BBO Discussion Forums: missed slam - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

missed slam

Poll: who should have bid more? (25 member(s) have cast votes)

who should have bid more?

  1. N (7 votes [28.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 28.00%

  2. S (8 votes [32.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 32.00%

  3. both (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. neither (10 votes [40.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2007-December-22, 14:34

Scoring: IMP

1NT-2♥-2♠-4♠-all pass

... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#2 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2007-December-22, 14:48

I would bid the same.
0

#3 User is offline   Blofeld 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 2005-May-05
  • Location:Oxford
  • Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.

Posted 2007-December-22, 14:49

The bidding looks normal. Mild slam invititation rejected. The slam isn't even that great.
0

#4 User is offline   pclayton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,151
  • Joined: 2003-June-11
  • Location:Southern California

Posted 2007-December-22, 14:52

Blofeld, on Dec 22 2007, 12:49 PM, said:

The bidding looks normal. Mild slam invititation rejected. The slam isn't even that great.

Its a good slam. Its cold on a non-club lead, and a little better than 50-50 otherwise.

I think South could make another move with 5♣. When you hold the ♠AK and partner makes a slam try, you should consider cooperating.

Pass is far from unreasonable however.
"Phil" on BBO
0

#5 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2007-December-22, 15:03

Blofeld, on Dec 22 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

The slam isn't even that great.

Don't agree with this.
0

#6 User is offline   Blofeld 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 2005-May-05
  • Location:Oxford
  • Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.

Posted 2007-December-22, 15:07

Obviously you want to be in slam, but I'd guess the expected IMP loss from not being there is only 2 or 3.

Maybe I'm overestimating the chances that the opponents find the club lead.
0

#7 User is offline   Blofeld 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 2005-May-05
  • Location:Oxford
  • Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.

Posted 2007-December-22, 15:15

Actually, back-of-the-envelope calculation shows I'm talking rubbish.

So scratch that. I just have a very bad intuitive idea of which slams we want to be in. :(
0

#8 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2007-December-22, 15:23

Blofeld, on Dec 22 2007, 04:07 PM, said:

Obviously you want to be in slam, but I'd guess the expected IMP loss from not being there is only 2 or 3.

That would make the amount of IMPs you win for bidding slam very large right?

I was responder so won't comment.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#9 User is offline   Apollo81 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,162
  • Joined: 2006-July-10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 2007-December-22, 15:30

Neither is to blame.
0

#10 User is offline   Edmunte1 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 593
  • Joined: 2003-October-26
  • Location:Galati, Romania

Posted 2007-December-22, 16:58

Neither is to blame, maybe the methods could be better. Something like:

1nt-2♥
2♠-3♥ (1)
3♠-3NT(2)
4♣(4)-4♦(4)....
5♦(5) -6♠

(1)-retransfer
(2)-forcing, SI 6+♠, no shortage
(4)-cues
(5)-reevaluating, the hand value increased, denies ♥ control, second round ♣ control, emphasis is on concentrated hcp in ♦ and trump
Still a tough slam to bid
0

#11 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2007-December-23, 03:22

North's hand is limit, if going to make a forward movement it would be with 3♣ wich pictures kinda awfully our hand.

If north was in need of recovery he can try some other funny stuff, but given who he is, it is highly unlikelly :unsure:
0

#12 User is offline   pclayton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,151
  • Joined: 2003-June-11
  • Location:Southern California

Posted 2007-December-23, 13:37

Edmunte1, on Dec 22 2007, 02:58 PM, said:

Neither is to blame, maybe the methods could be better. Something like:

1nt-2♥
2♠-3♥ (1)
3♠-3NT(2)
4♣(4)-4♦(4)....
5♦(5) -6♠

(1)-retransfer
(2)-forcing, SI 6+♠, no shortage
(4)-cues
(5)-reevaluating, the hand value increased, denies ♥ control, second round ♣ control, emphasis is on concentrated hcp in ♦ and trump
Still a tough slam to bid

Aren't 3♥ and 3N redundant here?

I would think Opener could cue 4♣ directly over 3♥.
"Phil" on BBO
0

#13 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2007-December-23, 13:41

I think with any methods this is just really hard to bid.
0

#14 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,772
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2007-December-23, 16:43

I think south should take another bid.

While south has a minimum fifteen it is almost all controls and the J10 provide potential for further tricks.

I am not sure after one further move whether we will get to slam.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#15 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,772
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2007-December-23, 16:46

I had another look - I couldn't remember the exact hands when I was making the last comment.

1NT 2♥
2♠ 4♠
5♣ 5♦
5♠ 6♠

looks very reasonable to me.

North also has controls and I think would easily accept when south takes a move. Slam makes opposite this fitting 15 count and opener could have a better hand without a heart control and bid the same way.
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#16 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2007-December-23, 16:56

I'll take this chance to vent about a pet peeve. Why do people so often call this auction a 'mild' slam try? It's a balanced slam try, and in most common systems, at least in the US, it's the only balanced slam try available with a six card suit. Calling it a 'mild' slam try implies that there is some stronger slam try available (blackwood, I suppose). Nothing mild about it.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#17 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2007-December-23, 17:45

jdonn, on Dec 23 2007, 05:56 PM, said:

I'll take this chance to vent about a pet peeve. Why do people so often call this auction a 'mild' slam try? It's a balanced slam try, and in most common systems, at least in the US, it's the only balanced slam try available with a six card suit. Calling it a 'mild' slam try implies that there is some stronger slam try available (blackwood, I suppose). Nothing mild about it.

5S
0

#18 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2007-December-25, 15:44

I now like 1NT-transfer-2NT to be a three-card super-acceptance (HHx in trumps). But, this Opener's hand is not strong enough.

I also like 1NT-transfer-simple-3OM to be a slam move. So, if I did that, Opener would cue 3♠ (two of the top three clubs), and Responder would bid 3NT (serious, after learning this), and Opener would bid 4♣ (club control). Responder would bid 4♦ (diamond control -- not shortness because no initial 4♦).

Now, if Opener happened to bid 4♥ as LTTC, Responder would accept, primed out an all.

This sequence, however, requires that Responder upgrade his enthusiasm by the information provided about the solid trumps and that Opener upgrade his enthusiasm by the presence of the diamond Ace, either of which is plausible but somewhat unlikely.

I think I would either miss this one or, if arriving at the slam, feel that a bad move by one of us turned up lucky gold.
"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

#19 User is offline   benlessard 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,465
  • Joined: 2006-January-07
  • Location:Montreal Canada
  • Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.

Posted 2007-December-25, 23:44

The way I like is that mild slam are very specific hand that need 4 keycards (or 3 when playing weak Nt) to be accepted. So with north im going to make a real slam try. I think south with 3 keycards and the K of D has an easy accept.
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
0

#20 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2007-December-26, 08:17

North needs five covers.

South would super-accept with five assured covers.

The late 4♠ call does not change that need.

So, South only goes if KJ10x in a side suit provides two covers in his estimation. I'm not sure that this is a good decision.

Adding 3OM (3♥) to allow further consideration does help slightly. When Opener bids 3♠, rather than 4♠, he is showing something worthwhile.
"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 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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