How to battle chicken instinct

[Oceanss]

I was told to slow down while playing to avoid stupid mistakes I make while in hastle. But when I do slow down, I have time to think of ALL bad things that can happen & chicken out.

So here is the hand, it was IMPs challenge (TY BBO, great feature♥), but lets assume it was a team match in IMPs. We are red, opps are white. N opens weak 2H, opps were silent.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa2ha9873daqj4ck4&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=2h(weak)p2n(feature%3F)p3s(A%20or%20K%20spade)p4n(rkc)p5d(1%2F4)p]133|200[/hv]

 

I assumed for a fact we'll get a lead from a minor going thru me if we play 6H. Yuck – A♣ is "surely" after me. But even if the lead is a dime, we would have to go up with Ace because of inevitable loss of a club. So option was 6N to get lead to my hand , but then should I bid slam based on 50% that K♦ is sitting right, with prayer A!c does too??

So, I chickened out and closed it at 5♥; unfortenatelly both cards were onside, cold slam.

Anyone has advice how to win over negative thoughts in making these kind of decisions? Thanks : )

[Tramticket]

You are chickening out because you haven't involved your partner. why not just cue-bid in clubs rather than leaping to Blackwood. Maybe partner can help your decision making?

[Oceanss]

By bidding 3♠, pard deniend A or K in any minor, since he isn't supposed to have more than one outside A or K (or so I think). What is to be achieved with cue bidding, except if I cuebid clubs opps would likely lead ♦?

And I bid 4N because he perhaps opened with KQx QJTxxx xxx Jx in which case slam is out of question.

[Tramticket]

You have a slim chance of slam. I don't think you can make that judgement without involving partner.

 

On the example hand quoted, even 5H may be too high.

[ozjacoby49]

Your 2NT bid and the 3S response told you all you need to know............all you need to know to give up on any slam possibility. You know you are off the King of diamonds and the Ace of clubs so NO need to carry on.

[SteveMoe]

How good are your vulnerable weak 2 bids? How good must the suit be? Can partner open 2♥ with ♠Kxx ♥QJ9xxx ♦x ♣QJx? or do you require 2 of the top 3 honors (or perhaps 3 of the top 5) in the suit when vulnerable? Do you routinely open 5-7 HCP weak twos when vulnerable?

 

The worst hand for opener might be something like this: ♠Kx ♥KQxxxx ♦xx ♣xxx . For this to produce slam you need both the ♣A and the ♦K on side (24%). Swap the ♥Q for the ♣Q and now you only need the ♦K onside. If partner is more likely to hold ♥KQ, well, you get the picture.

 

Marshall Miles famously said we should bid any small slam that is at worst on one finesse. Here the likelihood is we need something more than just one finesse (a 1-1 trump split if missing the K, Partner holding the ♣Q(J), or a stiff♦ witht he ♣A onside, etc.). Once you visualize that, there's no justification for bidding the slam. The fact that slam makes is irrelevant. Your job is to make the best odds bid. You did when you avoided 6 on this hand.

 

Enjoy bidding that avoids odds-off slams.

[rmnka447]

I agree with SteveMoe.

 

Bidding is part science, part art. It's not perfect. So the best you can do is to bid to contracts that have a good chance of making. That means that just because a hand makes 12 tricks, it doesn't necessarily mean it ought to have been bid to slam. It also means that sometimes when you're right to bid to slam, you may not make 12 tricks.

 

Hands that require 2 cards onside are somewhere about a 25% chance to make. That isn't very good, so bidding the slam is clearly wrong.

 

Assuming your partner and you show an A or K as a feature, then slam is unlikely after partner rebids 3 ♠ and you should just bid 4 ♥.

[helene_t]

Whether one ace is sufficient may be open to questions, but if it isn't then you shouldn't ask for aces since partner is unlikely to have two keycards in addition to the king of spades. BTW situations in which you need all five keycards for small slam are very rare. Generally, if you don't think four keycards are enough you probably shouldn't have tried for slam at all, or you should have found a way to ilicit more information prior to keycard asking.

 

You could indeed start with a 4♣ cuebid. If partner has a singleton diamond and 4♣ doesn't get doubled (suggesting that the ace is not behind you), and p has a keycard, then you want to be in slam. There is a small chance that slam could make even if 4♣ gets doubled (p could have the queen, or someone might double without the ace, or partner may have the jack and opening leader the queen) but that is obviously a bad gamble.

 

If you bid slam this way it will be good more often than not, but you could still have a club loser since LHO might not always double when he has the ace.

 

So you have the choice between cuebidding or just signing off in 4♥. I would not be too worried about going down in 5♥ - if p has zero keycards (unlikely) and ♣A is offside despite the lack of double, there is a reasonable chance he has ♣Q (otherwise he would have opened 2♥ on very little), and otherwise ♥K just has to drop. But signing off could sometimes earn an overtrick when opps don't find the club lead. So I would cuebid at IMPs but sign off at matchpoints.

 

6NT is not a great idea imo. If opps don't lead a club then you need four diamond tricks so even if the finesse works you need enough diamonds in dummy to repeat the finesse (and not losing a trick to ♦10).

 

BTW it is important that partner understands that 4♣ is a cuebid. The reason it is a cuebid is that 2NT already established hearts as the trump suit. If you were interested in a clubs contract you would have responded 3♣. It is also important that partner understands that he must show a singleton diamonds if he has it. You may not apply that cuebidding style in all situations, but here partner opened a weak two (and even, presumably, denied a diamond feature), so a singleton or void is what he can have, and asking for a void would be too specific.

[Cyberyeti]

Slam can be cold (Kxx, KJxxxx, x, Qxx) but more likely is on 2 finesses, the Q♣ is the key card in making it with the odds. Of course if you don't get a club lead, it may simply be on the diamond finesse as if partner has 3 spades and 2-2 minors, 2 diamond finesses will get you home, or he may have a stiff club and 3 diamonds or xx/Qx in the minors.

 

Overall I think it's likely to need more than a finesse so I'm happy not being in it.

[PhilG007]

Oceanss remember this adage when you're in a similar situation in future:-

FORTUNE IS ALLIED TO THE BRAVE Even if you bid the slam and it fails,rest

assured you will be in good company on the score sheet! And there is always a chance the defence will

slip up in the play :D

[masse24]

Oceanss remember this adage when you're in a similar situation in future:-

FORTUNE IS ALLIED TO THE BRAVE Even if you bid the slam and it fails,rest

assured you will be in good company on the score sheet! And there is always a chance the defence will

slip up in the play :D

Brilliant!

 

I'm convinced.

[PhilG007]

Another useful tip to remember is whenever you get into an inferior contract,

play as fast as you can when you are declarer and try to pressure the defenders

into making errors. It's neither illegal nor unethical and can often reap rich rewards ;)

[manudude03]

Another useful tip to remember is whenever you get into an inferior contract,

play as fast as you can when you are declarer and try to pressure the defenders

into making errors. It's neither illegal nor unethical and can often reap rich rewards ;)

 

Somewhat controversial.

 

A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by means of remark

or gesture, by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating

before playing a singleton), the manner in which a call or play is made

or by any purposeful deviation from correct procedure.

[helene_t]

Somewhat controversial.

But the law is about deceit. What PhilG describes is different. You could maybe call it intimidation.

[Zelandakh]

But the law is about deceit. What PhilG describes is different. You could maybe call it intimidation.

There is also 73D1:

It is desirable, though not always required, for players to maintain steady tempo and unvarying manner. However, players should be particularly careful when variations may work to the benefit of their side. Otherwise, unintentionally to vary the tempo or manner in which a call or play is made is not in itself an infraction. Inferences from such variation may appropriately be drawn only by an opponent, and at his own risk.

 

74A3:

Every player should follow uniform and correct procedure in calling and playing.

 

and 74C:

The following are examples of violations of procedure:

7. varying the normal tempo of bidding or play for the purpose of disconcerting an opponent.

 

 

The practise has been brought up on BBF before as an example of questionable ethics.

[Phil]

Tempted to change my name :(

[Fluffy]

Tempted to change my name :(

 

Its not like pbleighton is going to come back all of a sudden :)