[the hog]

Imps all red

Scoring: Imps

---

(4S) P (P) X
(P) ?

I was expecting this to be a pickup and was annoyed when it was a flat board. The double is explained on you side of the screen as "card showing", whatever that means. What is your call?

[mikestar]

5♥

In this situation, "card-showing" means what we used to mean by "optional": not shapely enough for a takeout double, not strong enough in trumps for a penalty double.

We will place partner with 2 (3 4 4) for total trick analysis. They have 10 trumps, we might have 8 (then we have a double fit) but we probably have 9 and may even have 9 with a double fit. So we'll say 19 total trumps=19 total tricks. 5♥ is wrong only if ♥ takes exactly 10 tricks and ♠ takes exactly 9.


With the ♥ and ♦ holdings, there may well be more tricks than trumps because of the purity of the deal. If there are 20 total tricks, 5♥ is always right.

[hrothgar]

Tricky hand

Pulling 4SX seems clear, especially if partner doesn't have a penalty double available.

With this said and done, I am going to pull to 4NT, suggesting two place to play.
I intend to correct 5C to 5D showing the red suits.

We're playing IMPs, so I'm more worried about identifying strain than forcing the hand to play in a major. Furthermore, a 4-4 diamond fit might provide 1 more trick than a 5-4 fit in Hearts. Getting a club discard could be crucial.

[inquiry]

I don't like "card showing" doubles here.... and who is explaining on your side of the screen what your parnter's double means?

There are only two possible calls here. Pass and 4NT (scramble). IF I decide to bid, and I will have to think about it, I will bid 4NT and if partner bids 5♣ i correct to 5♦ giving him a choice between the reds.

I guess in final analysis I will bid... 4NT rather than pass.

Ben

[the hog]

I opened 4S Ben. This was a problem my opponents faced - not clear in my post; I asked the meaning of the double. Why did I know in advance what you were going to bid.

Hmm. 4N scrambling? I guess you pass your partner's 5D now? I'm amused that everyone has pulled the X so far. (Oh well, small things....)

[inquiry]

Yes, I pass 5♦ if this is partner's bid. Come on, partner didn't promise enough to make 6♦ when I have no first or second round control in any suit (if you excuse the short ♠. So we can make 6♦ or 6♥.... partner will just have to bid more himself (jumping to 6♦...choose a red suit, if we belong there, for I am done.

Ben

[Free]

4NT, cheapest bid and cover for all suits. Let's hope p doesnt see this as Blackwood...

[the hog]

"Yes, I pass 5♦ if this is partner's bid. Come on, partner didn't promise enough to make 6♦"

That wasn't a criticism of passing by any means. I would have found the same auction had I been in your seat.

[the hog]

The hand from last night was from the pennant semi finals played. Here is the full hand.

---

Note that you make 5H, even 5N. 5D is maybe too hard too handle due to the 5-0 break, but has chances, and is still a pickup even if 1 off. I was annoyed as 790 in 4SX was a flat board. Interestingly note how far out lott is. Both teams left in the X; a mistake in my view and obviously in the view of all who posted here.

[Free]

From the moment there's a void in the game, LOTT isn't correct anymore... This is again some evidence!

[inquiry]

The_Hog, on Mar 3 2004, 08:34 PM, said:

---

Note that you make 5H, even 5N. 5D is maybe too hard too handle due to the 5-0 break, but has chances, and is still a pickup even if 1 off. I was annoyed as 790 in 4SX was a flat board. Interestingly note how far out lott is. Both teams left in the X; a mistake in my view and obviously in the view of all who posted here.

I don't get it... what is the total trumps on this hand...

NS have 10 Spades, EW have 8 diamonds or eight hearts.

There are some additions here. Add 1/2 trick for trump purity (both sides), that raises the count from 18 to 19. So LOTT is off by one trick, using the obvious correction for purity, I am not terribly surprised, after a vul first seat 4♠ preempt, expect wild distribution. And with 8 and 9 card suits in one hand, lott is also usually under estimated as well, this is a typical example as to why, but let me give you an example.. how many spades will these two suit combinations win in spades?

AKQJ
T987

versus
AKQJT987
void

It the first case, if the opponents ever lead spades even once, you can win at most 7 spades, in the second case, you always win 8 spade tricks.

So I would have guessed this hand as at least a 19 trick hand based upon LOTT, because I would have assumed we had at least an 8 card fit, that they had purity, and that south had 8 spades or more (gaining some bonus trick value).

Ben

[flytoox]

The_Hog, on Mar 3 2004, 09:29 PM, said:

Imps all red

Scoring: Imps

---

(4S) P (P) X
(P) ?

I was expecting this to be a pickup and was annoyed when it was a flat board. The double is explained on you side of the screen as "card showing", whatever that means. What is your call?

I will bid 5H if must pull. 4N in my view imlies minors.

Do I pull? Yes, opp are red as well, so 4S cannot be too broke, which implies pd should have strength in other suits.

[inquiry]

flytoox, on Mar 4 2004, 10:12 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Mar 3 2004, 09:29 PM, said:

Imps all red

Dealer: East Vul: Both Scoring: Imps

♠ 2 ♥ QTxxx ♦ QJT2 ♣ 987

(4S)  P  (P)  X
(P)  ?

I was expecting this to be a pickup and was annoyed when it was a flat board. The double is explained on you side of the screen as "card showing", whatever that means. What is your call?

I will bid 5H if must pull. 4N in my view imlies minors.

Do I pull? Yes, opp are red as well, so 4S cannot be too broke, which implies pd should have strength in other suits.

Fly, let's say you bid 4NT.. and your partner bids 5♣ because 4NT implied "minors", now what would 5♦ by you mean?

Since 4♠x was not takeout (this is not what I play by the way), you really should use 4NT here as scrambling.. two places to play. If partner bids one of your places all is well.. .if not, you bid the next one. It is wasteful to save 4NT for the minors. Now if the opening bid had been 4♥ppx.... now 4NT would be for minors, as you could have run out to 4♠ one level lower.

Ben

[flytoox]

inquiry, on Mar 4 2004, 03:15 PM, said:

[Fly, let's say you bid 4NT.. and your partner bids 5♣ because 4NT implied "minors", now what would 5♦ by you mean?

Since 4♠x was not takeout (this is not what I play by the way), you really should use 4NT here as scrambling.. two places to play. If partner bids one of your places all is well.. .if not, you bid the next one. It is wasteful to save 4NT for the minors. Now if the opening bid had been 4♥ppx.... now 4NT would be for minors, as you could have run out to 4♠ one level lower.

Ben

Hmm, this makes sense. point taken. Thanks.

[Trpltrbl]

I ain't passing, so I will bid my longest and bestest suit ♥. But thank God I don't play cardshowing silly X in that situation.

Mike

[Antoine Fourrière]

Gulp (?). Would have opened 5♠, I think.

[Azzkikr]

I will rip this X and bid 4NT you want partner to play it if you can get them to and you have 2 suits, so give them the choice, if you dont like what they bid then you can always correct.

[Cascade]

mikestar, on Mar 3 2004, 06:48 PM, said:

With the ♥ and ♦ holdings, there may well be more tricks than trumps because of the purity of the deal. If there are 20 total tricks, 5♥ is always right.

But if there are 17, 18 or 19 total tricks then we may well have just taken a phantom push.

[Cascade]

The_Hog, on Mar 3 2004, 10:34 PM, said:

Both teams left in the X; a mistake in my view and obviously in the view of all who posted here.

Using this hand as an example is flawed in my view.

Eight-card suits are about 12 times more likely than 9 card suits. And some players might have opened 4♠ with a seven-card suit. So I don't mind being wrong occasionally when a 9-card suit turns up in order to gain a lot more when the more likely hands are around.