[mgoetze]

---

A quick recap of Burn's 2nd Law, also known as the Rule of Eight:

Quote

1. During the auction, ascertain how many aces are held by your opponents.
2. Subtract this number from eight.
3. Do not bid at the level given by the answer.

[Phil]

Does Burns II also address doubling at the 5 level with a 10 count?

[mgoetze]

Phil, on 2015-November-17, 16:57, said:

Does Burns II also address doubling at the 5 level with a 10 count?

No, but maybe it should be a corollary? You tell me.

[cherdano]

Good preempt, it really puts East in a difficult spot. (What to do over 5♣ P P.)

[mikestar13]

West's double is a bit too aggressive for my tastes, but why oh why doesn't East pass it for an easy 800? With the waste ♣Q, East should know the West is more likely than usual to be (sub)minimum, so slam is unlikely. Take the money.

[sfi]

mikestar13, on 2015-November-17, 18:22, said:

West's double is a bit too aggressive for my tastes, but why oh why doesn't East pass it for an easy 800? With the waste ♣Q, East should know the West is more likely than usual to be (sub)minimum, so slam is unlikely. Take the money.

Slam's pretty good opposite a sub-minimum such as xxxx Axxx Axxx x, so East's bidding is a reasonable shot.

West's double, on the other hand, is just silly. As is South's opening bid. They both deserve to have the North-East hands switched, when the final contract would likely be 5DX making an overtrick. N-S would never find the slam (although North may find a redouble), but West risks East bidding 5D for -1100. I'm not sure who would be getting the good score, but neither West nor South would be able to take credit for it.

[WesleyC]

An extension of Burns law uses the opponents 5m opening as an ace ask for your side.

Pass shows 0-1 Aces, Double shows 2+.

Regarding this specific hand, I would like to continue playing against South (preferably for very high stakes)!

[rmnka447]

East can't possibly know if slam is a make or not. So East should just bid 5 ♠. It might feel like a fix if West has all the right cards. But bidding 6 ♠ is just putting too many cards in West's hand. So East gets a huge charge for bidding slam.

For slam to be made, West has to have something to limit ♣ losers to one, the side suit As, and fitting ♠ cards to ensure no trump losers. That even might even not be enough if West and North hold ♣ stiffs and North holds a droppable ♠ Q, but can overruff dummy on the 2nd round of ♣.

If you don't know if slam is a good proposition or not, you either invite or don't go. Here, there's no way to invite, so stay "fixed" and don't go.

[Jinksy]

I feel like I am reading a different thread to everyone else (except Phil).

W's X in my book says 'I've got a very powerful hand and not enough distribution to bid that this level'. I suppose that's half true.

[billw55]

West clearly does not have his bid.

East's jump to slam is aggressive, but seems a reasonable gamble. From his standpoint, it is difficult for west to have his bid without two aces.

As it is, even 5♠ is not trivial. South can duck the first heart, and declarer has to make the right guess.

[phil_20686]

East is closer to trying to investigate the grand than they are to passing or bidding 5S. 6S totally normal. Wests x, however, is pretty strange. I mean, I guess its not so unreasonable with an AK, but feels like this could just get a xx a fair amount of the time. 5Cxx+1 when north couldn't try for slam is not going to please team mates.

[mgoetze]

cherdano, on 2015-November-17, 18:15, said:

Good preempt, it really puts East in a difficult spot. (What to do over 5♣ P P.)

I thought the answer to that was "5♠, wtp?"

[billw55]

mgoetze, on 2015-November-18, 08:30, said:

I thought the answer to that was "5♠, wtp?"

I suspect cherdano was being sarcastic about the "good preempt".

[cherdano]

mgoetze, on 2015-November-18, 08:30, said:

I thought the answer to that was "5♠, wtp?"

It's not that obvious to me given that I would expect 5♣ to be down, and that would expect 5♠ to be down. I mean, against the actual South, it seems pretty clear to pass! On the actual layout, bidding turns +300 into -100, and that's with partner having a club singleton and a nice spade fit. Give South some random 8221 and we have 2-3 defensive tricks, yet a number of losers to take care of in 5♠ (partner is still at best 50% to have a singleton).

In any case, it looks like a closer to decision to me than whether to double with the West hand over 5♣, and whether to force to (at least) the 6-level with East over 5♣X.

[mgoetze]

billw55, on 2015-November-18, 08:46, said:

I suspect cherdano was being sarcastic about the "good preempt".

It will be much easier for you to understand cherdano's posts if you start with the assumption that he is being sarcastic and then try and see when he's not being sarcastic than the other way around.

[billw55]

cherdano, on 2015-November-18, 09:04, said:

On the actual layout, bidding turns +300 into -100, and that's with partner having a club singleton and a nice spade fit.

Can't east can make 5♠ with a good view in hearts?

[cherdano]

billw55, on 2015-November-18, 09:12, said:

Can't east can make 5♠ with a good view in hearts?

Sure, but I wouldn't make 5♠ - it wouldn't occur to me to play the preemptor for ♥A.

[billw55]

cherdano, on 2015-November-18, 10:28, said:

Sure, but I wouldn't make 5♠ - it wouldn't occur to me to play the preemptor for ♥A.

Sure. But by the time this decision is due, south will have already shown up with two spades, two diamonds, and the ♥9. Is the ten on the second round really so unreasonable?