[gszes]

FWIW I liked the 4d bid because it will set up my anticipated 5h bid (I see I am always going down) I hope partner will realize there was a good reason for my 4d bid when I bid 5h and that reason is every red ace they can give me should lead me closer to a small/grand slam. It just seems wrong somehow to assume an opening bid by partner will be so horribly useless to us.

[Cyberyeti]

gszes, on 2019-February-26, 06:25, said:

FWIW I liked the 4d bid because it will set up my anticipated 5h bid (I see I am always going down) I hope partner will realize there was a good reason for my 4d bid when I bid 5h and that reason is every red ace they can give me should lead me closer to a small/grand slam. It just seems wrong somehow to assume an opening bid by partner will be so horribly useless to us.

One person made 5♥, ♣A is a particularly unfortunate lead, after this is ruffed, partner gets endplayed with his stiff ♥A at trick 2.

[PhantomSac]

I like just bidding 4H, the opponents being white/red and bidding to only THREE spades is a huge warning sign when we have this hand. Partner having short hearts and 4 spades and wasted black values is really likely... Our hand seems really nice but give partner some 4126 opening bids and we might not even make 4H.

I know I am posting this after the actual hand/result was posted but these were my thoughts before reading the results heh.

[etha]

I'll see what happens if I fix the south hand and make the other hands comply with the bids up to 3♠ and then simply determine the dbl dummy outcomes of these hands. Computer will speed this up and not be insane it only goes mad after the 3♠ bid.

[nekthen]

I am with those who bid 4♥ instead of 2♥

[maartenxq]

Former dutch international and manifold national champion Kees Tammens uses to comment on problems like this: you cannot ask me questions about 8 cards and more. Having said that I think I would have bid 4 ♥ planning to bid 5♦after their probable 4 ♠. Now I pass not sure what to do if 5 ♠runs to me. Maybe I should even correct to 5 ♥ as I will be short immediately after their spade lead. If ♦4-1 this will be a disaster.

Maarten Baltussen

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2019-February-26, 08:32, said:

I am with those who bid 4♥ instead of 2♥

Which would show short hearts and 4+ clubs by our agreements, but is a lot more sensible opposite a potentially short club.

[etha]

Hmm well that plan wasn't very successful because spades going off is almost always par.

6♦ made once, 6♥-1 was par once, and 4♥ 5 times. This is over 100 hands dbl dummy.

[IGoHomeNow]

rmnka447, on 2019-February-25, 11:26, said:

I'm not bidding 4 ♥ now. Like a forum member once said about auctions like this, 4 ♥ is a transfer to 4 ♠. Then if partner doubles 4 ♠ do you site or bid on?

I'm bidding 5 ♥ and making the opponents have the next tough decision. Partner should be able to interpret that having overcalled and competed further that my hand is not strictly a preempt, but a big player.

4H a transfer to 4S? Really... Maybe if you play against bingo playing droolers. Against competent opposition, they would have bid to 4S already.
Since they have not done so, they probably won't

The 3S bidder should be done with his call, since 3S here is (at least with most folks) pre-emptive. Now the 1S bidder will advance the pre-empt further if that seems to fit his hand instead of passing. Of course there are morons who dream of getting doubled in 3S or even buying the hand, but that is why they are morons.

As for the actual hand? Its a pure guess, but I strongly expect simulations would show that you will make 6 of a red suit most of the time. Just bid it. Sure.... On occasion the opposition has 2 red aces on this sequence, but bridge is not about avoiding negative scores. What is less clear is if we should bid 6H or 6D, but my guess is 6D is safer.

[etha]

the opposition had to bid 6♠ or higher 74 times to get to par in my 100 hand sim from before.

[Y383]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-February-25, 07:15, said:

We had a decent weekend playing in the grand masters pairs, this was one of the hands that went horribly wrong, sense checking it.

---

System notes, Acol, weak NT, 1♣ shows 4+

Now, 4♦ or 4♥ (or something more extravagant) ?

If you bid 4♦ (showing 5 categorically) partner bids 5♦, any thoughts of 6 ?

Edit: cross IMP scored pairs

north passed, logic dictates:
- low pts opener (11-13 pts).
- low ♥, void to dobelton.

so u stuck. hard to know if ur partner have ♦ stopper.
i think that becos 2♥ bid is wrong. should bid 2♦. with 2d, with no respond from p.. u can jump to bid 4h easy, so the base minimum contract still achieved. if ur partner respond, bid 4nt to ask ace. i think for slam, we should take the risk (contract failed).

[Cyberyeti]

Y383, on 2019-March-26, 21:25, said:

north passed, logic dictates:
- low pts opener (11-13 pts).
- low ♥, void to dobelton.

so u stuck. hard to know if ur partner have ♦ stopper.
i think that becos 2♥ bid is wrong. should bid 2♦. with 2d, with no respond from p.. u can jump to bid 4h easy, so the base minimum contract still achieved. if ur partner respond, bid 4nt to ask ace. i think for slam, we should take the risk (contract failed).

You can't jump to 4♥ over 3♠ and if you bid 4♥ you're showing 5-6 or 5-7 rather than 8-5

[Y383]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-March-27, 05:02, said:

You can't jump to 4♥ over 3♠ and if you bid 4♥ you're showing 5-6 or 5-7 rather than 8-5

oh cmon, this 8-5 distribution is 1 in million chance it should come out, and nothing in ordinary convention cover it. and u say 2h or 4h showing 5-6 or 5-7?. this is like telling that if u have 13 cards all ♥, 1 suit only from 2 to ace, 10 pts, u should pass? not bid 7♥??
THIS IS SPECIAL CASE.

the bidding convention create by rule of LOGIC. if somehow u cant use convention due to the 'weird hand', u just need to get back to LOGIC.

for me, this is how i see that 8-5 hand:
- regardless ur partner points, that hand alone minimum worth 4h contract.
- so if u can manage to probe ur partner hand and points, there's a chance to slam.
- luckily, ur partner bid first, so u know north have 12 pts ish.
- wishful thinking north have 2 aces, ♥ and ♦, u have slam.
-so ur effort should be thinking how to make ur partner spill his/her ♦, ♥, and aces.
- this is special case, and bidding mode is: u ask - ur partner answer, like 1nt bidding.

[Cyberyeti]

Y383, on 2019-March-27, 21:04, said:

oh cmon, this 8-5 distribution is 1 in million chance it should come out, and nothing in ordinary convention cover it. and u say 2h or 4h showing 5-6 or 5-7?. this is like telling that if u have 13 cards all ♥, 1 suit only from 2 to ace, 10 pts, u should pass? not bid 7♥??
THIS IS SPECIAL CASE.

the bidding convention create by rule of LOGIC. if somehow u cant use convention due to the 'weird hand', u just need to get back to LOGIC.

for me, this is how i see that 8-5 hand:
- regardless ur partner points, that hand alone minimum worth 4h contract.
- so if u can manage to probe ur partner hand and points, there's a chance to slam.
- luckily, ur partner bid first, so u know north have 12 pts ish.
- wishful thinking north have 2 aces, ♥ and ♦, u have slam.
-so ur effort should be thinking how to make ur partner spill his/her ♦, ♥, and aces.
- this is special case, and bidding mode is: u ask - ur partner answer, like 1nt bidding.

I'm finding your English impossible to understand.

You suggested bidding 2♦ not 2♥ in your previous post, 2♦ followed by 4♥ is going to potentially lead to playing in a 5-2 fit a level higher than your 8-2 fit.

[wank]

pescetom, on 2019-February-25, 15:20, said:

Nobody would have considered DBL in the first round rather than 2♥ ?

double isn't takeout. double shows exactly 4 hearts or a weak hand with more.