This is usually very accurate.

 

In this auction, responder has shown a GF 4=5=1=3 (or 4=5=0=4). Without a single keycard he has the option of signing off in 5♣. 5♣ would be a picture bid denying any keycard, after which South can actually paint North's hand (something like QJxx-KJxxx-x-Qxx). That's why I'd assume 4♦ shows 2 keycards rather than 0.

 

Out of interest, what would 4♦ for South be over 3♣? If this shows serious slam interest in clubs (in any form) then 4♣ is presumably only a slam try; then 4♦ is clearly 2 since with 0 North would simply sign off. it feels like there ought to be enough options for you here to disambiguate and have a "pretty" auction.

That would show an even number of keycards, serious slam interest, and willing to show his hand. Responder should expect 4 keycards after a 1♣ opening imo (which is impossible looking at the North hand). We like the option to either ask or show. In many cases we can support the minor to 4-level or immediately cuebid with 4m+1 or higher. 4♠ won't be ambiguous because he can bid 3♠ as well, so that's also an option.

 

We've toyed a lot with various ways to show the difference between min and max, but usually you lose the flexibility to decide who should show keycards. In many cases this flexibility determines if we have a comfortable auction to slam or not (see my second auction as an example of how bad it can be), so we're not willing to give that up easily.

[relknes]

out of curriosity, has anyone run a simulation given these two N/S hands and passing E/W hands, that shows how often 3N makes and how often 5♣ makes? Might also be interesting to see 4♥ and 4♠, for comparrison.

[FM75]

OCP

 

1♣ - 1♥

1N - 2♦ 3 controls

2♥ - 2N 1 top honor, and 5

3N

[JLOGIC]

1c 1h (strong, 8-11 without 5 spades)

1n 2c

2d 3d (4s 5h)

3n

 

Funny this came up because I have been saying forever that we should change our methods for smolen hands to be able to show specific shortness but we haven't and its never mattered. It is kind of ridiculous not to have done this it would be very simple but might wrong side spades.

[akhare]

out of curriosity, has anyone run a simulation given these two N/S hands and passing E/W hands, that shows how often 3N makes and how often 5♣ makes? Might also be interesting to see 4♥ and 4♠, for comparrison.

 

Edit (see data in following threads):

 

The following redeal script indicated that 5C is a winner in a 10000 hand simulation.

 

Antonylee, please correct in case I made a mistake :D:

 

from redeal import *

 

predeal = {"S": H("AK4 Q5 A85 AJT83"),

"N": H("JT32 AJ732 3 K65")}

 

def initial():

global TABLE

TABLE = Payoff(("bid3N", "bid5C"),

imps)

 

def accept(deal):

return True

 

def do(deal):

bid3N = deal.dd_score("3NS")

bid5C = deal.dd_score("5CS")

scores = dict(bid3N=bid3N, bid5C=bid5C)

TABLE.add_data(scores)

 

def final(n_tries):

TABLE.report()

print("Tries: {}".format(n_tries))

[hrothgar]

The following redeal script indicated that 5C is an winner in a 10000 hand simulation.

 

How does 4♠ do?

Also, are the differences statistically significant?

 

Arguably, the simulation should be based on the data available to the relayer at the point in time they had to decide on strain...

[karlson]

I'm not really an active participant in these threads, but I have to say that if I had the south hand and found out that partner had a minimum GF with 4513, I think I would choose to play 4♥.

[relknes]

The following redeal script indicated that 5C is a winner in a 10000 hand simulation.

What percentage of the time did each contract make? Was it close, or was it a blowout?

[akhare]

What percentage of the time did each contract make? Was it close, or was it a blowout?

 

Actually, I think I stand corrected. My personal bias towards 5♣ likely caused to misinterpret the data in this table and as see it now, 4♠ > 3N > 5♣.

 

BTW, the formatting doesn't quite come out right, but it's essentially a payoff of one contract vs. another. So, below 3N gains +0.72 over 5C and loses by -0.51 to 4S etc. with an implied +0 against itself.

 

bid3N.....bid5C.....bid4S

bid3N.....+0.72.....-0.51

..........(0.07).....(0.08)

bid5C...-0.72........-1.02

........(0.07).......(0.07)

bid4S....+0.51.......+1.02

........(0.08).......(0.07)

 

Richard brought up an excellent point regarding the statistical significance of the data. A better simulation will assign the shape (4=5=1=3) and RPs / HCPs to the North hand without the specific hand in question.

 

I will try and modify the script to do it, but am not very comfortable with the redeal Python syntax -- perhaps, antonylee can help?

[antonylee]

Yes, I was wondering why I had 3N clearly higher than 5♣ in my own sims...

Here is the IMPs payoff table (10,000 hands), also including 4♥. All contracts are assumed to be played by South (I don't think it matter much here). Also you need to pass True as second argument to dd_score (for vulnerability).

bid3N	bid4H	bid4S	bid5C	
bid3N		-0.66	-0.39	+0.77
	(0.03)	(0.03)	(0.02)
bid4H	+0.66		+0.30	+1.24
(0.03)		(0.03)	(0.02)
bid4S	+0.39	-0.30		+0.93
(0.03)	(0.03)		(0.03)
bid5C	-0.77	-1.24	-0.93	
(0.02)	(0.02)	(0.03)

(hint: use [ code ] for the formatting)

So it's basically 4♥ > 4♠ > 3N > 5♣ (and numbers in parentheses are standard deviations, so to first approximation all differences are statistically significant).

 

On the other hand I think DD sims should be taken with a grain of salt here because indeed 3N becomes much better as soon as you guess the clubs right. I wouldn't be surprised if it fared worse than 5♣ "in practice".

 

As for syntax I basically ran your simulation with an extra line for 4♥. I would be happy to implement a simpler syntax but I'll need your suggestions as this one is the best (that caters for everything I want to sim) I've found so far (granted, I did not put much thought in it either).

[awm]

There are a number of choices for us in the auction, I will go with this one:

 

IMprecision:

 

1♣ - 1♥ (strong, 4+♠ with 5+ hcp and 2-6RP)

1♠ - 2♥ (various hands including 3+♠, 4♠ and 5+♥)

2NT - 3♣ (NF misfitty, natural patterning out and GF)

3♦ - 3NT (nothing wasted in diamonds, no extra shape/values and potentially NF)

4♥ - Pass (must be Hx, reasonable heart suit)

 

Some decisions:

 

Opener could rebid 1NT over 1♥ as this hand will not play spectacularly in a 4-3 fit and has some issues when responder shows hearts. Then the auction would proceed 2♣(stayman)-2♦-2♥(puppet)-2♠-3♣(both majors short diamonds)-3♦(no wastage)-3♥(longer major)-3♠(three spades) and we would scramble to one of 5♣/4♥/4♠ (I think 4♥ most likely).

 

Opener could continue relaying over 2♥ and hope for the best since he does have "working" values; then responder would show pattern via 3♦ and opener would have to guess which game to play (generally we don't play 3NT here, but any of 5♣/4♥/4♠ seem possible).

 

On our given auction, opener could pass 3NT or bid 4♣ or 4♠. However I think 4♥ (showing Hx) is best because it leaves responder the option to remove it when holding weak hearts.

[rbforster]

The following redeal script...

 

predeal = {"S": H("AK4 Q5 A85 AJT83"),

"N": H("JT32 AJ732 3 K65")}

Akhare - I think you're assuming the actual North hand, not sure if that matters. The situation faced by most precision relayers was that South knew North had 4513 min GF, say 8-10 hcp roughly. It would be interesting to sim across the various North hands subject to those shape/value constraints to see what game contracts seemed best.