Seems obvious but is it

[thepossum]

This hand proved extremely expensive in a meaningless bot session

 

I spent ages thinking about my bid and ended up passing, not doubling or bidding 5D

 

Can any smart people explain where I went wrong

 

I think I was dazzled by the lack of randomness of the hand (even more so when you look at the scores)

 

It looks so obvious and in a sense was but ....

 

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=stha8dakqj97ckjt6&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=2sp4s]133|200[/hv]

[pilowsky]

If it's a meaningless bot session I might bid the unusual 4NT and probably end up in a 4/3 Club fit.

[AL78]

I'd probably bid 5♦. It is not in the realms of fantasy that partner could be covering two of your four losers given they likely hold no spade wastage, and passing feels like a way to gift wrap the board to the opponents with a bouquet of flowers. There is risk in bidding, but passing is risky as well.

[thepossum]

I'd probably bid 5♦. It is not in the realms of fantasy that partner could be covering two of your four losers given they likely hold no spade wastage, and passing feels like a way to gift wrap the board to the opponents with a bouquet of flowers. There is risk in bidding, but passing is risky as well.

 

Who knows how my brain was(or was not) functioning at the time. Its a curious hand since you can get 4S doubled down one but its hard to defeat 5 or 6 diamonds seemingly.

 

Somehow I rationalised a pass. Didn't want to risk a double and wasn't entirely confident of 5D

[LBengtsson]

I prefer 5♦ to 4NT as solid top four honour suit and 6-4m shape. 4♠ bid sound either weak or the law as responder has not gone thru 2NT Ogust...

[thepossum]

If it's a meaningless bot session I might bid the unusual 4NT and probably end up in a 4/3 Club fit.

 

Clubs or diamonds are an excellent outcome. In fact clubs probably better which nobody found

I had forgotten about the unusual 4NT :)

[thepossum]

I would be grateful on any advice how to evaluate that though, including how to rule out options from partner's pass

 

I have run one of my equally meaningless sims and pass or double seem excellent bids

[sfi]

I've got a good hand with good shape and good diamonds, so it looks right to bid them. Even if partner has good support for clubs, say four clubs and one diamond, it still may be right to play in diamonds. Another thought is that good things might happen if I bid and they're not likely to if I pass, so I'll bid. 5D it is.

[mw64ahw]

With 9.5 playing tricks following two pre-empts I would hope partner has something to offer. Unusual 4NT or 5♦, would both work for me with the self-sustaining ♦ suit providing certainty.

[hrothgar]

I don't know how to interpret the phrase "lack of randomness"

 

I don't think that there is a clear cut answer here

 

Given the differences in suit quality, I think that I prefer 5♦ to 4NT

 

(If nothing else, it's going to be a lot more difficult for them to double you if the 4!S bidder has values)

[AL78]

I would be grateful on any advice how to evaluate that though, including how to rule out options from partner's pass

 

2♠ is weak, and 4♠ is almost certainly pre-emptively bidding to the level of the fit given your strength.

 

They are likely to have a 10 card fit and partner is unlikely to hold any wasted values in spades. This means wherever partner's values are (if any), they will be in hearts or clubs (you hold all the diamond honors), in other words complementing your honor cards. It is a 30 point pack situation.

 

Give opener 7-8 HCP, combined with your 18 count gives 25-26 HCP between you and opener. That leaves around 14-15 HCP between the other two hands. Give partner 6-8 of those in hearts and clubs. How many ways can you give partner a couple of club/heart honor cards and not have play for 5♦, bearing in mind you just need him to cover two of your four losers? The answer to this question will tell you that bidding 5♦ is a decent shot.

 

In in the unusual case of partner being completely broke, you might not be defeating 4♠ on a handful of possible layouts.

 

I don't like the idea of bidding 4NT. The disparity between the minors is too large, and if partner has more clubs than diamonds, you may still want to play in diamonds. There is one danger if partner has long clubs to the queen and short diamonds, if you are in 5♦ missing the club ace, the defence will go club to the ace, club ruff, cash spade winner, down one, when 5♣ makes, but that would be unlucky.

[Winstonm]

This is why opponents preempt. Take your best guess and move on,

 

I bid 5D. With 3-3 minors partner will bid 5C so let’s avoid that fiasco.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=stha8dakqj97ckjt6&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=2sp4s]133|200| The possum 'This hand proved extremely expensive in a meaningless bot session. I spent ages thinking about my bid and ended up passing, not doubling or bidding 5DCan any smart people explain where I went wrong. I think I was dazzled by the lack of randomness of the hand (even more so when you look at the scores) It looks so obvious and in a sense was but ....'

I rank ....

1, Double = T/O. 4 tricks might be easier than 11. Partner can show a good suit or 2 suits (4N)..

2. 5♦ = NAT.

3. Pass = NAT. Timid with 3.5 quick tricks and a good suit.

4. 4N = UNT. But you are likely to reach a 4-3 ♣ fit..[/hv]

[Gilithin]

Do people really play UNT here? I thought standard is for 4NT to be 2 places and for 4NT followed by 5♥ over 5♣ to be natural with slam interest. I don't think standard is actually best (it's better for example if the direct 5♥ is stronger than going via 4NT) but if you play 4NT as unusual, what are doing with ♥+minor 2-suiters? The cheapest bid surely has to be available for more than one single hand type here.

[smerriman]

Do people really play UNT here? I thought standard is for 4NT to be 2 places

This is really a moot point, as whatever terminology you use to describe 4NT, you're still asking partner to pick a minor.

[DavidKok]

Do people really play UNT here? I thought standard is for 4NT to be 2 places and for 4NT followed by 5♥ over 5♣ to be natural with slam interest. I don't think standard is actually best (it's better for example if the direct 5♥ is stronger than going via 4NT) but if you play 4NT as unusual, what are doing with ♥+minor 2-suiters? The cheapest bid surely has to be available for more than one single hand type here.

Some people would double with ♦+♥ and pull 5♣, but I agree your description is most common.

[Gilithin]

This is really a moot point

You might find that opponents and TDs do not necessarily agree with you on that.

[thepossum]

Here are the hands. As I said the obvious diamond bid didn't often go wrong and the attempt at bringing down 4S went wrong due to me missing an obvious lead (I think). Partner led to my diamonds. I cashed the Ace of hearts and for some reason led something back other than a Club :(

 

So it was expensive, but fortunately in a meaningless hand

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=stha8dakqj97ckjt6&w=saq9762h9d8532cq2&n=s4hq6532d64ca9543&e=skj853hkjt74dtc87&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=2s(weak%202)p4sppp]399|300[/hv]

[thepossum]

I don't know how to interpret the phrase "lack of randomness"

 

 

Sometimes it feels that many of the hands are carefully crafted/engineered :)

[pilowsky]

Sometimes it feels that many of the hands are carefully crafted/engineered :)

 

Only the ones where I fail to make the contract and others succeed - which is more than half the time.

So - not random in the sense that others are more skilful than me.

[AL78]

Here are the hands. As I said the obvious diamond bid didn't often go wrong and the attempt at bringing down 4S went wrong due to me missing an obvious lead (I think). Partner led to my diamonds. I cashed the Ace of hearts and for some reason led something back other than a Club :(

 

So it was expensive, but fortunately in a meaningless hand

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=stha8dakqj97ckjt6&w=saq9762h9d8532cq2&n=s4hq6532d64ca9543&e=skj853hkjt74dtc87&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=2s(weak%202)p4sppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Did partner play the ♥2 on your ace lead to signal for a club switch?

[akwoo]

Who knows how my brain was(or was not) functioning at the time. Its a curious hand since you can get 4S doubled down one but its hard to defeat 5 or 6 diamonds seemingly.

 

Somehow I rationalised a pass. Didn't want to risk a double and wasn't entirely confident of 5D

 

Somehow loss aversion kicks in. Doubling or bidding and getting a bad board because of it seems worse than passing and getting a bad board from it, but, of course in actuality, a bad board is a bad board.

 

A lot of players lose a lot of MPs or IMPs from loss aversion. Most club players never kick it (and keep getting 30% on boards for -110)

[nige1]

its hard to defeat 5 or 6 diamonds seemingly.

As soon as declarer picks up [CL}Q has 12 tricks.

[Gilithin]

Here's another question that seems to raise itself from this deal - if E-W were NV and East had responded 5♠ (instead of 4♠) what would be your thinking in the South seat?

[pescetom]

Some people would double with ♦+♥ and pull 5♣

 

Interesting, does it have a name (claim to space in my limited memory)?

FWIW the better dinosaurs in my club would consider 4NT as both minors, the others as Blackwood B-)