[TimG]

The 4th problem in the October 1998 Challenge the Champs set is:

Scoring: MP

---

The scores are: 7♣ 10; 6♠ 7; 6♣ 6; etc.

I wonder though, does 7C really deserve that high a score? I had thought that you didn't really want to bid grands that depended upon a 32 trump split.

Tim

[twcho]

The scoring is fair imo. It is because if ♣ doesn't break, even 6♣ or 6♠ fails.

[shevek]

twcho, on Dec 30 2008, 11:35 PM, said:

The scoring is fair imo. It is because if ♣ doesn't break, even 6♣ or 6♠ fails.

Not quite. You might make 6♠ when North has stiff ♣10 or J plus extra chances like throwing in a player with ♥K & 4 clubs.

[awm]

The key is that the scoring is MP. At MP it is good to bid grands that are more than 50% provided that the field will be in a small slam. Assuming a reasonably strong field, most people will get to six of something on this pair of hands.

[ArtK78]

7♣ is better than a 3-2 trump break. It will also make when trump are 4-1 and a singleton J or 10 is behind the A9xx as long as spades are 3-2.

[TimG]

ArtK78, on Dec 31 2008, 03:12 PM, said:

7♣ is better than a 3-2 trump break.  It will also make when trump are 4-1 and a singleton J or 10 is behind the A9xx as long as spades are 3-2.

That's only 12 tricks, isn't it?

When I posted, I had overlooked that the 41 split would most often also sink small slams.

[jdonn]

ArtK78, on Dec 31 2008, 03:12 PM, said:

7♣ is better than a 3-2 trump break. It will also make when trump are 4-1 and a singleton J or 10 is behind the A9xx as long as spades are 3-2.

I think it's worse than a 3-2 break. Supposing spades are 5-0 and they lead a diamond.

[jdonn]

awm, on Dec 31 2008, 02:31 AM, said:

The key is that the scoring is MP. At MP it is good to bid grands that are more than 50% provided that the field will be in a small slam. Assuming a reasonably strong field, most people will get to six of something on this pair of hands.

Wow is it really so obvious? I would expect many good players to miss this slam. There are 26 hcp, it's very difficult to confirm the spades are solid (without bidding RKC but then you risk the 5 level when they aren't), and the players would have to know the diamond void is very good when the first response is likely going to be 2♦. There is also no fit longer than 8 cards (for our side). You must play in some tough fields!

[Fluffy]

It is imposible to know if partner has ♣J, ♣10 and/or ♥J, with 2 of them grand slam goes over 70% I think.

There is no way to show the void, but if the bidding starts 1♠-2♦-2♠-3♣-4♣-4♥ opener will know partner doesn't have diamond control. Still he will miss 1 trick for the grand.

[barmar]

CTC isn't claiming that it's feasible to bid the grand. The score just reflects that IF you manage to bid it, it will usually make and you'll get a great score as a result.

Also, experts don't always wait until they can count 13 tricks before bidding grands, especially playing pairs in an expert field (which is what CTC assumes in its scoring). Grands often depend on having the right queens or jacks, and even experts rarely can pinpoint these. They'll sometimes bid hopeful grands, hoping that either partner has the right cards or can squeeze it out of the opponents.

[whereagles]

I think I would end up in 4♠ on this one...

Still, at imps a grand slam starts to be statistically favourable at around ~60% odds, so the scoring seems fair. Even at MPs.

[cherdano]

twcho, on Dec 30 2008, 10:35 PM, said:

The scoring is fair imo. It is because if ♣ doesn't break, even 6♣ or 6♠ fails.

This has been picked up by many replies, but this does not matter at matchpoints, since we still go down one more than the rest of the field.
Anyway, a 10 is a bit high by the CTC scoring rules - if 7♣ makes 68% of the time, we can't get more than 68% of a top for bidding it, which would be a 8 not a 10 out of a top 12. Knowing what the field does is important for scoring the small slams, however.

[shevek]

cherdano, on Jan 1 2009, 05:09 AM, said:

twcho, on Dec 30 2008, 10:35 PM, said:

The scoring is fair imo. It is because if ♣ doesn't break, even 6♣ or 6♠ fails.

This has been picked up by many replies, but this does not matter at matchpoints, since we still go down one more than the rest of the field.
Anyway, a 10 is a bit high by the CTC scoring rules - if 7♣ makes 68% of the time, we can't get more than 68% of a top for bidding it, which would be a 8 not a 10 out of a top 12. Knowing what the field does is important for scoring the small slams, however.

If I'm the only one I get 100% a bit less than 68% of the time.
However, I might get nearly 50% if there is a club loser because those in 6♠ might well go down. 68% + ½32 = 84. 84/100 = 10 out of 12.

Silly figures of course.

[cherdano]

shevek, on Jan 1 2009, 07:47 AM, said:

cherdano, on Jan 1 2009, 05:09 AM, said:

twcho, on Dec 30 2008, 10:35 PM, said:

The scoring is fair imo. It is because if ♣ doesn't break, even 6♣ or 6♠ fails.

This has been picked up by many replies, but this does not matter at matchpoints, since we still go down one more than the rest of the field.
Anyway, a 10 is a bit high by the CTC scoring rules - if 7♣ makes 68% of the time, we can't get more than 68% of a top for bidding it, which would be a 8 not a 10 out of a top 12. Knowing what the field does is important for scoring the small slams, however.

If I'm the only one I get 100% a bit less than 68% of the time.
However, I might get nearly 50% if there is a club loser because those in 6♠ might well go down. 68% + ½32 = 84. 84/100 = 10 out of 12.

Silly figures of course.

Except that we usually go down more than those in 6♠ or 6♣.