[Elianna]

On the following sets of three hands, "yes" says you'd like to be in this slam, "no" says not. These are all MPs, in a "B-flight-only" field (but of course B varies greatly).

1)

Scoring: MP

a. 6♠ by North.

b. 6NT by North.

---

2)

Scoring: MP

a. 6♠ by North.

b. 6NT by North.

---

3)

Scoring: MP

a. 6♠ by North.

b. 6NT by North.

---

[hrothgar]

1. Yes to both 6S and 6N

2. Yes to 6H

3. Yes to 6D. Maybe to 6C. (6C is clearly inferior to 6D due to the risk of an Diamond ruff). However, the question is problematic. Looking at both hands, we KNOW that 6D is the "correct" contract. What are we even considering 6C? If we can't see both hands, do we have enough information to eliminate 6C as a viable contract?

[inquiry]

1. 6nt - it is matchpoints

2. No preference at imps or matchpoints. 6♥ or 4♥.

3. Tough one... in clubs it might go ♦A, ♦ruff. In ♣ it might go ♣, win ♦A, ♣ ruff. Odds seem equal, except to ruff ♦, the hand with ace has to have two (or three if on lead) other ♦. When diamonds split 3-1 the odds favor ACE in long.

Playing in ♦ however, the hand with the the ♦ACE has to also have three or four clubs. I am not sure of the exact math, but the requirement for Ace ♦ and three clubs to find a club ruff seems longer odds than diamond ace and two diamonds. So while it is slim, I believe I would rather play in 6♦.

[han]

Yes and yes, yes and yes and yes.

Hand 2 seems 50%, but the possibility of a spade lead or a strip endplay (yes I know that good opponents never misdefend) makes it better.

Hand 3 is clearly more attractive if the auction was quick.

[pclayton]

Hi Eli - by Districr Semi-finals, I assume you mean the Unit finals. To Q, you need to be in the top 50% of your flight, which for the B's in LA is probably 45% or better I'm guessing.

If you are having a flat game, I'd be real worried about betting a full board on a 50-55% slam that a lot of the field won't be in.

If you are rolling along with a good game and want to win the 8 or so masterpoints, then bid these slams.

Now, if you are the District final or at Dallas, its pedal to the metal!

[pbleighton]

Yes to all.

I agree with Justin that I would rather play 6S than 6NT in the first hand. One other reason for this is that if East has the CA, he is more likely to lead it in a suit contract. This overrides the extra 10 points at matchpoints, IMO.

Peter

[Elianna]

Well, we seemed to be on the wrong end of these hands. On

Scoring: MP

---

We were in 4♠. Bidding went: 1NT-2♥-2♠-4♠-pass.

6♠ was cold on the layout.

On

Scoring: MP

---

We were in 6♥ in a pushy auction, down one.

On

Scoring: MP

---

We were in 6♣, down one (and 6♦ would also be down one).

We were anti-field on each of the three, for three zeros or near zeros. We lost (were second) by .5 matchpoints.

Lastly,

pclayton said:

  Hi Eli - by District Semi-finals, I assume you mean the Unit finals. To Q, you need to be in the top 50% of your flight, which for the B's in LA is probably 45% or better I'm guessing.

As I think Adam replied to you online, I DID mean district Semi-Finals (they run two of them, all district members (of any unit) may qualify in one or the other, and yes, it's a 45% cut). It's not my fault that District 23 runs things wierdly.

[pclayton]

I like the idea of a 'semi-final'. It effectively turns the District final into a 4 session event.

[awm]

The silly thing about the format is that there's no carry-over from semi-final to final. This makes the semi-final an "almost automatic" step as they qualify two-thirds of the field. Seems like if we're all going to play four sessions anyway, they could run it as an actual four-session event...

Perhaps this was the wrong reasoning on the first board (with all the kings), but my view as north was that playing in spades didn't really upgrade the hand. With a side doubleton somewhere it'd be clear to go. It seems like there are a lot of good spots in the south hand that may not have been necessary for the invite, and the ♦Q is a very good fitting card (much better than say ♣Q), and despite all this the slam is only a little above fifty percent.

[han]

It may be true that you could have done better, but you certainly were very unlucky on these three hands. Bridge can be so unfair.

[Elianna]

jlall said:

Not that you asked about the bidding, but I think assuming south showed a slam try on the first board north has a clear bid on the first one. Controls are what are needed in this auction, and thats all north has. If you don't play texas then north has to pass of course.

Justin, I don't usually ask about Adam's bidding. But yes, we play Texas.

District 14 also has 4-session finals (with no unit finals, at least, there weren't any in my unit). But they do something silly, too. Because the district is so big, there's a split site final, and last year, they seemed to not advertise it in Omaha, so Omaha (the site close to me) had soemthing like two B pairs, and three or four C pairs (all A's had to go to somewhere in Minnesota).

The other thing that they do is guarantee the flight winner from each of the two sites at least second place, and then compare percentages (to figure out a clear winner, and to calculate third). Not too silly yet, right?

But wait! Because the field in Omaha was so small, they played the B's and C's TOGETHER, but didn't do that in Minn. How's that for fairness for the B players in MN, or the C players in Omaha?

Hopefully they'll figure it out better next year, but I won't be there for that.

[Fluffy]

6♠ yes, above 50% on a squeeze
6NT no, just 50%


6♥: yes, a ♦ endplay is possible if RHO has ♦KQJ10 or something less with missdefence. so it is above 50%.

6♦/♣ normally better to play in ♦, but would play both.