Deal #20

[Kungsgeten]

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Pass 2000

pass - 1D; (0-7 / 17+ ; 4+ hearts, 8-16, may have longer minor)

1H - 1S; (relay, may be weak ; natural, may be 44(14))

1N - 2D; (GF relay ; short diamonds)

2H - 2S; (R ; 4-5-1-3)

2N - 3D; (ace ask ; 1 ace)

3H - 3N; (king ask ; 1 king)

pass

[Zelandakh]

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

Why would you do this without looking at the hands?

 

 

Pass 2000

How would you bid it if North has ♠QJTx/ ♥AJTxx/ ♦x/ ♣KQx?

[antonylee]

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.

Here we go for 10,000 deals with North constrained to 4513 and 8-10 HCP. I only list the probability that a contract makes (double dummy):

5♣ 90%

4♥ 88%

4♠ 87%

3N 80%

So except for 3N all other games are basically equally good (or rather, the 2-3% difference is probably negligible compared to the approximation of double-dummy play); and 5♣ goes up again.

[Zelandakh]

Could you do the same for 9-11 too please Antony?

[qplus10]

1♣1♥(5+♥gf)

3nt

[Free]

1♣1♥(5+♥gf)

3nt

Proof that this system really sucks or that we don't get a full explanation

[relknes]

Why would you do this without looking at the hands?

 

I wouldn't. I had a momentary brain lapse after looking at the hands.

I guess the better question for me to ask is, would it be worth giving up one of my slam tools in this auction to gain the ability to explore a major suit game on a known 5-2 fit.

[Zelandakh]

I wouldn't. I had a momentary brain lapse after looking at the hands.

I guess the better question for me to ask is, would it be worth giving up one of my slam tools in this auction to gain the ability to explore a major suit game on a known 5-2 fit.

Yeah, this is easy to do. Sometimes I wish I could reconsider some of my table bids after I see the hands too!

 

As for a solution, well how do you play:

 

1♣ - 1♥;

1NT - 2♠?

 

If this is natural then you can continue:

 

2NT - 3♣

to pattern out. Now you have reached a similar position to the relayers. Basically, the simplest solution is to have some way for North to show all 3 suits (and hence shortage in the fourth) and then leave the decision to South.

[straube]

Here we go for 10,000 deals with North constrained to 4513 and 8-10 HCP. I only list the probability that a contract makes (double dummy):

5♣ 90%

4♥ 88%

4♠ 87%

3N 80%

So except for 3N all other games are basically equally good (or rather, the 2-3% difference is probably negligible compared to the approximation of double-dummy play); and 5♣ goes up again.

 

Thanks for running this. I found this really useful.

[relknes]

Yeah, this is easy to do. Sometimes I wish I could reconsider some of my table bids after I see the hands too!

 

As for a solution, well how do you play:

 

1♣ - 1♥;

1NT - 2♠?

 

If this is natural then you can continue:

 

2NT - 3♣

to pattern out. Now you have reached a similar position to the relayers. Basically, the simplest solution is to have some way for North to show all 3 suits (and hence shortage in the fourth) and then leave the decision to South.

Currently, 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT - 2♠ would be minor suit stayman.

We play simmilar conventions over 1♣-1x-1N as we do over a 1N opener, except that responder rebidding their suit after giving a positive response sets trump absolutely, opener should show 3 card support for responder's major if responder bids stayman (new minor forcing), and 3m shows a 5-5 hand instead of invitational with a strong minor. If we wanted to show 5 hearts and 4 spades, we could bid 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT - 2♦ (transfer) - 2♥ - 2♠ after which we could continue on as you suggested.

Thanks for the imput. Looks like we had the tools after all...

I have added to my original post, but left the previous auctions intact so people understand what we are talking about.

[jack502]

1♣2♥

3♣3n

4♥

 

2♥semi positive 5+ hearts 4 spades

3♣nat 15-18

[antonylee]

Here we go for 10,000 deals with North constrained to 4513 and 8-10 HCP. I only list the probability that a contract makes (double dummy):

5♣ 90%

4♥ 88%

4♠ 87%

3N 80%

So except for 3N all other games are basically equally good (or rather, the 2-3% difference is probably negligible compared to the approximation of double-dummy play); and 5♣ goes up again.

And for 9-11 (and 4513), as requested by Zelandakh

5♣ 95%

4♥ 93%

4♠ 93%

3N 88%

Again 3N is a bit behind (less, though) but the three other games are basically equally good.

[Mbodell]

5♣S for tosr

 

1♣-1♥ : 16+ bal, 18+ unbal; 8+hcp, 2+ctls, 4+♠

1♠-1nt : relay; 4+♥

2♣-2♥ : relay; 4♠5+♥

2♠-2nt : relay; short ♦

3♣-3♦ : relay; 4=5=1=3

3♥-3nt : relay; 3 ctls

4♦-4♥ : ->4♥ to sign off somewhere; obeying

5♣ : to play

 

Partner did think about trying a major but figured clubs was likely to be better. All you know is 8+ points (but probably not 13 or someting) 4=5=1=3 and for controls either the missing 3K or ♥A and some K (and at least a J if it is A+K).

[Zelandakh]

And for 9-11 (and 4513), as requested by Zelandakh

Thanks very much Antony!

 

From the results, it seems like we should probably be playing 5♣ at IMPs and 4♥ at MPs.

[Siegmund]

Unassuming has a boring auction: 1C-1H-1NT (15-18 balanced), checkback stayman method of your choice, 3NT.

 

Malfoir backs itself into a corner but lands on its feet:

 

1C-1S (if opener has the 11-18 hand with 4 spades and <4 hearts, spades are going to be trump, so might as well conceal them, and take control of the auction)

1NT-2D (15-18 no 4CM / inv+ transfer, can be 4S5H or 5S5H)

3C-4S (maximum, 3 spades but usually not 3 hearts, values in clubs that might be wasted opposite shortness)

and now responder really ought to be scared of playing 3NT, if opener chose to advertise club values rather than diamond values.

[antonylee]

Thanks very much Antony!

 

From the results, it seems like we should probably be playing 5♣ at IMPs and 4♥ at MPs.

Actually even if we forget the double-dummy considerations it seems like you'll want to play 4M even at imps -- you're losing 10 imps 2% of the times but winning 1 88-93%, which is clearly positive.

[Zelandakh]

and now responder really ought to be scared of playing 3NT, if opener chose to advertise club values rather than diamond values.

Am not sure about this - would Opener bid differently with the ♦K instead of the ♠K? Even then, it seems more logical to me to play in our AJxxx suit (opposite 2) rather than JTxx (opposite 3).

[Siegmund]

Am not sure about this - would Opener bid differently with the ♦K instead of the ♠K?

 

If he had Axx Qx AKx AJTxx, then no, the auction probably would be the same as it is here. (Now, if opener's diamonds were KQx or something, then he would have bid 3D rather than 3C, to show a holding that would be more useful in 3NT than in 4M if partner is short in diamonds, and we'd play 3NT.)

If the auction wasn't the same as it is here, it would result in opener bidding 4S over 2D: maximum, all values working (3S, 2H, pure holdings in both minors.) That would have been the system bid after 1NT-2D-2H-2S (responder showing 5-5 invitational) but here opener should avoid blasting to 4S because he is aware of the risk it may be a 4-3 fit.

 

Even then, it seems more logical to me to play in our AJxxx suit (opposite 2) rather than JTxx (opposite 3).

 

Possibly so. It comes down to responder has to pick a game of his choice opposite 17 or 18 and 3-2 in the majors, and a hint that partner has medium club cards but aces and spaces in diamonds. My responder won't know anything about the suit quality in either spades or hearts.

 

Here again it's a spot where responder's instinctive urge is to rush to 3NT, but I'm hoping opener's choice of 3C-vs-3D will help responder choose sensibly. I don't have any firm conviction what responder really would do, as far as spades vs. hearts. Straube can score it as whichever of 4H or 4S he thinks is fairer. I lean toward 4S as the more likely table result, in large part because opener might have dragged us there himself bidding as if partner had to be 5-5.

[Lord Molyb]

Molybdenum Forcing Pass System:

S ---- N

P --- 1♣ (opening, 0-bad 12)

1♠? --- 1NT (19-21?, GF)

2NT --- 3♦ (balanced, transfer)

3♥ --- 3♠ (finish transfer, 5+♥ 4+♠)

3NT --- P

[CamHenry]

Unnamed Homebrew Diamond:

1♦-1♠ 16+, non-GF / 8+ almost any

1N-2♦ 17-19 bal / transfer

2♥-2♠ no 4-card support / second suit

2N-3♦ No major fit yet found / shortness, implying 4=5=1=3 shape

4♦-4♥ Implicit club fit, 5 or 7 CPs / 4-5 CPs

4♠-4N 7 CPs, second-round ♠ control / second-round control in a suit past 5♣

6♣ Should be enough

 

Various things could go better (or go wrong): S could bid 3NT instead of 4♦; S could decide not to look for slam despite the control-rich hand and useful values, so we play 5♣.

[CamHenry]

I'm surprised that 5♣ does so badly in the simulations. The dangerous lead is a heart; if you let that run and a diamond comes back you have to guess trumps for the overtrick. On normal splits I can see several lines of play for 6♣ here: if the ♥K is onside it's easy; if not, you have to guess trumps but you can combine chances (e.g. win a ♦ lead in hand, run the ♥Q). Is my analysis flawed?

[PrecisionL]

Upgraded Ultra Club Relay (C3):

 

1♣ = 16+ Pass 1NT = Majors or any 5-5 & G.F. Pass 2♣ = puppet staymanish pass 2♦ = 5+♥ & 4♠ Pass 2♥ = DAB pass 2NT = 4=5=1=3 Pass 3♥ = Beta Pass 3NT = 3 Controls Pass 4♥ ALL PASS

 

Final contract = 4♥ by South

[Zelandakh]

I'm surprised that 5♣ does so badly in the simulations. The dangerous lead is a heart; if you let that run and a diamond comes back you have to guess trumps for the overtrick. On normal splits I can see several lines of play for 6♣ here: if the ♥K is onside it's easy; if not, you have to guess trumps but you can combine chances (e.g. win a ♦ lead in hand, run the ♥Q). Is my analysis flawed?

The sims are done from South's point of view so the only things known about the North hand are the shape and approximate strength. And the sim result for 5♣ is 90-95%; it is not what I would call bad.

[CamHenry]

The sims are done from South's point of view so the only things known about the North hand are the shape and approximate strength. And the sim result for 5♣ is 90-95%; it is not what I would call bad.

 

OK, that makes more sense. Thanks! So it's the fact that N has shown 8+, 4-5 CPs, and second-round control in at least one red suit that means we can bid 6♣ with some degree of confidence.