[kuhchung]

w/w MPs

x AKTx AKQxxx Ax, we deal

1D (1S) p (4S)
?

[Jinksy]

Ug. 4N for me, planning to pull 5♣ to 5♦, pass 5♦, and raise 5♥ to 6. We might go down one when we have 300 our way, but I doubt we're setting this by three opposite a passed hand, and we need so little from P to make game.

[diana_eva]

Dbl

Dunno if I'd open that 1♦ tbh, seems too good.

[BillPatch]

kuhchung, on 2014-December-09, 11:43, said:

w/w MPs

x AKTx AKQxxx Ax, we deal

1D (1S) p (4S)
?

I recommend an unusual 4NT. Not Ace asking -- absence of agreed fit. Not Natural -- would have made stronger opening bid. Correct Clubs to Diamonds at any level.

[Phil]

Double.

[karlson]

I would double.

[mikeh]

I double

Most of the time partner will pass and we collect 100-300 or on a great day, 500.

The main thing is that we will almost always go plus, and this is mps.

I would be surprised if we can make 5♦: we have too many losers to expect partner to cover all but 2 of them, and the defence will likely be easy.

The main reason to bid, and if we bid 4N is the obvious choice, ostensibly the minors but showing the reds when we pull 5♣) is the hope that we can make 5♥.

As for that: well, partner MIGHT hold heart length and have been too weak to negative double so we may well be able to make 11 or 12 tricks. However, at mps, bidding is a bet that we will make a 5-level contract more often than not, and I don't like those odds.

At imps, this is a tougher problem because on hands where we can make 11+ tricks in hearts, it is in fact possible that they can make their contract, so there is the low risk of a big swing. A low frequency risk of a big swing can be ignored at mps, but not at imps.

However, even at imps I think double is right, on the theory that one takes one's money. However, I would bid red v white at imps due to the size of the gain when bidding is right.

As for the auction, I would have opened 1♦ as well, due to the rebid problems if we start 2♣: I have to rebid in diamonds and the possible 4-4 heart fit is almost unfindable. Meanwhile, 1♦ will rarely get passed out and (usually) I can expect to show my shape and some approximation of my strength if I open at the 1-level. Btw, if we were going to bid here, we are far ahead of the 2♣ bidders, assuming, as seems reasonable, that the auction would be at 4♠ without my having said anything other than 2♣.

[ggwhiz]

At matchpoints I consider what the rest of the field would do facing the same problem, mind you many may face a 3♠ bid instead of 4♠.

imo, double would be in tune with the majority of the field (protecting the mp plus) and regardless of the result should score 40% ish at worst. That's not a total loss but bidding on and going minus could well be if the 4♠ bidder is out on a limb.

[mikeh]

ggwhiz, on 2014-December-09, 18:29, said:

At matchpoints I consider what the rest of the field would do facing the same problem, mind you many may face a 3♠ bid instead of 4♠.

delete: dup post

[mikeh]

ggwhiz, on 2014-December-09, 18:29, said:

At matchpoints I consider what the rest of the field would do facing the same problem, mind you many may face a 3♠ bid instead of 4♠.

On what basis do you say that? Never assume that the opps have gone anti-field in the absence of a bridge-logic reason for that assumption. Here, your spade shortness is a bridge-logic reason to expect that the auction is completely normal, not the other way around.

[Jinksy]

mikeh, on 2014-December-09, 18:12, said:

I double

Most of the time partner will pass and we collect 100-300 or on a great day, 500.

The main thing is that we will almost always go plus, and this is mps.

I would be surprised if we can make 5♦: we have too many losers to expect partner to cover all but 2 of them, and the defence will likely be easy.

This seems incredibly pessimistic. We rate to make 5♦ opposite as little as xxx Qx xx xxxxxx.

[mikeh]

Jinksy, on 2014-December-09, 19:20, said:

This seems incredibly pessimistic. We rate to make 5♦ opposite as little as xxx Qx xx xxxxxx.

nice heart Q; such a high, high probability he has that. When trying to assess likelihoods, humans are incredibly bad at making up random examples. Placing partner with the Q of our side suit is an example of that bias. You want to bid 5♦, so you 'randomly' pick a hand that works.

[Cthulhu D]

mikeh, on 2014-December-09, 20:08, said:

nice heart Q; such a high, high probability he has that. When trying to assess likelihoods, humans are incredibly bad at making up random examples. Placing partner with the Q of our side suit is an example of that bias. You want to bid 5♦, so you 'randomly' pick a hand that works.

To be fair, I think the club king works as well. What are the conditions of simulation?

South has: x AKTx AKQxxx Ax
West has: 5+ spades, 8-15 points (and maybe some sui quality restrictions, like 2 of the top 4 honors, and he does not have 4 hearts I am guessing?)
North has less than an 8 count with 4 hearts and less than any 10 count I'm going to guess, and not 5 diamonds
East: 5+ spades, less than an 9 count?

Assuming 4S is a pre-emptive raise (so 5 spades less than 8 HCP and 1S is a regular overcall so 8-15 HCP with 5+ spades).

[mikeh]

Cthulhu D, on 2014-December-09, 20:12, said:

To be fair, I think the club king works as well. What are the conditions of simulation?

South has: x AKTx AKQxxx Ax
West has: 5+ spades, 8-15 points (and maybe some sui quality restrictions, like 2 of the top 4 honors, and he does not have 4 hearts I am guessing?)
North has less than an 8 count with 4 hearts and less than any 10 count I'm going to guess, and not 5 diamonds
East: 5+ spades, less than an 9 count?

Assuming 4S is a pre-emptive raise (so 5 spades less than 8 HCP and 1S is a regular overcall so 8-15 HCP with 5+ spades).

The only aspect of your proposed simulation with which I agree is the opening hand, lol.

[Cthulhu D]

Well, come on, what's some better values then. LC Standard has the 1S overcall as 8-17 HCP. It cannot have 5 hearts else it would be Michaels. Advancer has 5 spades and a pre-emptive raise, so is that as little as 0-6? More? Less?

Finally, what does responder have? I think this is the most complex hand type. He not got a negative double (7+ 4 hearts?). He didn't bid 1N, so he doesn't have 8-10? with a stopper. He didn't cue, so he doesn't have a simple, mixed or pre-emptive diamond raise. I don't play better minor so I'm not totally sure how many diamonds you want to bid 3D, but I'm guessing it's 5?

[nige1]

kuhchung, on 2014-December-09, 11:43, said:

w/w MPs, we deal
♠ x ♥ A K T x ♦ A K Q x x x ♣ A x
1♦ (1♠) Pass (4♠
?

IMO Double = 10, 4N = 9, 5♦ = 8. Partner won't imagine you to be as strong as this. so he's quite likely to pass your double when you can make game or slam e.g.
♠ x x ♥ x x x x x x ♦ x x ♣ x x x
Hence, it seems a close decision between double and 4N.

[fourdad]

OPEN 2c, THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM.

[PhilKing]

I double. I think this is an auction on which partner should usually remove the double since we should not be doubling with a balanced 18-19, for instance.

If double is removed to 5♥, I will raise to six, of course. The defence will start with a top spade and switch to a club, so if partner has xxxxx of hearts and out, we will make either 10 or 12 tricks.

[nekthen]

We have shot ourselves in the foot by not opening 2♣. This renders the question irrelevant as the hand is too good. We are thinking about a heart fit when partner failed to make a double of 1♠. We are thinking about this because our hand is too good!

From a defensive pov I can easily construct hands for opps where 4♠ makes. The 4♠ bidder could well have a ♣ stack and only two red suit losers.

My vote goes for 5♦. Double is scary as p may well pass with a Yarborough when we need him to bid. I also doubt whether double guarantees 4♥.

I think the alternative question is more interesting 2♣-2♠-p-4♠ ?

What is the best hand p can have for his pass?

If I pass now what are partner's options? Maybe dbl is penalty and 4NT is general please bid your suit. If I do not pass, then 5♦ is surely the only alternative as 4N would imply a more two-suited hand and double is surely to play

[Jinksy]

mikeh, on 2014-December-09, 20:08, said:

nice heart Q; such a high, high probability he has that. When trying to assess likelihoods, humans are incredibly bad at making up random examples. Placing partner with the Q of our side suit is an example of that bias. You want to bid 5♦, so you 'randomly' pick a hand that works.

I didn't pick anything randomly, I picked the weakest hand that came to mind on which 5♦ looked good. He could also have Jxx or xxxx in trumps and xx in ♥s, xxx in trumps and a stiff ♥, KQx(x) in ♣s; 5 ♥s to the J and a favourable wind, or a suitable pair of K♣; QJ ♣s with the K onside; A♠; K♠ with the A onside; doubleton trumps and doubleton ♥, and various other holdings that'd give us squeeze or endplay prospects. Then there's nige's hand, which gives us excellent odds for 6♥.

I also don't see any reason to assume the opps have 20 points between them. Perhaps a lot depends on how aggressively you expect P to X over 1♠.