Lone Wolf

[lamford]

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt764hkj643d83c&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=1n(15-17)d(M/m/diamonds)r2d(D%20better%20than%20C)p2s(M%20longer%20S)3sp3n]133|200[/hv]

A two-part problem

a) Do you bid 4H, double, or pass

b) If you pass, what do you lead?

Redouble just showed a good hand, and 3S asked for a spade stop. Your agreements are pretty much just what is stated.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt764hkj643d83c&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=1n(15-17)d(M/m/diamonds)r2d(D%20better%20than%20C)p2s(M%20longer%20S)3sp3n]133|200[/hv]

A two-part problem

a) Do you bid 4H, double, or pass

b) If you pass, what do you lead?

Redouble just showed a good hand, and 3S asked for a spade stop. Your agreements are pretty much just what is stated.

Not sure what "M/m/diamonds" means?

Would partner pass the redouble with no preference?

Presumably, opener can double 2♦ for penalties?

Anyway IMO

• Bid 4♥ = 10 Avoiding the lead problem :), Pass = 9, 4♠ = 8, Double = 5.
• Lead ♦8 = 10, ♠K = 9, ♠7 = 8, ♥4 = 7. Don't know what to do :( Has his partner's 3♠ bid backed opener into a corner? Has opener gambled 3N without a ♠ stop? Seems less likely because opener must have some length and strength outside ♣ but appears to have been unable to double 2♦. Naturally, however, opener won't mention ♥ because your bidding implies you hold them.

[lamford]

Not sure what "M/m/diamonds" means?

Majors or minors or diamonds. Sorry, the bidding screen did not allow all of that, and I had to truncate. And partner thought that Pass might be a desire to defend 1NTxx, so she could be equal length in the minors with better diamonds.

[CamHenry]

Has opener gambled 3N without a ♠ stop?

 

It could, however, be that dummy's holding Jxx and opener has Qx, and the heart AQ are on table - at which stage they're clearly making; 4♥ is my call.

[WellSpyder]

Bridge is too tough for me. I now have no idea what is ... right ...!

+1

[Hanoi5]

♦8

[Codo]

I led the king of spades and take it from there.

[steve2005]

Not sure what "M/m/diamonds" means?

Yes what does your original double mean?

Diamonds or both majors?

[Finch]

Majors, minors, or diamonds.

 

I don't to spoil Lamford's fun, but you should possibly assume that partner is not a world class player.

p.s. I have no idea who partner actually is, by the way.

[gszes]

"are you feeling lucky punk" (dirty harry) well that's this hand

P has heard your 2s bid showing extra spades and presumably power since

you are forcing p to bid 3h to take a preference.

All u need is p to have say QTx of clubs and 2 small spades to set 3n but

you might also be able to find a good sac (probably in 4s not 4h so much)

The downside is you could get slaughtered if the hand is a total misfit. I would

go the road of the ostrich stick my head in the sand and

 

pass

 

and lead a small spade but anything could work IMO P=10 4s =7 4h=4 x=1

[the hog]

Well you get what you deserve for playing these methods. Including both Majors with other hand type options must be one of the silliest methods of cmpeting over 1NT that I have come across.

Pass is automatic now. Bidding 4H should score a 0.

[rhm]

Well you get what you deserve for playing these methods. Including both Majors with other hand type options must be one of the silliest methods of cmpeting over 1NT that I have come across.

Pass is automatic now. Bidding 4H should score a 0.

I have no such strong opinions about methods I have never played nor encountered

 

But let's analyze the situation a bit:

 

East having a strong hand was not interested in defense (why did he not bid 3NT immediately instead of redouble?) and partner has better diamonds than clubs.

It sounds as if dummy will come down in 3NT with a long string of good clubs.

If this analysis is correct, this deal could well have all the ingredients for a double game swing.

If the contract is beatable (a big if), it will depend on the opening lead and this is a guess.

 

To put it differently if you pass you are betting on that either

 

a) No game is making and you will find the right opening lead

b) or 3NT makes and a sacrifice at four of a major will be expensive.

 

Is that likely at these colors, given that they seem to have a great club fit?

It looks odds against to me.

4♥ looks to me like the percentage action, but it requires courage to do it.

Sure it is risky, but 4♥ or 4♠ could also make, in particular if 3NT is beatable. You need not much from partner in the majors.

If I would defend 3NT, which I have no intention, I would start with a top spade.

I do not believe it is close. Passing is lazy thinking.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

All u need is p to have say QTx of clubs and 2 small spades to set

I passed and led a small spade for -720. Cashing the ace of spades and then switching to a heart is +700, the same score as gnasher's opponents achieved! Bidding 4H is +450. My choice swung 24 IMPs, so what is right? I generated 24 hands with these criteria: a) dealer is 15-17 with three or four spades including the queen; b) the responder is 9-11 with 0-2 spades; c) they have more clubs than diamonds (I cannot enter 1 hand and constrain 3 hands with the software I have).

 

3NT made half the time, on the right lead. This was a low spade 11 times, of which 3 would also be beaten by a top spade and a low spade continuation. On one occasion, when partner had the ace of hearts, a heart was needed. Once declarer had QJxx in spades and partner 9x and a low spade lead and heart switch if declarer ducked was needed. A diamond always failed. The better of 4H or 4S made once, went one off four times, two off twelve times, three off five times, and worse twice, for an average score of about -320. Passing and leading a small spade scored +100 eight times, +200 twice and +300 once. It made for an average of about -630 13 times, and that came out to an average score of around -240. Most of the time it went off partner had values in the minors which declarer could not pick up, even double dummy. Partner had xxx Axxx Jxx xxx on the actual hand (she thought pass of the XX might be a desire to defend it). I thought double of 3NT on that would suggest bidding 4M, but it might just be "lead a heart". Opinions are welcome. I think I would do the same again, but I would take some action on partner's hand. The methods (x of 1NT) were obtained by watching some top Americans in Hawaii many years ago. I have not seen the methods much since, I must confess.

[lamford]

Well you get what you deserve for playing these methods. Including both Majors with other hand type options must be one of the silliest methods of cmpeting over 1NT that I have come across.

Pass is automatic now. Bidding 4H should score a 0.

Interestingly, the "Gawrys defence to a strong NT" is:

"Double: Promises a single-suited holding with Clubs or Diamonds, or a two-suited holding with both Hearts and Spades."

Clearly these silly methods were not the reason he was a member of the "only Polish team to win two World Championship events".

[PhilKing]

I think it's a pretty terrible method, since partner can almost never boost the bidding when third player acts, and I would think that even if he had won as many WC's as Hamman (who plays various treatments I also think are not perfect). Trying to win the contract in 2m is a mugs game, particularly where you don't even get to bid your suit directly.

 

But the method was not to blame here. When North bids 2♠, it doesn't show merely longer spades - it shows a hand too strong to pass 2♥, so South should bid 4♥. After all, South could have a weak 2443 in this crackpot defence, and North needs a safe way to show a game try opposite a sign off.

[lamford]

I think it's a pretty terrible method, since partner can almost never boost the bidding when third player acts, and I would think that even if he had won as many WC's as Hamman (who plays various treatments I also think are not perfect). Trying to win the contract in 2m is a mugs game, particularly where you don't even get to bid your suit directly.

 

But the method was not to blame here. When North bids 2♠, it doesn't show merely longer spades - it shows a hand too strong to pass 2♥, so South should bid 4♥. After all, South could have a weak 2443 in this crackpot defence, and North needs a safe way to show a game try opposite a sign off.

We are changing our methods to Multi Landy over any NT range now. Your arguments convince me.

[MickyB]

Discussions about a similar method by Gawrys and hypotheticals about Hamman seem odd given that the defence in the OP is known as "Meckwell" - not that I'm a fan of the method either!

[PhilKing]

Discussions about a similar method by Gawrys and hypotheticals about Hamman seem odd given that the defence in the OP is known as "Meckwell" - not that I'm a fan of the method either!

 

Maybe Meckwell have never played it either. Conventions are frequently misattributed (eg Benjamin Twos and Ingberman).

 

Update: I just checked and they still appear to play it. :(

[mikeh]

Interesting: my immediate reaction, on reading the given auction, was to wonder why we bid 2♠.

 

We are at favourable and playing a method designed, it seems to me, to encourage aggressive intervention, taking advantage of the ambiguity that we are introducing into what is usually one of the opps most disciplined, informed sequences. We'd make this bid, I assume, with a far less powerful playing hand.

 

I would far prefer 3♠ at the point of the 2♠ call. It would have worked fine, as it happens, by depriving the opps of the 3♠ cue, but that would have been a fortuitous happenstance: the reason I choose 3♠ is that I want to show that I have a very powerful playing hand: easily 2 tricks better than I think partner should/would play me for if I bid only 2♠.

[Finch]

The problem with your simulation is that it doesn't take into account partner's pass over 3S. But given that partner passed on a hand that both you and I think should have bid, it's hard to draw conclusions from this.

Nor does it take into account the fact that opener on the actual hand had a 13 count.

 

p.s. there's no reason not to think that bidding 4H isn't +590/+690 rather than +450.

[the hog]

Interestingly, the "Gawrys defence to a strong NT" is:

"Double: Promises a single-suited holding with Clubs or Diamonds, or a two-suited holding with both Hearts and Spades."

Clearly these silly methods were not the reason he was a member of the "only Polish team to win two World Championship events".

 

Just because Piotr plays these methods does not mean they are ideal. Have you not seen many top/world class players play inferior method? Putting a 2 suited M holding in with a single suited minor hand is poor practise. Show your major suite holdings as quickly as possible. (By the way, Gawrys did not play this method when I played against him a number of years ago).

[lamford]

The problem with your simulation is that it doesn't take into account partner's pass over 3S. But given that partner passed on a hand that both you and I think should have bid, it's hard to draw conclusions from this.

Nor does it take into account the fact that opener on the actual hand had a 13 count.

 

p.s. there's no reason not to think that bidding 4H isn't +590/+690 rather than +450.

If I were to exclude the hands that would have bid 4H, as you, I and PhilKing think my partner should have done, then that makes passing and leading a low spade even better. The reason that a high spade worked on the actual hand was that partner had Axxx in hearts and we could cash the first eleven tricks! The one hand where 4H made in the simulation was similar, partner having xx Qxxx Kxxx xxx, so one +590 would only change the average by 170/24, about 7 points, and I think you would exclude that hand as it would bid 4H.

 

I only know the auction on two other tables, which was 1NT - (2C - Landy) - 3NT. On one this hand backed in with double, and the opponents ran to 5C-1. On gnasher's they led a top spade for +700. Simulating just this auction makes a low spade best, but not by such a margin, as now they can have Jx opposite Qx.

 

And yes the opener did have a 13 count. Perhaps they should have alerted 1NT as 15-17 but maybe less with a long minor. But I have no idea how regular this deviation would be. I don't think it changes the odds much, as the redoubler might have more.

[lamford]

Just because Piotr plays these methods does not mean they are ideal. Have you not seen many top/world class players play inferior method? Putting a 2 suited M holding in with a single suited minor hand is poor practise. Show your major suite holdings as quickly as possible. (By the way, Gawrys did not play this method when I played against him a number of years ago).

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/meckwell_convention.html and

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/gawrys_defense_to_1_notrump.html

give a similar defence to 1NT. In the case of Meckwell, 2C shows clubs and a major, whereas with Gawrys it shows clubs and another. In both cases, the double shows a minor or both majors, slightly different to our method. As PhilKing states, Meckwell still play the defence, so I would bow to their superior knowledge.

 

At Brighton, in a side game, Gold and Cope were playing a similar method against a weak NT!

[rhm]

The reason that a high spade worked on the actual hand was that partner had Axxx in hearts and we could cash the first eleven tricks!

The reason you choose a high card is exactly that you can switch, admittedly at a price.

I know I do not have an outside entry, but against that if dummy has long clubs you may well not afford to loose the lead even once.

I would also not be surprised finding ♠Jx or xx in dummy and declarer having bid 3NT with ♠Qx

It has happened to me and I have bid 3NT with Qx and made my contract against a furious opponent, who had preempted in the suit and led low.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

I would also not be surprised finding ♠Jx or xx in dummy and declarer having bid 3NT with ♠Qx

I would also not be surprised finding Jx opposite Qxx, Jxx opposite Qx or xx opposite QJx. On all of those I want to lead a small spade.