[jdonn]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 30 2008, 12:49 PM, said:

I dealt 50 hands and looked at them to see where I wanted to play single dummy (so not a double dummy result, just a what looks to be the right spot). This is assuming my options are 6C or 7C, so doesn't count hands where diamonds might play better.

That result was
23 hands want to play 6C
3 hands any club slam is virtually playless
24 hands want to play 7C, but on 3 of them partner might raise 6C to 7C (but might not... I decided AK of spades a heart void and 4 trumps was definitely sufficient to raise but the others were more guessy depending on how aggressive your 6C bid was)

I think that means 7C isn't as bad as I initially thought either, but it's still right to bid 6C.

Nice! lol

Ok I knew I was going out on a limb, not surprised to see it's about 50-50. I bet any improvement (like clubs AKQJTx) would really sway things toward overcalling 7♣.

[keylime]

Phil,

Agreed - these choices offered by my club pard sucked major you know what.

Here's the 2nd part of it. Let's say you choose double, and pard of course drop kicks 4S at you. Now what?

[luke warm]

well i have a question (and be gentle, it's been awhile)... what would 4♥ : 4♠ : 6♣ (assuming opps stay quiet) mean?

[CSGibson]

luke warm, on May 26 2008, 02:34 PM, said:

well i have a question (and be gentle, it's been awhile)... what would 4♥ : 4♠ : 6♣ (assuming opps stay quiet) mean?

It means that you shouldn't be surprised when partner "corrects" to 6 and maybe 7 spades.

[NickRW]

keylime, on Apr 30 2008, 06:18 PM, said:

Here's the 2nd part of it. Let's say you choose double, and pard of course drop kicks 4S at you. Now what?

Well, I'm pulling out the 7♣ card now on the grounds that I have to ask myself what is pard having a punt at 4♠ with?! There aren't many high cards you can't see already.

FWIW, my partner held this quite similar hand only a few nights ago:
♠-
♥AKx
♦AQx
♣AKT9xxx

opposite
♠A9x
♥xxx
♦K9xxxxx
♣J

This was after 2S (weak) from (his) LHO, I decided not to pre-empt a pre-empt, 3S
from RHO. 4C wasn't the winning bid! I tanked for a while and figured my partner ought to have half the high cards in the deck and wondered why he hadn't doubled. Eventually I decided to trust partner's bidding and not the opps, so passed him out. Wrong!

Nick

[benlessard]

I play NLM so for me a cue bid followed by 6C describe this hand nicely.

[whereagles]

Nick: your pard underbid (5 or even 6♣ are better bids), but one could try 4♦ over his 4♣ (assuming you got 6 of them - pretty clear with 7 diams to bid 4[ði]), on grounds that pard is short in spades and thus should have at least mild diamond support.

[NickRW]

Jlall, on Apr 29 2008, 10:46 PM, said:

Can anyone do a simulation? I bet 7C isn't as bad as I initially thought and we are just trained to be really risk averse with grands to an irrational point when we learn bridge. Would be interested how often 7C makes and how often 6C makes.

DD analysis of 100 hands where East has 7+ hearts or 6 hearts to the QJ shows:

12 cases not even 6C makes
88 cases 6C (or 7) makes
and of these, 51 cases 7C makes

Also: North makes 7D in 36 cases, 7S in 3 cases, 7N in 21 cases.

Of the 37 cases where 6C makes exactly, 12 of them makes 7 of something else

Of the 12 cases where even 6C doesn't make, 4 of them make 6 of something else

Nick

[NickRW]

whereagles, on May 27 2008, 03:02 PM, said:

Nick: your pard underbid (5 or even 6♣ are better bids), but one could try 4♦ over his 4♣ (assuming you got 6 of them - pretty clear with 7 diams to bid 4[ði]), on grounds that pard is short in spades and thus should have at least mild diamond support.

Yes, on deeper reflection I should have pulled the 4C. Indeed as my partner wasn't experienced and the opps were, I should probably have trusted their bidding more and pulled to at least 5D, not 4. My bad.

I've disciplined myself over the years to trust partner and distrust opps bidding and carding - probably this is a rule I should have thrown out in these particular circumstances.

Nick

[whereagles]

NickRW, on May 27 2008, 04:13 PM, said:

I've disciplined myself over the years to trust partner and distrust opps bidding and carding - probably this is a rule I should have thrown out in these particular circumstances.

Trusting pard is ok, but only up to the extent he can be trusted. Same thing goes to trusting the opponents: if RHO opens 1♠, it's fairly safe to assume he's got 11+ hcp and 5 cards, even if pard overcalls and starts making slam tries

[SoTired]

I think DBL is a terrible bid with a spade void. You are just asking for trouble. You know partner is going to bid some number of spades. X is for those people who want to make a penalty dbl, but foolishly make a t/o dbl instead.

4N is also poor. You have a 6-4 and your 6 is almost solid. That means you have a 1-suited hand not a 2-suited hand. Would you like partner with 2c & 3d to bid 5D?

3N is so ridiculous, I shudder even thinking about it.

And 4C is non-forcing.

So every single one of the suggested bids are terrible.

4H makes more sense than dbl because it alerts partner to the minors and it shows a monster.

6C makes the most sense. It likely makes. I can't bid 7C and end up negative on this deal. I could pass and end up positive, so I would really, really hate to end up negative.

[NickRW]

keylime, on Apr 30 2008, 06:18 PM, said:

Here's the 2nd part of it. Let's say you choose double, and pard of course drop kicks 4S at you. Now what?

Continuing the analysis, another 100 hands where East hand is constrained as before and North has HCP+spades >= 14.

6C (or more) still makes in 88 cases
Of these 7C now makes in 54 cases (3% up)

North can make 7D in 40 cases, 7S in 8 cases and 7N in 48 cases (all up markedly).

Of the 34 cases where 6C makes exactly, 19 make 7 of something else

Of the 12 cases where even 6C doesn't make, in all 12 of them you can make at least 6 of something else.

Nick

[han]

luke warm, on May 26 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

well i have a question (and be gentle, it's been awhile)... what would 4♥ : 4♠ : 6♣ (assuming opps stay quiet) mean?

Assuming you don't play non-leaping Michaels I think that partner would take that as a slam force with 5+ spades and 6+ clubs.

[SoTired]

han, on May 27 2008, 12:04 PM, said:

luke warm, on May 26 2008, 05:34 PM, said:

well i have a question (and be gentle, it's been awhile)... what would 4♥ : 4♠ : 6♣ (assuming opps stay quiet) mean?

Assuming you don't play non-leaping Michaels I think that partner would take that as a slam force with 5+ spades and 6+ clubs.

Yup - that's is what I think. 4H followed by 6C shows a minor oriented hand with better clubs. It is asking about 7. Don't know what it is asking, tho. We must be void somewhere since we did not bid blackwood. So I think if partner held the ♠A, partner might bid 7C/7D.

[benlessard]

If you play leaping michael. The setup i suggest is

5m can be a bit streched.
Cue followed by 5m natural but sound and invite to 6.
cue followed by 6m natural but invite to 7

direct 5 nt both m with better C (64 or 65)
cue followed by 5nt both m with better D.

4nt followed by a raise both m equal lenght desire to play 6.

All the maj + m hand are in 4m. X and correct tend to suggest 64.

If you dont play nlm i strongly suggest you take a look at it. being forced to play 5m instead of 4m is a small price to pay imho.

[awm]

benlessard, on May 28 2008, 01:11 AM, said:

If you dont play nlm i strongly suggest you take a look at it. being forced to play 5m instead of 4m is a small price to pay imho.

But it's not just that you have to play 5m (possibly doubled) instead of 4m. You also can't get to your 4♠ contract when partner has a long spade suit and would bid 4♠ over 4m. And if you make the "power" overcall of 4♥ and LHO bids 5♥, partner won't know which minor you have. And partner can't bid 4NT over 4m because you have to bid 5m (regardless of whether to play or a slam try in the minor, this is a very useful call to have). And partner can't cue to make a slam try in your minor. He basically just has to guess whether to bid slam over your "could be stretched" 5m bid.

And for what? The ability to specify your side minor suit instead of having to bid 4♥ "spades and a minor"? Seems like a small amount to gain imho. And that's not even considering that hands with a 6+ card single suit are way more common than 5-5 or better two suiters.

[han]

benlessard, on May 28 2008, 01:11 AM, said:

If you dont play nlm i strongly suggest you take a look at it. being forced to play 5m instead of 4m is a small price to pay imho.

Recently gwnn (I believe) posted two hands: Qx KJ AQx AQxxxx and xx KJ AQx AQJxxx. The question was what to bid over their 3S playing non-leaping Michaels. After thinking about the problem a lot and running several simulations I came to the conclusion that pass was right but that I really really wanted to bid a natural, non-forcing 4C.

On both hands 3NT and 5C had something like 33% chance of making, 4C close to 70% if I remember correctly. 4C gives you a plus on most hands and allows partner to bid game or slam on many hands where it is right (including 4S as Adam points out).

Of course, these were hands where non-leaping Michaels works particularly badly. But having looked at and played non-leaping Michaels, I am glad I currently don't play it. I don't think that not having a natural 4m available is a small price to play.

[gnasher]

NLM has greater value over a 3♠ preempt, where there is no other satisfactory way to bid a heart-minor two-suiter. Over 3♥, with spades and a minor you can bid either 3♠ or 4♥, depending on strength and suit quality.

[benlessard]

Quote

On both hands 3NT and 5C had something like 33% chance of making, 4C close to 70% if I remember correctly. 4C gives you a plus on most hands and allows partner to bid game or slam on many hands where it is right (including 4S as Adam points out).

In MP ok but in IMPs if 30% to make game vs 70% to make a partscore i want to be in game.

Quote

You also can't get to your 4♠ contract when partner has a long spade suit and would bid 4♠ over 4m.

With this i agree.

Quote

And for what? The ability to specify your side minor suit instead of having to bid 4♥ "spades and a minor"? Seems like a small amount to gain imho. And that's not even considering that hands with a 6+ card single suit are way more common than 5-5 or better two suiters.

With this i disagree 100% You can use the 4H to show both m with S tolerance or a single minor with S tol or a slammish single m.

With 3361 facing 5??? i will play 4S you will play 4m. Partner rate to have a weakish 6 or 5 carder much more often then having a suit solid enough to bid 4 all by himself. If you bid 4m do you think partner will bid 4S with jxxxxx ?

As for being X in 5m i dont remeber last time it happened to me. The problem is that over a 3H preempt space is scarce. Playing that both 4m bids arent forcing is aiming at a too narrow target. Often making a offshape X will do the job.

(3H)----X-----(P)------3S
(p)-----4m. (suggesting a 64 or looking for 3nt)

With 23(63) shapes the X is preferable to 4m anyway. With (12)(64) shapes X is equal or slighty inferior to a 4m bid most of the time. With 33(61) bidding 4H (showing a m + S tol) is better then a direct 4m. With 13(63) i can live with 3Nt without a stopper or a heavy pass.


For slam bidding its obvious that nlm is better (most of your bid are forcing). For avoiding to play 3Mx making nlm is clearly better no need to X with 5530 shapes etc.

6 card suit are not way more frequent then 5-5 after a 3 level preempt and once you remove all the 6 carder where you dont really want to bid 4m anyway 2 suiters become more frequent then single suiters.

At MP i have no problem not playing NLM but at IMPS i consider NLM to have a a big edge over 4m natural. Both over 3S and 3H