I find this one tougher in standard

[Antoine Fourrière]

Regarding Deal 4 of the Match, which deserves at least one thread.

 

As hrothgar writes, "Players of relay systems and artificial methods always use hands like this one to show the advantage of a scientific approach."

Or of a partial relay system.

 

AK84 QJ

J4 72

AQ93 J62

J63 AK7542,

 

If you use some Scanian-type convention where opener is supposed to show a worthless doubleton, you give too much information to the defense.

 

A 16-18 NT does the job because that hand wouldn't open 1N, but so does any two-point notrump range, since now there is no need for invitational sequences based on strength.

 

A Puppet structure then enables responder to show his pattern - or at least a 6322 with clubs - and opener to stay off 3N.

 

For instance

1N 2C (puppet)

2D? 2H some shortness

2S balanced puppet with no slam interest

2N balanced slam relay asking for pattern and for controls

3C 5422 with 5c

3D 6322 with a six-card minor

3H,3S,3N 5422 with 5d

 

The above structure works better with a common major doubleton if responder hasn't a six-card minor

 

1N 2C

2D? 2S (yes, responder has to play spades)

2N? 3C 4h (3D? 3H 4s, 3S 3s, 3N 2s)

3D 4s (3H? 3S 3h, 3N 2h)

3H 3h 2s

3S 3s 2h

3N 3s 3h and 5-2 in the minors, since you would have answered 3NT with 4333

 

(This also permits to play a 5-3 fit without disclosing opener's five-card major.)

 

Back to Deal 4.

 

1N 2C

2D? 3D

3H? 3S (clubs)

4C (NF) 5C

 

Not a great auction, but opener retreats from notrump since either opponents have nine hearts or he can ruff a heart.

 

A full relay system could show a 2=2=3=6, or, as in the match, that opponents have hearts, but there are probably better candidates than those 6322s for your codified auctions when you have to untangle the invitational hands over 1N.

 

Yes, you give opportunities for lead-directing doubles, but are they more profitable to the defense than to declarer? I don't know.

[inquiry]

In the match, I had the following auction available to me...

 

1N 2S 2S=long clubs

3C 3H 3C = not super accept, 3H = short hearts

?

 

On this auction, clearly we would have stayed out of 3NT. However, this 3H bid showing shortness (weakness) can be played as singleton or void, or as I had here, two small or less. I like the two small or less, but sadly, all the agreement I had with Fred was "BBO Advanced" as written, which simply says "shortness" without defining it. So I was worried he would take it as singleton and we might get to hopeless slam. I think it is best played, initially as an attempt for 3NT, showing weakness (xx or less).

 

Ben

[luis]

Many times with this kind of hand you'd better bid 3NT and hope for the best , if you show your heart weakness you can end up in a hopeless minor suit game. Sometimes the opps cards are reversed and while a player can lead a heart from K98 he may not.

This hand looked like a construction for relay playes where a typical 1n-3n fails and the opening leader has the long hearts to lead the suit.

Maybe the BBO computer is a scientist she delat this hand just to give us a swing :-)

[inquiry]

Lol... your side's 5Diamond should be down two also... and even without a heart lead, down one is all but assured due to the 5-1 split. Both naturalist dropped one trick on defense. Of course it WAS easier to stay out of Notrump at the other table where EW did a lot bidding, getting to 2H before bowing out of the auction. So 3NT was never going to be bid at that table.......something not generally mentioned in all the elegant bidding this hand as produced in discussion. With MIKE giving a "free heart" raise, the lack of a heart lead is even harder to understand against 5D. In fact, 5Dx, down two seems like what should have happened. The 12 or 13 imps won on this one for the scientist was justified only as far as the poor play by their opponents. My partner overcalls vul and I am looking at five trumps to the king, I am going to double 5Ds. Play it with a natural heart lead. (even without a heart, it is down one with average defense).

 

I really don't think this hand should continually be held out as a bidding success for Moscito, and the myth that "5D is cold" started by Luis as posted by hgorthar really should be put to rest. What makes is 5Clubs (how did that go by the wayside) or an imaginative 4S (love those 4-2 fits).

 

Ben

[luis]

Yes yes, Marston and Sartaj got to 5d only because they had an acident with an alert. They might have played 5c.

The real advatnage of the relay system appears if you compare 3nt to 5c, 5d was just what happened at the table.

[hrothgar]

Two comments:

 

First: I never held this board out as an example of superior bidding.

Paul and Sartaj missed an alert and were on completely the wrong wavelength through the auction. Without the mis-understanding I suspect that they would land in 5C, however, I'm not sure.

 

Second: I do think that the hand is worth looking at because of some very nice declarer play. Yes, a Heart lead would immediately set the contract.

Yes, there were a couple minor defensive glitches.

 

However, it was still pretty declarer play

[inquiry]

But, the overcall in hearts changes everything. If you guys overcalled hearts we surely would have stayed out of 3NT as well...so staying out was no great feat. The real question, of course, is what would a 2S bid followed by 3H bid by me mean... two small or less or one small or less. With the first meaning, that is probalby not a horrible bid. But, as you pointed out, why bookmark the defense.

 

Ben

[luis]

Richard,

 

I think Paul played at least 3 or 4 hands very nicely but in this one is there any other line of play for a good player ? :-)

The hand looked as a construction for moscito since you can reach 5c when natural bidders would have a problem to stay out of 3nt, on other hands moscito bidders may went one off in 5m when natural bidders steal a 3nt contract on the lead. You never know.

Inquiry's points are fair, 5d is as bad as 3nt but that was an accident due to a problem with an alert, an upside-down world, the scientists misunderstood and alert by the naturalists :-))

I don't think the play of this rather ugly contract is important.

I still think the hand looks like a construction :-).

[inquiry]

 

Two comments:

 

First: I never held this board out as an example of superior bidding.

Paul and Sartaj missed an alert and were on completely the wrong wavelength through the auction. Without the mis-understanding I suspect that they would land in 5C, however, I'm not sure.

 

Second: I do think that the hand is worth looking at because of some very nice declarer play. Yes, a Heart lead would immediately set the contract.

Yes, there were a couple minor defensive glitches.

 

However, it was still pretty declarer play

 

The great play? He won the club, cashed two spades, won the diamond hook and saw the ominous diamond ten play under the QUEEN. Cashed two spades, throwing away two heart losers. Nothing brilliant here, unless I miss something (mike ruffing the fourth spade).

 

At this point, the hand is virtual double dummy. Why we returned a low diamond, allowing out trumps to be picked up and clubs to run is too odd for words. At this point the hand is double dummy. The diamond KING seems clear, but even lacking that, just force dummy to ruff a heart assures down one.

 

ben