3S - X - 4S - ? All vul

[diana_eva]

All star team match on BBO. IMPs, all vul:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=SJ4HAJ4D862CQJ854&d=w&v=b&a=3SD4S?]140|200[/hv]

 

What would you bid?

[ArtK78]

5♣. Partner asked me to bid. I have some stuff. Not enough to go crazy, but some stuff. So I bid.

[mikeh]

I pass

 

 

I have nothing special on the auction. I have zero reason to expect to make 11 tricks opposite the usual minimum to middling takeout double, when the opps' defence rates to be sitting behind partner.

 

My pass, especially when made in tempo, hardly constitutes a bar of partner. If he has the sort of hand on which we can make 5♣ then most of the time he will reopen.

 

As for being in-tempo, it is a good idea to make close calls quickly in these situations, since tanking and then acting is on average, in my experience, as costly or more costly than making an in-tempo 'mistake', when the decision is close. Partner gets barred when we pass and when we bid, the opps can take a chunk out of us when they know that we weren't thinking of bidding more, but of passing.

 

As it happens, I think (with all respect to Art) that this is a wtp? pass.

[ArtK78]

 

As it happens, I think (with all respect to Art) that this is a wtp? pass.

 

You may be right. I have been getting a lot of these wrong lately.

[diana_eva]

Needless to say I got it wrong at the table :P But I have to figure out what went wrong with my judgement, so any replies and explanations appreciated, will help me finetune my reasoning in such situations.

[eagles123]

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

[mikeh]

Needless to say I got it wrong at the table :P But I have to figure out what went wrong with my judgement, so any replies and explanations appreciated, will help me finetune my reasoning in such situations.

 

Imagine, quickly, good hands for partner, in terms of being able to make game. Don't over-reach: don't for example assume that he has a spade void. Assume a decent 4441 without enough to double a second time.

 

To me, x KQxx Axxx AKxx/ x KQxx AKxx Axxx, which are absolutely perfect fitters with 6 controls, are a second double, especially if I didn't break tempo.

 

So don't give him that.

 

Make the hand any worse and 5♣ has little play.

 

x Kxxx Axxx AKxx, for example, needs hearts 3-3 with the hook working. No thanks.

 

He'd pass 4♠ with that and we'd go quietly plus

 

x Kxxx AQxx Axxx: again, he'd pass with that, and again we'd avoid a near hopeless (on the auction) contract.

 

x KQxx AKQx xxxx

 

I think this is a wtp precisely because most good hands I construct fall into one of two camps. On the ones where we make, partner is bidding again. On the ones we fail, partner is passing. Now, I only construct a few hands and I am sure that with some work I could come up with a justification for bidding: the point is to be alive to the human tendency to construct hands that match what we want to do. Thus ignore hands on which he has a spade void...yes, they exist, but a stiff is far more probable and, again, with a void he may bid again anyway.

 

There are hands on which the decision is closer: give me xx AJx xx QJxxxx, now this hand rates to be worth a full winner more, and the question is whether it is a loser less :P

 

Now, x KQxx Axxx Axxx, with which he probably should pass 4♠ is enough, imo, to make 5♣ a good call. They may even make 4♠! Meanwhile, even with optimum defence, we have a play for 5♣ on some plausible layouts.

 

x KQxx AQxx Kxxx otoh leaves us very unlikely to make: we need the diamond K onside, which it rates not to be. Of course, LHO may lead a low spade and endplay rho, but that is improbable as well.

 

So with the 2=3=26 hand, I would imagine good and bad hands and try to be as objective as I can. I like to think I would bid with the example I gave, but it would be close and imo definitely not a wtp.

 

 

edit: all of the foregoing is going to look really silly if bidding was the winning action :D At least I can't be called for resulting on this!

[mikeh]

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

As I said in my last long post: construct 'good' hands where partner should pass: now see how many of them make game.

[eagles123]

As I said in my last long post: construct 'good' hands where partner should pass: now see how many of them make game.

 

 

well maybe we should x?

[Jinksy]

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

 

If so, it's quite likely that they're not making and neither are we. If I double, I'm not going to feel happy if P makes any call but 5♣.

[Fluffy]

I have enough to double, so I will do it, double shows a balanced hand, I don't expect him to pull often.

[steve2005]

I don't think 5♣ is going for 800, some chance to make. could be a good sacrifice even if doesn't make.

[PhilKing]

Pass >> double >>> 5♣

[wank]

i'd double. it might be screwing us but that's life

[whereagles]

pass. this can still be a 20-20 point split (making dbl risky), and I got no shape whatsoever for any bidding.

[SteveMoe]

Pass. My 9 losers won't make game unless partner has substantial extras. Partner needs 4-5 losers. Pass is the only way to find that out. Would consider a double IFF we need a top. Cannot find a double at IMPs.

[MrAce]

To be honest I do not see this as clear as Mike does. The points he made are all good points. But there is thing about good opponents when they open 3M and raise to game vulnerable....it usually either makes or goes down 1 at most. Maybe this is what my experiences taught me, perhaps coincidentally.

 

But look at the example hands Mike constructed, especially the ones he mentioned that we should not count because those hands will make a 2nd double and anything worse than that we will have a very little play in 5♣. Up to this point I agree. However, ironically if you make pd's hand any worse, our defense prospects are diminished also. Passers talk as if going plus is guaranteed, which is not even remotely guaranteed imo. Unless of course opponents do not have singleton or void in this auction, which is unlikely. They both may have shortness and this is when it gets ugly, especially when we have a huge fit as well.

 

Having said all of that, I would not bid 5♣. Whether I pass or dbl depends on what it actually means. To me dbl means "I have values but not shape to bid anything myself" All teh hands being constructed for pd are 1444 hand as far as I saw. Why pd can not have 1453 1543 (with weak hearts) or 0463? Having learnt I have some values, perhaps he can reevaluate his hand. Or is everyone playing 4♠ dbl = penalty? I admit we are a tad light for this and our hcps are not prime. My point is I do not think pass leads to good result as often as some of us think it will.

[diana_eva]

OK, thanks all. So it wasn't clear what to do, at least I wasn't on another planet when I found it hard to decide without huddling for 5 minutes.

 

I first thought "Goodie, I've got stuff!", then I tried to picture what I need for game/slam to make. I then realized partner needs to have quite a perfect hand for us to make something 5th or 6th level, and then, instead of passing, I figured I have to tell pd I've got something, so I doubled.

 

I didn't expect double to be 100% penalty, and pd was a very good player, he wouldn't play me for a trump stack with opps bidding and raising spades against us. But he had the most boring 1-4-4-4 T/O double so he left it in, and opps made 4SX.

 

Other table bid 5C which went down 2 undoubled.

 

What went wrong with my judgement though was that I kinda took it for granted that we own the board, and didn't consider the possibility of them making as a strong alternative, in which case maybe I should have thought of bidding just because we don't know who makes what and we've got a good fit.

[cherdano]

Of course, the proper reason to pass has been explained by Mike - think about what would happen opposite typical hands from partner. Let me add 2 small cents to his analysis:

- It is a mistake to only think about 1444 hands with partner. While 4 might be the most frequent club length with partner, he will have 3 clubs quite often (and much more often than 5) - that obviously makes the case for defending stronger. There is even a small chance that he has 2 spades.

- While there are 16 counts where we will miss games by passing (I dont think x Kxxx KQJxx AKx should double again), partner is much more likely to have a minimum takeout double. In that case, 5C is down for sure, and 4S may or may not be down - just the situation where you want to take your chances defending undoubled.

 

But the short reason to pass is that our hand is not too different from what partner expects. He will play us roughly for a balanced 7 count; a balanced 9 count (with one hcp wasted) is not too a good enough reason to take action at the 5 level. If you think about it that way, you may find a pass in tempo at the table.

[whereagles]

4441s are not boring :)

 

If dbl is sort of "optional", I might have pulled with pard's hand (without even seeing it).http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

[diana_eva]

4441s are not boring :)

 

If dbl is sort of "optional", I might have pulled with pard's hand (without even seeing it).http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

 

Double was undiscussed, but this partner had a brain of his own, and was allowed to use it. Dunno if he shd pull with a regular T/O, why would he? I suppose he'd pull with something unexpected, not with what I knew he has.

[whereagles]

Right. But is a 4441 the most likely shape for his double? I'm not so sure..

 

I mean.. if you have some extras you will dbl with, say, 2434/2443. Isn't that more frequent than a 1444 and 14-15 H? I didn't run a sim, but I suspect it's close.

[suokko]

I felt like I at least have to double. But biding over passing is also clear winner based on my quick simulation. Too bad scoring function doesn't support doubled contracts yet so I only simulated undoubled both. But undoubled both 5♣ and 4♠ makes biding winning choice by 5.3 IMPs on average.

 

Doubled contracts would require some C coding and more complex rules when 5♣ will be doubled. I won't be doing that at least today but if there is enough interest I might do the doubled simulation some other day.

 

Rules for preempt and T/O double were my quick toughs how to limit the hand types but if you see flaws on those rules I can repeat the simulation with improved hand limits.

 

EDIT: I updated the simulation limits based on feedback and added statistics for north holdings. But still 5♣ not doubled because that would take quite a lot more coding.

 

EDIT2: I added doubled contracts to simulations. I also improved ew hand definitions that slightly increases total tricks and makes biding win a bit more IMPs.

 

 

#Simulation for biding starting from west (3♠)dbl-(4♠)?

predeal south SJ4,HAJ4,D862,CQJ854

westpre = shape(west, 7xxx - any 4xxx - any 5xxx - any 6xxx + 6x4x + 6xx4) && hcp(west) < 11 &&
	hcp(west) > 4 && top5(west,spades) > 1

eastraise = (spades(east) >= 4 && !shape(east, any 4333)) ||
	(spades(east) == 3 && hcp(east) + 3*shape(east, any 1xxx) + 6*shape(east, any 0xxx) > 7 && !shape(east, any 4333)) ||
	(spades(east) == 2 && hcp(east) + 2*shape(east, any 1xxx) + 4*shape(east, any 0xxx) > 12 && !shape(east, any 4432)) ||
	(hcp(east) > 15)

northto = ((shape(north, any 4432 - 4xxx - 3xxx + 2542 + 2524) &&
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) > 15 &&
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) < 18) ||
	(shape(north, 1444 + any 5431 - 5xxx - 4xxx - 3xxx + 1363 + 1336 + 1462) &&
		hcp(north) - 2*queen(north, spades) - 2*king(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) > 12 &&
		hcp(north) - 2*queen(north, spades) - 2*king(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) < 17) ||
	(shape(north, any 5440 + any 6430 - x0xx - xx0x - xxx0 - x6xx) && hcp(north) > 10 && hcp(north) < 16) ||
	(shape(north, 2425 + 2452) && top2(north, spades) < 1 &&
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) > 14 &&
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) < 18) ||
	(shape(north, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5431 - 4xxx - 5xxx - x1xx - 1xxx - 2xxx - x2xx) && 
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) > 15 &&
		hcp(north) - 1*queen(north, spades) - 1*jack(north, spades) < 21) && top3(north, spades) == 0)

condition westpre && eastraise && northto

generate 1000000000
produce 100

st = tricks(west, spades)
ct = trick(south, clubs)

action
printoneline,
#	frequency "Tricks in 4♠" (st, 0,13),
#	frequency "Tricks in 5♣" (ct, 0,13),
#	frequency "Tricks in both" (st, 0,13, ct, 0, 13),
#	average "ave TT" st+ct,
#	frequency "TT" (st+ct, 0,26),
#	average "IMP 5♣ vs 4♠" imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),
#	average "IMP 4♠x vs 4♠" imps(score(vul, x4S, st) - score(vul, x4Sx, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣x vs 4♠x" imps(score(vul, x5Cx, ct) + score(vul, x4Sx, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣  vs 4♠x" imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4Sx, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣ dbl if not make vs 4♠x" imps((ct < 11 ? score(vul, x5Cx, ct) : score(vul, x5C, ct)) + score(vul, x4Sx, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣ dbl if not make vs 4♠" imps((ct < 11 ? score(vul, x5Cx, ct) : score(vul, x5C, ct)) + score(vul, x4S, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣x vs 4♠" imps(score(vul, x5Cx, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),
#	average "IMP 5♣ vs 5♣x" imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) - score(vul, x5Cx, ct)),
#	frequency "IMP undoubled both" (imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),-24,24),
#	frequency "IMP 4♠x vs 4♠" (imps(score(vul, x4S, st) - score(vul, x4Sx, st)),-24,24),
#	frequency "IMP 5♣x vs 4♠x" (imps(score(vul, x5Cx, ct) + score(vul, x4Sx, st)),-24,24),
#	frequency "IMP 5♣ vs 4♠x" (imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4Sx, st)),-24,24),
#	frequency "IMP 5♣x vs 4♠" (imps(score(vul, x5Cx, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),-24,24),
#	frequency "IMP 5♣ vs 5♣x" (imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) - score(vul, x5Cx, ct)),-24,24),
#	frequency "north hcp" (hcp(north), 0, 30),
#	frequency "north clubs" (clubs(north), 0, 7),
#	frequency "north diamonds" (diamonds(north), 0, 7),
#	frequency "north hearts" (hearts(north), 0, 7),
#	frequency "north spades" (spades(north), 0, 7, hcp(north), 0, 30),

#***
#Example deals for the biding
#
#n A.6532.KJ753.AK2 e 6532.KT98.AQT9.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT987.Q7.4.T973
#n .96532.AKJ4.AK62 e K876.KQ7.T953.93 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT9532.T8.Q7.T7
#n 9.KQ76.QJ9.AK972 e AQ53.T9852.AT4.3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT8762.3.K753.T6
#n 5.QT732.AKQ.A976 e A862.K5.J43.KT32 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT973.986.T975.
#n Q.KQT63.KQ5.AT97 e 9753.85.AT3.K632 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT862.972.J974.
#n .Q62.AQJ953.A762 e Q985.KT53.KT74.9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT7632.987..KT3
#n 3.KQT92.KJ3.AKT9 e T96.8763.AQT74.2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQ8752.5.95.763
#n 72.KQ532.A3.AK97 e A98.9876.KJ94.T3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT653.T.QT75.62
#n A3.KT853.KQJT.K7 e 962.Q62.A9753.A3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT875.97.4.T962
#n 2.Q82.KJ94.AK963 e AK9.T965.QT753.T s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT87653.K73.A.72
#n A.QT8.AKJT73.T76 e Q92.97632.Q95.A9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT87653.K5.4.K32
#n K8.K83.AK73.AT62 e Q62.T975.QJ.K973 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9753.Q62.T954.
#n T2.KT532.KQJ9.AK e Q96.Q976.AT43.92 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK8753.8.75.T763
#n 9.KQ87.KJT3.A632 e AT62.T953.Q4.K97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ8753.62.A975.T
#n 5.KT8.AQ975.AK72 e AQ9.Q9763.JT3.63 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT87632.52.K4.T9
#n A.T532.KQ54.AT97 e 862.K986.AJT7.K3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT9753.Q7.93.62
#n 2.KQ975.J94.AKT9 e AQ7.T86.AQT75.76 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT98653.32.K3.32
#n 9.765.AKQJ.KT973 e KT75.KT832.75.A6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ8632.Q9.T943.2
#n 5.KQT2.A754.AK76 e Q92.975.KQJT3.92 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT8763.863.9.T3
#n 7.KQ832.AQ97.A62 e KQ82.965.J3.KT73 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9653.T7.KT54.9
#n T.K832.KQJT5.AKT e K953.QT9765.73.3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ8762..A94.9762
#n 6.QT72.A54.AKT76 e 987.K865.KQT3.93 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQT532.93.J97.2
#n .985.AKT7.AKT976 e AT653.KQ732.J4.2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9872.T6.Q953.3
#n 6.KT96.AQJT.KT76 e A875.Q832.74.A32 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT932.75.K953.9
#n 6.K73.AT94.AKT93 e AQ75.Q9865.K3.76 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT9832.T2.QJ75.2
#n T.K32.QJ43.AKT92 e Q53.T975.AK75.73 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK98762.Q86.T9.6
#n K.K8653.AK97.KT2 e 9652.QT72.QJ54.3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT873.9.T3.A976
#n .K983.AKJ93.A976 e Q963.QT652.T5.KT s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT8752.7.Q74.32
#n .Q963.KQ975.AK97 e T532.KT82.AJ4.32 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQ9876.75.T3.T6
#n A.QT32.AK43.K973 e T865.8765.Q5.AT2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9732.K9.JT97.6
#n 9.QT6.KQT4.AKT93 e AK85.98752.J9.62 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT7632.K3.A753.7
#n 8.852.AKT5.AKT96 e KQ63.KT9763.74.7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9752.Q.QJ93.32
#n K6.K976.A75.AKT2 e T93.QT532.KQJ.73 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ8752.8.T943.96
#n .KQ863.KT94.AKT9 e QT75.97.A753.762 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK98632.T52.QJ.3
#n T.K652.A93.AK763 e A832.QT973.KQT.9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9765.8.J754.T2
#n 5.K863.QJT43.AKT e AQ92.9752.AK95.7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT8763.QT.7.9632
#n 7.T852.AKQ7.A632 e Q85.KQ3.JT543.97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT9632.976.9.KT
#n 5.KQ85.QJ53.AKT6 e KT96.T962.K9.973 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ8732.73.AT74.2
#n A.K87.QJT974.A63 e Q65.QT952.AK.972 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT98732.63.53.KT
#n Q.Q76.AK95.A7632 e 9862.KT852.T4.KT s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT753.93.QJ73.9
#n 3.T765.AQ543.AK2 e T96.KQ32.KT97.63 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQ8752.98.J.T97
#n 5.K8763.AKT9.AT6 e K632.Q52.J4.K972 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT987.T9.Q753.3
#n Q.Q652.AKJ95.K72 e T876.KT987.T.AT9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK9532.3.Q743.63
#n 6.9832.AQJT9.AKT e KT52.KQ65.K.9732 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ9873.T7.7543.6
#n K.KT765.AJT.AKT2 e 962.Q983.K9754.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT8753.2.Q3.973
#n 9.Q986.KQ4.AK763 e A76.KT532.T753.9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT8532.7.AJ9.T2
#n .Q983.AKQ4.AT972 e AQ95.762.JT973.K s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT87632.KT5.5.63
#n 7.QT86.AKQJT9.K3 e Q32.7532.3.AT972 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT9865.K9.754.6
#n Q7.K975.KQJ54.AK e A52.QT82.3.T7632 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT9863.63.AT97.9
#n .K96.KJ74.AKT763 e A632.Q8732.A95.9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT9875.T5.QT3.2
#n 2.KQ3.KJ73.A9632 e AQ95.9872.Q5.KT7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT8763.T65.AT94.
#n 8.K965.KQ53.AK32 e Q753.T8732.A7.T9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT962.Q.JT94.76
#n A5.KT65.QJT3.AK7 e Q93.Q8732.A4.T92 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT8762.9.K975.63
#n 5.QT93.AKJ4.KT62 e Q963.K8652.95.A3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT872.7.QT73.97
#n .Q976.KQ9543.A32 e T9653.KT53.AT7.K s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQ872.82.J.T976
#n 5.KT65.AKT.AT762 e KQ97.Q983.975.K3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT8632.72.QJ43.9
#n .T6532.AT94.AK63 e QT72.KQ98.KQ7.72 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK98653.7.J53.T9
#n 32.KQ76.AKJ93.K3 e AQ6.T532.QT54.72 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT9875.98.7.AT96
#n 6.Q93.AKQ973.KT6 e K83.KT82.JT.A973 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT9752.765.54.2
#n .K976.KQT4.AKT32 e A9652.T32.A3.976 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT873.Q85.J975.
#n T.KQ2.AKQ.T97632 e Q932.8653.T73.AK s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK8765.T97.J954.
#n 2.KQ8.KT97.AKT72 e AK5.97532.A43.96 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT98763.T6.QJ5.3
#n 6.K875.AKJT93.K7 e AK73.QT963.54.96 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT9852.2.Q7.AT32
#n 2.K92.KQJT75.A76 e AT65.Q765.A943.9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9873.T83..KT32
#n 8.KT5.KQ97.AK762 e KT92.9732.A5.T93 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ7653.Q86.JT43.
#n .KQ873.AQ43.K762 e T653.T96.KT975.A s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKQ9872.52.J.T93
#n .9852.AQJ5.AKT72 e AT76.KQ76.9743.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ98532.T3.KT.93
#n K5.KQT63.KQ75.A2 e A32.987.AJT94.97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT9876.52.3.KT63
#n Q6.K832.AKJ94.A6 e A85.Q765.5.T9732 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT9732.T9.QT73.K
#n 3.KT2.AKQ743.A97 e AT8.Q8763.J9.KT3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ97652.95.T5.62
#n 83.K876.AQJ4.AK6 e K92.Q92.KT9753.2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT765.T53..T973
#n .T92.AKQJ53.AT73 e Q963.K8765.94.K6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT8752.Q3.T7.92
#n Q.K82.AKT54.KT63 e A97.Q9763.QJ7.97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT86532.T5.93.A2
#n 6.KQ872.A97.AT93 e QT8.T95.QJT54.K2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK97532.63.K3.76
#n 8.KQ983.KQT5.KT7 e AT5.65.A743.A632 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ97632.T72.J9.9
#n K.KT963.QJT.AKT3 e Q87.Q72.K97543.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT96532.85.A.972
#n 32.QT87.AKQT3.A6 e AK6.K6532.974.T2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT9875.9.J5.K973
#n K5.9632.AQT5.AK3 e Q87.KT875.J943.2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9632.Q.K7.T976
#n 7.K86.AKT753.AT7 e KQ9.QT932.Q4.K63 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT86532.75.J9.92
#n Q.KQ97.AKJ5.K972 e K876.8652.T4.AT6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9532.T3.Q973.3
#n 3.K95.AK5.AT9732 e AQ2.T7632.QJT9.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT98765.Q8.743.K
#n 2.Q9875.KJ95.AK3 e KT86.KT63.Q7.976 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ9753.2.AT43.T2
#n .KT52.AKT743.K73 e Q753.Q863.Q5.A62 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT9862.97.J9.T9
#n 5.KQ965.AK73.AT9 e QT86.T873.T4.K73 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK9732.2.QJ95.62
#n 5.KQ32.AKT3.KT93 e A876.T865.Q4.762 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT932.97.J975.A
#n 8.KQ987.A97.A763 e KT3.T532.KQ543.2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ97652.6.JT.KT9
#n .9853.AQJT.AT932 e AK865.KQT2.74.K7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT9732.76.K953.6
#n 9.KQT62.KQ7.AT62 e Q732.8753.AT3.K9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT865.9.J954.73
#n 8.KT52.KQJ97.A97 e K65.Q9863.43.K63 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT9732.7.AT5.T2
#n 6.Q76.AKQ975.KT9 e Q98.K832.T3.A763 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT7532.T95.J4.2
#n .K8532.AT74.A932 e KQ973.T976.KQ93. s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT8652.Q.J5.KT76
#n 8.KQT87.AK93.AT9 e K972.932.QT.K763 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT653.65.J754.2
#n A.QT98.AQ73.A972 e Q92.7632.KJ95.K6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT87653.K5.T4.T3
#n 7.KQT6.KJ4.A7632 e AT52.98752.AQ9.K s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9863.3.T753.T9
#n .8763.AKT54.A972 e QT52.KQ52.QJ93.6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK98763.T9.7.KT3
#n A.Q7653.AQJ.T972 e T765.T2.K94.AK63 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9832.K98.T753.
#n A.KQ73.AT53.K932 e T932.T965.J9.AT6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ8765.82.KQ74.7
#n .QT86.AQJT4.KT92 e AQ83.7532.K75.A6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT97652.K9.93.73
#n A.T98.KQT94.AK63 e 9876.KQ7632.7.T7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT532.5.AJ53.92
#n .K962.AKJ753.973 e AQ62.T875.Q9.KT2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT98753.Q3.T4.A6
#Generated 337045 hands
#Produced 100 hands
#Initial random seed 1420118753
#Time needed    0.111 sec

#Simulation results
#
#Frequency Tricks in 4♠:
#    6	       2
#    7	     166
#    8	    1777
#    9	    3846
#   10	    2881
#   11	     984
#   12	     296
#   13	      48
#Frequency Tricks in 5♣:
#    6	       5
#    7	      57
#    8	     344
#    9	    1507
#   10	    3636
#   11	    3229
#   12	    1090
#   13	     132
#Frequency Tricks in both:
#          6      7      8      9     10     11     12     13    Sum
#   6      0      0      0      0      0      1      1      0      2
#   7      0      0      0      8     26     76     37     19    166
#   8      0      0     23    104    509    740    338     63   1777
#   9      0      6     73    370   1529   1390    442     36   3846
#  10      0     24    132    641   1152    712    206     14   2881
#  11      2     17     97    295    310    212     51      0    984
#  12      3      8     18     75     92     87     13      0    296
#  13      0      2      1     14     18     11      2      0     48
#Sum       5     57    344   1507   3636   3229   1090    132  10000
#
#ave TT: 19.7233
#Frequency TT:
#   16	      37
#   17	     230
#   18	    1108
#   19	    3052
#   20	    3214
#   21	    1603
#   22	     560
#   23	     170
#   24	      24
#   25	       2
#IMP 5♣ vs 4♠: 6.7021
#IMP 4♠x vs 4♠: -0.0282
#IMP 5♣x vs 4♠x: 5.2174
#IMP 5♣  vs 4♠x: 5.3393
#IMP 5♣ dbl if not make vs 4♠x: 4.1013
#IMP 5♣ dbl if not make vs 4♠: 4.7946
#IMP 5♣x vs 4♠: 5.3853
#IMP 5♣ vs 5♣x: 0.2907
#Frequency IMP undoubled both:
#  -11	      37
#   -9	     203
#   -7	     879
#   -5	    1529
#    4	       2
#    5	       4
#    6	      42
#    7	      86
#    8	     285
#    9	     759
#   10	    1412
#   11	    3436
#   12	      18
#   16	    1308
#Frequency IMP 4♠x vs 4♠:
#  -12	      48
#  -11	     296
#   -8	     984
#   -5	    2881
#    3	    3846
#    7	    1777
#   11	     166
#   12	       2
#Frequency IMP 5♣x vs 4♠x:
#  -16	      37
#  -14	     203
#  -12	     879
#   -9	    1531
#   -8	       1
#   -7	      24
#   -5	       3
#   -4	       1
#   -3	      17
#   -2	      76
#    0	     132
#    3	       8
#    4	      37
#    5	      97
#    6	     740
#    7	     643
#    8	      19
#    9	      18
#   10	     633
#   11	    2543
#   12	     138
#   13	     766
#   14	     128
#   15	      18
#   17	    1130
#   18	     152
#   19	      24
#   20	       2
#Frequency IMP 5♣ vs 4♠x:
#  -14	      34
#  -13	      23
#  -12	     619
#  -11	      74
#  -10	       1
#   -9	     370
#   -7	    1529
#   -5	     113
#   -4	      19
#    3	    1078
#    4	      63
#    9	    1414
#   10	     612
#   11	     658
#   12	    1252
#   13	     631
#   14	     170
#   15	      14
#   16	     950
#   17	     263
#   18	     111
#   19	       2
#Frequency IMP 5♣x vs 4♠:
#  -16	       6
#  -14	      96
#  -13	      10
#  -12	     477
#  -11	      26
#  -10	      49
#   -9	     511
#   -7	    1529
#   -5	     132
#   -4	      97
#   -3	      19
#    3	     641
#    4	     295
#    5	      89
#    8	       1
#   10	    1630
#   11	     759
#   12	    1427
#   13	     799
#   14	      99
#   16	    1022
#   17	     272
#   18	      14
#Frequency IMP 5♣ vs 5♣x:
#  -11	     132
#   -8	    1090
#   -4	    3229
#    3	    3636
#    7	    1507
#   11	     344
#   12	      57
#   14	       5
#Frequency north hcp:
#   11	     412
#   12	     444
#   13	    2726
#   14	    2118
#   15	    1986
#   16	    1702
#   17	     460
#   18	     152
#Frequency north clubs:
#    2	     721
#    3	    3008
#    4	    4108
#    5	    1714
#    6	     449
#Frequency north diamonds:
#    2	      94
#    3	    1842
#    4	    4328
#    5	    2230
#    6	    1506
#Frequency north hearts:
#    3	    2684
#    4	    4862
#    5	    2454
#Frequency north spades:
#         11     12     13     14     15     16     17     18    Sum
#   0    412    444    397    366    308      0      0      0   1927
#   1      0      0   2329   1752   1615   1277    197    121   7291
#   2      0      0      0      0     63    424    263     31    781
#   3      0      0      0      0      0      1      0      0      1
#Sum     412    444   2726   2118   1986   1702    460    152  10000
#
#Generated 35719893 hands
#Produced 10000 hands
#Initial random seed 1420118753
#Time needed 1469.499 sec

 

[diana_eva]

Thanks all BTW, very good stuff, lots of things I've been missing when thinking about this situation.

[PhilKing]

I felt like I at least have to double. But biding over passing is also clear winner based on my quick simulation. Too bad scoring function doesn't support doubled contracts yet so I only simulated undoubled both. But undoubled both 5♣ and 4♠ makes biding winning choice by 5.3 IMPs on average.

 

Doubled contracts would require some C coding and more complex rules when 5♣ will be doubled. I won't be doing that at least today but if there is enough interest I might do the doubled simulation some other day.

 

Rules for preempt and T/O double were my quick toughs how to limit the hand types but if you see flaws on those rules I can repeat the simulation with improved hand limits.

 

#Simulation for biding starting from west (3♠)dbl-(4♠)?

predeal south SJ4,HAJ4,D862,CQJ854

westpre = shape(west, 7xxx + 64xx + 6x4x + 6xx4) && hcp(west) < 11 && hcp(west) > 4 && top5(west,spades) > 1

eastraise = (spades(east) > 2 && hcp(east) > 4) ||
	(spades(east) > 1 && hcp(east) > 10)

northto = ((shape(north, any 4432 - 4xxx - 3xxx) && hcp(north) > 14) ||
	(shape(north, 1444 + any 5440 + any 5431 - 5xxx - 4xxx - 3xxx) && hcp(north) > 11) ||
	(shape(north, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5431 - 4xxx - 5xxx - x1xx) && hcp(north) > 16) && top3(north, spades) == 0)

condition westpre && eastraise && northto

generate 1000000000
produce 500

st = tricks(west, spades)
ct = trick(south, clubs)

action
#	printoneline,
frequency "Tricks in 4♠" (st, 0,13),
frequency "Tricks in 5♣" (st, 0,13),
average "ave TT" st+ct,
frequency "TT" (st+ct, 0,26),
average "IMP average for biding 5♣ when undoubled both" imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),
frequency "IMP undoubled both" (imps(score(vul, x5C, ct) + score(vul, x4S, st)),-24,24),

#Example deals for the biding
#
#n A.Q9653.AT53.AT3 e 732.K8.KQJ9.K976 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT9865.T72.74.2
#n 6.KQT.JT93.AK762 e K32.9632.KQ75.T9 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT9875.875.A4.3
#n K.QT9.KJT3.AKT97 e T32.8753.AQ975.3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ98765.K62.4.62
#n 8.KQ963.974.AK76 e A53.T8752.KQJT3. s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT9762..A5.T932
#n A.T62.K753.AKT73 e T653.Q83.AQ94.96 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ9872.K975.JT.2
#n Q.KQT3.AT753.KT6 e T732.86.KJ4.A732 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AK9865.9752.Q9.9
#n 8.QT985.AKT4.K62 e Q73.K7.QJ7.AT973 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT9652.632.953.
#n A7.KQ5.K974.AT32 e 865.982.AQT3.K97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT932.T763.J5.6
#n K3.KQ96.KJ4.AK73 e 965.T7.AQT975.96 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQT872.8532.3.T2
#n A.Q932.AJ9.A9732 e Q86.K76.T7543.K6 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KT97532.T85.KQ.T
#n A.KT65.QT3.AT976 e T972.72.AKJ54.32 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ8653.Q983.97.K
#n K.Q875.AJT7.K632 e A932.KT63.Q3.A97 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w QT8765.92.K954.T
#n 7.KQT8.KQ3.AKT63 e Q865.76.AJT95.92 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT932.9532.74.7
#n T.Q63.AKQ94.AKT9 e A65.T98752.JT3.7 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQ98732.K.75.632
#n K2.QT52.KQT5.AK3 e Q85.K98763.73.T2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT9763..AJ94.976
#n 8.KT97.AT7.AKT72 e Q763.Q6.KQJ93.93 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AKT952.8532.54.6
#n K.KT82.KQT9.KT73 e T972.95.AJ53.A92 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ8653.Q763.74.6
#n K.K965.AKT7.KT73 e Q952.QT872.93.A2 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AT8763.3.QJ54.96
#n A.863.AJ97.AK762 e 9832.K92.KQ543.3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w KQT765.QT75.T.T9
#n T.9653.AK94.AK62 e K52.KQ872.753.T3 s J4.AJ4.862.QJ854 w AQ98763.T.QJT.97
#Generated 16642 hands
#Produced 20 hands
#Initial random seed 1420027278
#Time needed    0.013 sec

# Simulation for imps undoubled and trick frequencies for 4♠ and 5♣
#
#Frequency Tricks in 4♠:
#    7	      21
#    8	      95
#    9	     166
#   10	     135
#   11	      60
#   12	      21
#   13	       2
#Frequency Tricks in 5♣:
#    7	      21
#    8	      95
#    9	     166
#   10	     135
#   11	      60
#   12	      21
#   13	       2
#ave TT: 19.436
#Frequency TT:
#   17	      21
#   18	      90
#   19	     162
#   20	     142
#   21	      57
#   22	      19
#   23	       8
#   24	       1
#IMP average for biding 5♣ when undoubled both: 5.342
#Frequency IMP undoubled both:
#   -9	      21
#   -7	      72
#   -5	      64
#    6	       1
#    7	       8
#    8	      36
#    9	      40
#   10	      80
#   11	     134
#   12	       1
#   16	      43
#Generated 536757 hands
#Produced 500 hands
#Initial random seed 1420027360
#Time needed  120.493 sec

 

You need to treat the hands where partner would double again somewhat differently. On a couple of them, a direct bid of 5♣ would get raised to six in my world.

 

If you just had hands where partner would not double again the sim would at least have some validity. As it stands I think it is somewhat meaningless.

 

Also, looking through the example hands, I was surprised there were no 0(5)44 shapes. Also there were no 2452s, and partner seemed to have 5 clubs extraordinarily often.