[redbird97]

If you are fixed, stay fixed. I bid 4S.

[hrothgar]

foo, on Jun 12 2007, 11:19 PM, said:

Bridge is indeed a 4 handed game.

If Overcaller has that when Advancer has xxxx.A.AKxxxx.xx,  what do you suppose Opener opened the bidding on?

The better you make Overcaller's hand w/o giving him ♣ values, the more likely Opener has them...

I think most folks here would open the East hand.
There are other variants consistent with split Club honors.

---

Quote

trick1: ♣A, trick2: ♣K, "OK, what else can we do?"

His Bridge is definitely less than his norm for the next board or 3, and for some reason he's not available henceforth... In fact, all your teammates from this match are much harder to get play dates with from this event on for some reason...

Funny... Last I recall you where the one who had to hire Metcalf and Pitch to find a partner.

[jdonn]

Foo is right in this case. Say you overcall 1♠ on some hand that is minimal for whatever your standards are. Before you get to offer any other input into the entire auction, partner has put you in 6♠ and they cash an AK on you, and he had an 11 count with four small trumps. Do you think you will be a happy partner? Nothing is more frustrating than being removed from the game by the one person who should care what you have to say.

BTW, what in blazes do you think west will lead in your example!

[hrothgar]

jdonn, on Jun 12 2007, 11:45 PM, said:

Foo is right in this case. Say you overcall 1♠ on some hand that is minimal for whatever your standards are. Before you get to offer any other input into the entire auction, partner has put you in 6♠ and they cash an AK on you, and he had an 11 count with four small trumps. Do you think you will be a happy partner? Nothing is more frustrating than being removed from the game by the one person who should care what you have to say.

BTW, what in blazes do you think west will lead in your example!

You're quite right. I went over board and gave West the KQ of Clubs rather than the stiff Queen.

However, please note my earlier comments.

1. I stated that that I would bid 4♠

2. I said that IF someone put a gun to my head and forced me to bid higher than 4♠, that I would (probably) bid 6♠

[foo]

Since Ken started the topic, I'll assume the board posted by hrothgar is not the actual board under discussion? (..and if it is a ♣ honor lead seems clear for 6♠X-1)

Even if it is, Bridge is a game of probabilities, not certainties. Even if you do the statistically correct thing, you may not get a good result in any given specific instance.
As the song goes: "Sometimes you're the windshield. Sometimes you're the bug."

Using any specific board as grounds for a overall argument is Resulting.
The goal, I hope, of these discussions is to find the action that rates to be best most of the time. Not the best DD action.


...and the I assume intended to be personal comment is clearly off-topic and simply confusing enough to be dismissed...

[kenrexford]

I suppose that the key to this hand is the reliability of 1♠ as a "sound opening." If by "sound opening," you mean, as I mean, something that really approaches opening strength, then partner's hand will likely feature something of value in clubs.

In actual practice, partner held AKJxx-xx-Jx-QJxx, which certainly qualifies for me. This is not a good holding for slam, obviously, but the club could have been the Ace or King.

That gave Opener something like Qxx-KQJxx-Qx-Axx, certainly enough, and Responder x-xxxxx-xxx-Kxxx, which is fair white on red.

Not all that strange. Changing Opener to Qxx-KQJxx-Qx-QJx works. Changing Responder to x-xxxxx-xxx-QJxx also is plausible.

When partner does have something approaching an opening hand, Advancer has some liberty at the five-level. Without that, he lacks such liberty.

So, I suppose my ultimate point with this hand is that I continue to be more and more convinced that sound overcalls help at IMPs, especially when direct and red-v-white.

[P_Marlowe]

kenrexford, on Jun 12 2007, 10:56 AM, said:

Where are the Gambler's out there???

Does not partner have a fair shot with something as mundane as ♠AQJxx ♥xxx ♦xx ♣xxx?  I mean, is it all that clear that a club lead will hit the table?

I thought for sure that someone might take a stab at this under the "right" circumstances, like:

Down in the match, or
About 58% game estimated in a major pairs event, or
Playing a money game and baby needs new shoes, or
You grew balls this morning.

Something.  But NOOOO takers!?!?!

LOL

Bergen: "Desparate situations call for desparate measures,
but dont be suprised if the desparate measure did not work."

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If Baby needs new shoes, I think taking the sure money
and hoping for the next baord is best. If you play KO match
with only few boards to go, we may start talking, but even
than, how certain you are, that you are far behind.

[foo]

So at one point I asked what 5♦ and 5♥ would mean here. There was a reason.

Defining 5♥ here as "How good are your trumps? Please bid 6♠ with good trumps and 5♠ with mediocre or poor trumps."
Can be quite useful.

Defining 5m here as "I have ♠ support and a nice source of tricks in this suit."
Can also be quite useful.
(Robson and Segal would call this a Fit Non Jump).

Now there's a way to bid past 4♠ in a way that involves pd and at least has a chance of being sane.


With these agreements in place and holding the example hand of ♠xxxx♥A♦AKTxxx♣xx,
in this auction.
I'd bid 5♥

[Foxx]

4♠. The opponents are trying to make us think they're stealing us blind. No reason to fall for their ruse.

If we really and seriously needed a swing, then 6♠.

[mhais]

i will bid 4s opp have atleast 12 pts slm is difficult if the day is with me bid 6

[FrancesHinden]

foo, on Jun 13 2007, 04:45 AM, said:

Defining 5m here as "I have ♠ support and a nice source of tricks in this suit."
Can also be quite useful.
(Robson and Segal would call this a Fit Non Jump).

Defining 5m here as "I would like to play in 5m" also has merit.

[Codo]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 13 2007, 06:43 PM, said:

foo, on Jun 13 2007, 04:45 AM, said:

Defining 5m here as "I have ♠ support and a nice source of tricks in this suit."
Can also be quite useful.
(Robson and Segal would call this a Fit Non Jump).

Defining 5m here as "I would like to play in 5m" also has merit.

Huu?
You really suggest that a suit bid at the 5 level shows this suit? What a revolution...
I must think about this concept. You may even use it in different situations too...

[foo]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 13 2007, 04:43 AM, said:

foo, on Jun 13 2007, 04:45 AM, said:

Defining 5m here as "I have ♠ support and a nice source of tricks in this suit."
Can also be quite useful.
(Robson and Segal would call this a Fit Non Jump).

Defining 5m here as "I would like to play in 5m" also has merit.

We are very high and the air has become thin. pd's 1♠ bid did not promise the ability to support any other strain besides ♠'s. In fact, it implied the opposite.

Under such circumstances, bidding a new suit at the 5level w/o having support for pd seems a bit dicey. How often are you going to be dealt a suit good enough for this?

Let's see. We are essentially contracting for 11 tricks all by ourselves in this suit.
Suits that are self sufficient enough might look like AKQJTx, Hhhhxxx, Hhhxxxx, or Hhxxxxxxx where "H" is the A or K and "h" is any honor.

Given the likely suit quality requirements of the above, it just might be that on a frequency and utility basis that having support for partner as one of the requirements for bidding a new strain here will reduce the suit quality requirements by enough that the Fit Non Jump will be the more useful method over the long term.
YMMV.

[Fluffy]

foo, on Jun 13 2007, 10:19 AM, said:

Under such circumstances, bidding a new suit at the 5level w/o having support for pd seems a bit dicey. How often are you going to be dealt a suit good enough for this?

It is not only how often, is what alternatves you have when you are dealt that. You can just bid 4♠, 4NT, 5♥, 5♠, 5NT, and some more with support.

You can only bid your suit at the 5 levle when you have it. If you get rid of it then what?, 6 of the suit?.

To take a convention you need that

%Convention*Benefit - %Natural*Loss >0.

Actually you need that the total is more than 0, cos it has no point on taking a convention you have to remember when the expected winning is 0.003 IMPs/Hand, but how much depends on the partnership.

[pclayton]

4S is patently obvious. I like 6S if I was desperate for a swing.

The real problem is when it continues 5H - check - check.

[skjaeran]

pclayton, on Jun 13 2007, 05:56 PM, said:

4S is patently obvious. I like 6S if I was desperate for a swing.

The real problem is when it continues 5H - check - check.

Agree. And I'd have to be very desperate too.

[foo]

I still think 5♥, asking for trump quality, is very likely a winning bid if it is part of System.

Pd's 1♠ Overcall Unfavorable playing IMPS should be relatively good.