[inquiry]

Stephen Tu, on Oct 8 2008, 01:14 PM, said:

Quote

The play in trumps was certainly not silly. It was picking up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton 10 offside; low to the jack picks up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton K onside (symmetrical) and run the queen, low to the 8 picks up K10x onside but loses to 10x offside; I think 10x offside is slightly more likely so the selected line is fine

Frances makes an analysis error for first time in ages?

Best play in trumps is low to the J. This picks up K/Kt/Kx/Kxx onside.
Running J then cash Q picks up KT/Kx/Kxx/KTxx, but stiff K is more common than KTxx onside. Not symmetrical, after low to J drops T on right you can cross again to finesse.

Running J then hook 8 picks up KT/Kxx/KTx/KTxx, but KTx < Kx and KTxx < K.

Low to 8 first is like the worst, losing to Kxx also.

As for the bidding, whether North can open is a style issue. But I don't think South should try for slam at all, I like 4M responses to Jacoby to be real dreck, the 5 level not necessarily safe. Reordering the response structure is best but if you want to keep the same one at least lower the ranges for all the bal/semi-balanced hands about 1.5 pts.

Are you sure low to the Jack picks up KT with West? What if he plays the KING when you lead low? Do you play him for KT or stiff king?

[han]

inquiry, on Oct 14 2008, 07:18 PM, said:

Do you play him for KT or stiff king?

For either?

[effervesce]

I blame the method used. Given the method used, I don't blame either player (unless north should not have opened such hands given the partnership style).

Give north the ten of spades as well, and slam is pretty much on a hook.

[mike777]

The_Hog, on Oct 8 2008, 04:03 AM, said:

I would have opened the Nth hand. South is 100% to blame here. North has advertised a balanced min. Why should Sth push on to a slam on a hand that looks like being on a hook at best.

As usual I agree with the Hog.


For me 4s shows 11-12 balanced(or less) very often.
denies any void..denies any stiff.

[benlessard]

Either North hand isnt an opening.

Or South had no right to bid 6S after 5H.

I like 4m/4H to show minimum hands but with a control and 4S show AK/AQ in spades + 2 Queens or 1Q+3 jacks.

And im not a big fan of jacoby 2Nt anyway.

[lilboyman]

South can reasonably expect a 7 loser hand for North's opening bid. South has 5 high card tricks for North and can reasonably expect to trump at least 1 Heart. This, looks like 12 tricks to South even after the 4 Spade balanced minimum call by North and I cannot expect him to stop short of slam. So, I would assign blame to North unless South agreed to allow the opening 9 loser hands at IMPs in which case I would blame both.

[manudude03]

lilboyman, on Oct 16 2008, 10:23 PM, said:

South can reasonably expect a 7 loser hand for North's opening bid. South has 5 high card tricks for North and can reasonably expect to trump at least 1 Heart.  This, looks like 12 tricks to South even after the 4 Spade balanced minimum call by North and I cannot expect him to stop short of slam.  So, I would assign blame to North unless South agreed to allow the opening 9 loser hands at IMPs in which case I would blame both.

LTC is quite sensitive. It doesn't count for duplication of values, and at the same time, doesn't count jacks at all (a jack in a sidefit is very often half a trick). It does have its limits too. Here's an extreme case:

---

Excessive tricks doesnt mean no losers. Both hands are 3 loser hands, going by LTC alone, it's saying you should be making 7S easily (a full 5 tricks past the LTC value needed). Somehow, I don't think you want to play there......

As for how you applied it to this hand, you counted the heart doubleton twice (one of the missing losers was for the ruff, then you added another ruff to come to 12 tricks).

Also, should 7 LTC with North be expected to happen enough to drive to slam? AKJxx Jxx Jxx QJ is a minimum bal hand with 5 spades (no-one passing that, right?), yet that has same initial LTC as the North hand posted. Move the Q to another suit and its an 8 loser. I agree that a lot of the time, opener will have 7 LTC due to the fifth spade (AJxx AJx AJx AJx is a 20 count with 8 LTC), but its far from promised.


Anyway, my opinion of the OP hand:

I wouldn't have opened with the North hand. I don't mind the fact its a balanced 11 count, but when 3 of those points are jacks and 2 of those are in short suits, its not an opening bid for me. If south can reasonably expect an opener like that, then the blame has to go to south. North's hand didn't get any worse during the bidding, and the 5H cuebid would have been almost obligitory.