home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!cs.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!news
- From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
- Subject: Re: Problems from Portland - results and summary
- Message-ID: <1992Nov22.021802.3707@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
- Sender: news@m.cs.uiuc.edu (News Database (admin-Mike Schwager))
- Reply-To: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
- Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
- References: <1992Nov20.151557.27043@rayssd.ssd.ray.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:18:02 GMT
- Lines: 160
-
- sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson) writes:
-
- >* 2. Both vul. South dealer. You are East: T74, KJ52, K7, Q975
- >*
- >* West North East South
- >* 1D-1 1. Shows at least 4
- >* dbl 1S dbl-2 1N 2. Responsive, 6-9 HCP
- >* pass 5D ?
-
- >Correct answer: PASS.
- >net.experts: 5 pass
- > 2 double
-
- >My partner doubled. Declarer can always make 7D,
- >due to 2 finesses working, but only 2 pairs bid 6D.
- >This declarer managed to take 12 tricks, losing a heart trick.
- >West (me) had a distributional take-out double: KJ2, QT98, 2, AT843.
-
-
- Whether they make 6D or 7D is not important -- the key is that it
- appears very likely that opponents can make 3NT and are in the wrong
- strain (assuming no slam). So, there is no need to try to gild the
- lily by doubling...
-
-
- >* 3. NS vul. West dealer. You are West: Q863, J63, 632, AQ6
- >*
- >* West North East South
- >* pass 1C 2N-1 3H 1. 6-12 HCP, at least 4 spades and 4 diamonds
- >* 3S 4H pass pass with at least 9 cards total in the 2 suits
- >* ?
-
- >Correct answers: DOUBLE (best) or PASS.
- >net.experts: 6 pass (2 suggested that they might double)
- > 1 double
-
- >I bid 4S, which got doubled and went down 2
-
- 4S is wrong for one simply because you should have bid it first if you
- were going to bid 4S anyway. There are only two possible actions you
- can take -- bid 3S first or 4S first. the latter forces North to
- decide whether to X or not when he has not yet showed his hearts. By
- bidding 3S and then 4S you are giving the opponents the best of both
- world -- North can show his hearts and then can whack or pass
- (forcing) over 4S confident of having shown his values...
-
- Secondly, some pairs may have bought the hand in 3S, so you will be
- getting a bad score versus them...
-
- As to double, it may be BEST on this deal (clearly it is always right
- to double when opponents are going down) but again, the primary
- principle of not trying too hard for that super top stands out -- for
- all you know 4H is the normal constract at every table and in that
- case you may convert an average score into a bottom , and if they are
- going down (and should not be there) you get a top anyway...
-
- there is a small case for doubling to protect you partscore of +110 ,
- but that only applies if they go down 1 exactly -- in that case, on
- most other tables pairs sitting as you will be netting -140 (versus
- 3H) or -50 playing in 3S -- so +100 should still be very good... I
- think pass, is the right choice, but would not quibble with double.
-
- >* 4. Both vul. South dealer. You are North: QJ95, T97, AKT762, void
- >*
- >* West North East South
- >* 1S-1 1. 11-15 HCP, at least 4 spades
- >* pass 2C-2 2H pass-* 2. artificial, forcing to game
- >* 3H ? opener may not pass short of game
-
- >* so the pass says only 4 spades, no heart suit or decent stopper,
- >* not a distributional hand, and on the low end of the HCP range (11-13).
- >* In other words, your basic garbage balanced opener with 4 spades.
-
- >Correct answer: DOUBLE (best) or 3S (forcing) or 4S (to play)
- >net.experts: 1 double
- > 6 either forcing pass, 3S (forcing) or 4S (to play)
-
- If the opponents have tehir bids, double will not turn out well -- the
- opponents in this case clearly didn't, but competing against decent
- pairs i would like better hearts to whack -- I guess, I lack the
- cajones to whack this...
-
- >My partner bid 3S (yes, forcing), agreeing spades and demanding me to cuebid.
- >(The way we play it, if one partner starts a cue-bidding sequence,
- >the other is obligated to also cue, up to the level of game,
- >even without extra values).
-
- If 4S shows less than 3S in your system, that is clearly the right bid...
-
- >Partner decided slam was a good bet if I had a singleton heart
- >(then I would have been exactly 4-1-4-4).
-
- No comments on this -- I would like to play in 4S and would wonder if
- that was making -- to try for a slam hoping for partner to hold the
- magic hand, plus some luck, is asking for waaay too much. Especially,
- when your system could have got you to a contract where no one else
- is...
-
- >The 2H bidder had bid on AKxx of hearts,
- >for "lead-directing purposes since we were going to game".
-
- I take it back -- against such opponents you should defintely whack --
- too bad you didn;t have 4 hearts then a whack would be easy... sigh...
- But I repeat, against good opponents X will usually be wrong.
-
- >His partner raised to 3H on Jxx.
- >3Hx goes down 4 on perfect defense, 3 otherwise.
- >Double would have been a top, but +620 in 4S would have been OK, too.
-
- A double on your hand would have been a wild shot in the dark -- just
- take the plusses of your system and bid 4S...
-
- >* 5. NS vul. East dealer. You are South: 9, J4, AK7654, JT94
- >*
- >* West North East South
- >* pass ?
- >*
- >* Do you preempt or not?
-
- >Correct answer: 3D.
- >net.experts: 4 pass
- > 2 2D
- > 1 3D
-
- >I decided not to open, due to a) the decent 4-card club suit
- >and b) East had passed.
-
- This has very little to do with your 4 card club suit -- and
- everything to do with being (a) SECOND SEAT (b) RED versus WHITE.
- This is the absolute worst case to prempt, and you need an almost
- perfect hand to bid 3D...
-
- >On *this hand* I should have preempted (playing result merchant)
- >but I'm still not sure if there's a definitive answer on whether
- >or not to preempt in a similar type of situation
- >(vul vs not, second seat, side 4-card suit).
-
- Advocating a 3D opening on this hand is 100% result-merchanting.
- There is no doubt whatsoever that 3D is wrong -- read Woolsey's
- Matchpoits where he talks about precisely this situation -- you have
- too many things going against you and so a PERFECT hand is needed --
- this is not even close.
-
- The 4 card club suit is a problem, but the 6 card non-solid diamond
- suit is more of a problem. With x,x,KQJTxxx,JT9x a 3D opening is
- fine...
-
- This may be a reasonable 2D opening however -- I would expect a better
- suit at this vulnerability, but at matchpoints this seems reasonable
- for its lead directing quuality...
-
- >Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)
-
- Bharat
- --
- R. Bharat Rao E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
- AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
- 405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801 (217)337-6498(H)
- Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
- OFFICE: (217)244-0292, 333-5978 (NOTE new numbers)
-