BBO Discussion Forums: Restricted choice? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Restricted choice?

#1 User is online   kenrexford 

  • Unanimously Voted Best Bridge Theorist of the Year by BBO
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,225
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2012-June-21, 21:37

I was quite disappointed by the result.



North opened 1, opponents passing throughout, and I responded 1NT. North, for reasons known only to him (perhaps induced by three people mocking him two hands earlier for being a wimp), blasted 3NT.

My LHO made the opening lead of a small spade. I tried the 10, won by RHO with his King. a spade back was floated, LHO playing low, and I won the Ace anyway.

Now a heart to the Jack and Ace (RHO contributing nothing interesting), and then LHO played the Ace and Jack of clubs.

I won the second club with the King, which may well have been a mistake, but this was matchpoints and a remote club-diamond squeeze seemed possible.

I then played a heart toward dummy, LHO sticking in (for reasons known only to LHO) the 8, forcing me to cover as RHO showed out. (Damn -- missed my chance for the deep hook!)

Of course, this now left me with three options (because of the bizarre split of the heart 8-9).

First, I could cash out for down one, which probably scores horribly when NO ONE will be in 3NT (I thought).

Second, I could eliminate diamonds and spades, ending in hand, and play a club to LHO if LHO started with 3-5-2-3 pattern with the A-J-10 in clubs.

Third, I could eliminate the diamonds and spades, ending in hand, and play a diamond to LHO if LHO started with 3-5-3-2 pattern with the Q-x-x or Q-J-x in diamonds. Interestingly, the diamond 10-x-x in hand might even grow up tio three tricks if LHO desperately tries a double jettison.

(If LHO started with 4-5-2-2 pattern, I am just SOL. If 4-5-1-3, I have a chance of a club throw-in, but then I will know this when I play the second top diamond.)

So, now you think. There seems to be a restricted choice inference from the spade lead. LHO started with a spade rather than a diamond. This seems to suggest that LHO has a diamond card. If it does not show up on the second top diamond, then it seems to be H-x-x. Of course, it could be J-x-x, which does me know good. But, I do not yet know who has the spade Jack yet. So, if LHO has x-x-x in spades, then restricted choice suggests that LHO has the J-x-x or Q-x-x in diamonds, as LHO seems to be making a passive lead, If LHO started with J-x-x in spades, and if the lead was intended to be passive, then LHO also tends to have Q-x-x in diamonds, also for restricted choice reasons. Of course, if LHO is making an attacking lead and would attack from Q-x-x, then having the J-x-x would suggest J-x-x in diamonds (bad) or nothing in diamonds.

The diamond-spade lead-related restricted choice problem was giving me a headache. Of course, I then thought for a minute that LHO would jettison the Queen from Q-x-x in diamonds if they saw the position, but this person split the 8-9 in hearts, so...

Next, I considered the club switch. That also has restricted choice possibilities. A-J tight, A-10 tight, or A-J-10? Seems like Ace and an honor has a mild restricted choice tendency to Ace-honor tight. ranted, from A-J-x this might also be an early jettison (yeah right), but that would be a quite wild play.

So, which line do you go with?
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.
0

#2 User is offline   CSGibson 

  • Tubthumper
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,831
  • Joined: 2007-July-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, OR, USA
  • Interests:Bridge, pool, financial crime. New experiences, new people.

Posted 2012-June-21, 23:51

here's what I think:

You make the argument "hey, its matchpoints" for not ducking the 2nd club, but then make the argument that "cashing out is really bad because no one will be in 3N".

Make up your mind, Ken. If no one is going to be in 3N, then duck the 2nd club if you think that's the best line to make, don't go for the obscure club diamond squeeze - it ought to be a huge result just to make 3N since you are going to lose a trick in every suit in 4, the alternative game contract. Do your best to make the unusual and aggressive contract.

Now I'm going to cash out. Down 1 ought to be an above average result, some people will be in 4H, some will have gotten a different defense in 3N to possibly be down 2, and surely no one will stop in 2 with this hand - everyone is going to force to the 3 level and be down on the same horrible split, some doubled. Despite your pessimism, I'd be willing to wager that down 1 is a 60% or better board.
Chris Gibson
0

#3 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,321
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2012-June-22, 02:41

View Postkenrexford, on 2012-June-21, 21:37, said:

Now a heart to the Jack and Ace (RHO contributing nothing interesting), and then LHO played the Ace and Jack of clubs.

For all your technical knowledge, you should still play Bridge, where deductions and inferences reign supreme.
At the point of the club switch declarer was clearly marked with the king of clubs and 3 cards in spades.
When LHO switched to clubs playing the Ace and Jack, why would he do that if he does not have the Ten?
Without the Ten how did LHO know declarer does not have this card? In fact the club switch was probably a mistake in spite LHO having AJT.
If LHO had simply continued with a spade, declarer hands would have no communication any more and I can not see how declarer can come to 9 tricks.
8 tricks would have been already a (steppingstone) challenge.
This was the indicated defense for several reasons, not least that declarer won the second spade with the ace instead of the spade Ten.
LHO should not have the Q, because this would have made the spade continuation even more obvious.

LHO is marked by Bridge logic with the Ten and in such cases I do not care for restricted choice arguments, because they are probabilistic and not deterministic.
The club throw-in is clearly marked and I would be disappointed if it does not work. It is not 100% but by far the best option.
If LHO is 4=5=1=3 (In fact he could be 4=5=0=4 or 3=5=1=4 with AJT9 in clubs) he can theoretically defeat you by discarding the Ten on the second diamond.
But do you really expect LHO, apparently a weak player, having switched to clubs and split in hearts, is capable of avoiding an end-play by suddenly jettison winning honor cards?
Even if down one would be above average, I would never play for that here. I can always change my mind if the T appears on the diamond honors.
Rainer Herrmann
2

#4 User is offline   Statto 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 2011-December-01
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, but not in conflation.
    Statistics, but not massaged by the media.

Posted 2012-June-26, 00:24

Gut instinct says a , can't work out the finer details, and wouldn't attempt to at the table B-)
A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem – Albert Einstein
0

#5 User is online   kenrexford 

  • Unanimously Voted Best Bridge Theorist of the Year by BBO
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,225
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2012-June-26, 04:20

CLUB WORKS.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users