[mauro_1946]

Mamma mia !!!!! This is a nigthmare not a pool. Agree with Roland, it's a guess. And agree again with Roland: 5♠........ and this may be the end of nightmare and the beginning of a suicide.

[inquiry]

I think this hand is the hardest of the entire set. There are a number of issues, most of which the panel addressed. One question is if 5♥ forcing? The confusion shown in the members responses to this point in the thread is carried over into the panelist responses. Maybe there isn't a good problem. Let's see what the panel has to say.

First there where the timid passers..

Beto: Pass. Dont think there is a right answer. As east did not double it, I would pass.. Luis joined in saying, Pass, I wonder where is the lesson in this problem, the following bids can be either a disaster or a great success: pass, 6d, 7d, 5h, 6h, 7h, 6c, 7c. Pick your own poison. Perhpas Luis is correct, this might be more of a psychological test than a bridge lesson test. Certainly anything could be right. But also experts might have a reason for choosing one bid over another. Let's see if anyone comes up with anything better than blind guess (the reason for the question actually). Gabor (ng) also passed, pointing out.. "Pass. Void in partner’s suit is always bad sign. Don’t forget, he wasn’t able to bid his diamonds at lower level. If his suit is not solid, even the heart slam would be doubtful because bad break in hearts or clubs is also likely. Of course, slam (even grand) is possible with good heart or club fit, but we can’t investigate it." Joker_Gib also picked pass, saying. "Humm ! Tough one and anything can be right here ! However, bad breaks are probably there and with a void in partner's suit I don't want to punish him for his courageous bid. (Well done opps for the preempt)"

Having gotten the passers out of the way, the remaining pool of players mostly went for bidding some number of hearts. Richie bid 6♥. Bidding 5♥ was Fred, Frances and Jeffrey, MikeH, and Roland. None of the panel choose the imaginative 6♦, nor less off beat 5NT or 5♠ as discussed in this thread. Let's see what the 5♥ bidders had to say.

Fred. 5]He] - This is certainly a natural call, but I have no idea if it is supposed to be forcing or not. However, given that we could be going down in 5D while laydown for 7C or 7H, I have to do something. Yes there can be a correct answer to this problem, at least from a probabilistic point of view. Obviously none of the possible actions offers anywhere close to a guarantee of a good result. I think Fred has hit the essential point of the problem in my mind. Partner's biddign of 5♦ didn't assure us diamonds is the best place to play the hand (especially given our void). So bidding on out of greed and fear seems better than passing out of hopelessness.

Echoing Fred's thoughts where the other 5♥ bidders. Frances and Jeffrey said, "Obviously a guess, but this has two ways to gain (partner raises, or partner has solid diamonds and we are making slam) and only 1.5 ways to lose (we were making exactly 11 tricks in diamonds). The 1/2 way to lose when we get doubled for 300 in 6D while 5D was only -50. We also decided we didn't like passing 5D when we could be easily cold for a grand (any hand with really solid diamonds and the HA will give 7D play). Having decided to bid, 5H looks clear.

MikeH concurred, saying. "5♥: dreading every moment until the auction is over and we are undoubled. Anything could be right. Pass works only when 5♦ is the last reachable making spot, and why should that be? 5♦ may in fact be the only reachable spot that fails: RHO is not going to double the only contract he can beat. Obviously 5♥ comes with no guarantee that it will work, let alone that partner can raise when small slam is cold, or that grand is remotely biddable. However, 5♥ has many ways to win, and somehow fortune seems to favour the bold in these situations."

Roland was also on the same track, despite his complaints earlier in this thread that anything could be right. His response was: 5H. Anything can be right (and wrong) here. Maybe 5D was high enough, but we could easily be cold for 6D or 6H, maybe even 6C. On a very good day we have a grand slam on! I'll pass if partner retreats to 6D.

Reading the expert commentary, the 5♥ bidders it seem to me to be on sounder ground. They are basing their bidding their choice on something more than "anything can be right." Also, I suspect richie meant to bid 5♥ rather than 6, but even if he meant to bid 6, it shows he favors doing something to passing. So despite the tie between pass and 5♥ (each with four votes), I have upgraded 5♥ to the top spot. We never did answer the question of rather 5♥ was forcing or not. But the insight into why bid 5♥ on this anything can be right hand, I think, proved (at least for me) that this was indeed a good problem. I am glad I included it.

Votes
5♥ 4, score 100
Pass. 4. score 80
6♥, 1 score 40
5NT. 0. score 20

[Echognome]

Is 6♥ receiving a score of 60 also a typo?

I can see why 5♥ is a nice "flexible" action, but 6♥ is unilateral. 6♥ might also be a ridiculous place and doesn't involve partner at all.

[inquiry]

Echognome, on Jan 30 2006, 09:33 AM, said:

Is 6♥ receiving a score of 60 also a typo?

I can see why 5♥ is a nice "flexible" action, but 6♥ is unilateral. 6♥ might also be a ridiculous place and doesn't involve partner at all.

Hey, Richie is my buddy... I can give him a boosted score... :-)

It was a typo. I meant to give 30 or 40. So I have made 40. BTW, I really think he meant to bid 5♥, not 6.. .but since he was busy, he didn't explain his bids. On the other hand, Richie is a VERY CREATIVE thinker. He may have thought up a great reason why 6♥ is best.

[Free]

why is 5♥ getting a higher score than pass, when there's the same number of expert-votes?

[inquiry]

Free, on Jan 30 2006, 10:43 AM, said:

why is 5♥ getting a higher score than pass, when there's the same number of expert-votes?

Because Richie also choose to bid, so the bidders out numbered the passers. Also, if I had a vote (I don't, but I consider myself a tie-breaker), I would have bid 5♥. And finally, I think the logic shown in bidding 5♥ as a group was better than the logic shown by those choosing pass.

[han]

Good interesting problem. Let's please not argue about the scoring, you can't win any candy Frederick .

[Free]

Hannie, on Jan 30 2006, 07:17 PM, said:

Good interesting problem. Let's please not argue about the scoring, you can't win any candy Frederick .

lol, i'm just trying to understand how the scores are calculated...

[inquiry]

Free, on Jan 30 2006, 07:33 PM, said:

Hannie, on Jan 30 2006, 07:17 PM, said:

Good interesting problem. Let's please not argue about the scoring, you can't win any candy Frederick .

lol, i'm just trying to understand how the scores are calculated...

The bid with the most points gets 100.

If two bids tie for the most votes, I decide which one I like the most, and give it the 100, but I am often persuaded here by other factors. For instance, if one of the bid is pass, and the other is a forward going bid, and there were other forward going bids, then pass will probably be downgraded.

Then the bid with the second most panel votes get the second highest score, and so on. Occassionally, I upgrade a bid with only one vote above some bids with more votes. This is always a case like this... the winning bid is forcing to slam, the other bids are signoff except for the one stand alone bid, which also forces to slam (and most likely the same one), but just by a different route. One has to remember, there in seldom only "one" right bid.

For other scores, it depends a little on the size of the vote. If there were a lot of scatterred votes, usually the score will be somethong like 100, 80, 60. If there was a clear winner, the scores will usually be somethiong like 100, 60, 40. If there was 9-1 vote, the scores will usually be 100, 50 or 100 and less than 50.

It there are two clear choices, the votes are often 100-90.

This is not a science, nor is it an art. It simply meant to be fun (and not a source for wagering). There are people who refuse to partipate in voting because they want a more calibrated scoring system. Their loss, but hopefully they still can read the expert thoughts on the hands. There is always something to learn from the choices... yes, even the bad choices they occassionally make, because they are so generous to share their thoughts with us.

Ben

[Echognome]

I agree entirely that we only score for fun.

I also understand that the panelists are volunteering their time to participate in the poll and certainly appreciate reading their insights.

All that being said, I think it might be insightful to hear not only about why panelists chose a certain bid, but also why they didn't choose other bids. Panelists will often do this naturally on some problems. But it would be helpful if they could discuss all bids they might be thinking about and then rate and more importantly discuss those bids. I think it's a greater lessen for those that are trying to learn to not only know the winning way to thinking, but also what to avoid.

Ultimately it is up to the panelists what they would like to share with us and I am happy with their current efforts. I am only making a request as one member of their reading audience.

[Walddk]

Echognome, on Jan 31 2006, 03:27 PM, said:

I agree entirely that we only score for fun.

I also understand that the panelists are volunteering their time to participate in the poll and certainly appreciate reading their insights.

All that being said, I think it might be insightful to hear not only about why panelists chose a certain bid, but also why they didn't choose other bids. Panelists will often do this naturally on some problems. But it would be helpful if they could discuss all bids they might be thinking about and then rate and more importantly discuss those bids. I think it's a greater lessen for those that are trying to learn to not only know the winning way to thinking, but also what to avoid.

Ultimately it is up to the panelists what they would like to share with us and I am happy with their current efforts. I am only making a request as one member of their reading audience.

Very good point. I can only speak for myself, but I think the answer (if you exclude Frances/Jeffrey and MikeH who are very thorough) is that most panelists for whatever reason don't feel inclined to write a novel.

And a novel it will be if Ben was to quote every single word the panelists write. As a moderator, it's obviously his right to edit as much as he wants, but he may feel it as a dilemma if he must leave out a few of the comments .... comments that the panelist in question thinks is very important for his/her reasoning.

Ben may want to comment on this issue.

Roland

[Echognome]

I take your point Roland. I do not expect the panelists to write a novel, nor do I expect that they have any duty to do so. I do not want to come off in any way as griping as I enjoy what the panelists do write. I am only making a suggestion as to what I would enjoy reading. Of course, any insights the panelists make are appreciated.

[inquiry]

Walddk, on Jan 31 2006, 09:39 AM, said:

And a novel it will be if Ben was to quote every single word the panelists write. As a moderator, it's obviously his right to edit as much as he wants, but he may feel it as a dilemma if he must leave out a few of the comments .... comments that the panelist in question thinks is very important for his/her reasoning.

Ben may want to comment on this issue.

I tend to leave out little of what the panelist say. Oh I edit extremely rarely, but mostly I cut and paste the replies into what I post. Unlike a publication like Bridge World (or any real paper publication), this online forum has no practical space limitations. If it was a paper medium, I would post one persons comments and then say who agreed... here, each can express themselves. An advantage of an online forum.

Also, I think now that MikeH, luis, roland and a few others get in and slug out the issues before I post the expert commentary, the polls are even more valuable. One thing I notice is that after I post the panel's views the discussion usualy ends. That is a little sad, since there is often open issues that can still be "argued over." Remember, as good as our panel is, there really is rarely a last word in bidding situations... no matter how confident my pronouncement is that the panel has spoken with a single voice. For instance, 2N-3S-3N-4C.. why shouldn' that be smolen like? Clearly the panel voted for 4C as NATURAL and FORCING (and slam try). But what is the merits of minor-smolen? That might be fun to discuss.

Ben

[reisig]

I voted to bid ..and it was clear to me that partner could never raise 5♥ even when right. So - being a brave bidder - I bid 6♥ and -as always - ready with the "I'm sorry" card in the bidding box.

[fred]

Thanks to Inquiry for his excellent work!

The man writes well, analyzes well, and scores fairly in my opinion, but I really don't think the scores are that important.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[joker_gib]

fred, on Jan 31 2006, 04:56 PM, said:

Thanks to Inquiry for his excellent work!

The man writes well, analyzes well, and scores fairly in my opinion, but I really don't think the scores are that important.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

I agree with Fred !

The score is one of the less important thing !

Tx a lot to Ben for his great work and to all panelists for sharing their views with us.

This poll is great and instructive !

Alain

[luke warm]

fred, on Jan 31 2006, 10:56 AM, said:

Thanks to Inquiry for his excellent work!

The man writes well, analyzes well, and scores fairly in my opinion, but I really don't think the scores are that important.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

agree wholeheartedly with the part about ben

as for the importance of the scores, thank God they aren't that important

[Rebound]

Alas, I did not submit my answers before the deadline, but I would have voted for pass.

I am curious to know what the panelists would do with the given hand were they in direct seat.