[whereagles]

Matchpoints, V vs NV, intermediate field. You hold:

♠ A832
♥ AJ54
♦ A2
♣ KQJ

You pard
2NT . 3♣ (dbl)
3♦ ... 4♣
..??

2NT = 18 to bad 20
3♣ = puppet stayman
(dbl) = some clubs
3♦ = one or two 4 card majors
4♣ = slammish with 44 majors

Your options are:

4♦ = heart fit, good hand for slam
4M = fit, bad hand for slam
4NT = spade fit, good hand, RKCB
5x = spade fit, good hand, control in x (meta-agreement, so you're only 95% sure pard will understand it)

How do you evaluate your hand and what do you bid?

[cherdanno]

4♦ seems obvious at first sight. It still seems obvious after reflection.

[MarkDean]

4♥ for me (assuming 2NT was 20-21). I think this hand is pretty bad for slam, in the context of the auction. We may be mirror, and if not, partner's ruffing value will be opposite my KQJ. We need partner to have a lot for slam to be good, in which case she will bid again.

[kenrexford]

A good idea is to assess how many covers per expectancy you have.

If partner has two suits, your best cover position would be KQKQ in his suits, plus AKA extermally, for seven covers. That's the primo hand.

Your worst cover position is perhaps AKQJAKJ extermally and JJ internally, which is the death hand and only three covers.

More likely you have 4-6 covers. With only four, you get out. With a full six, you clearly move.

Five is tweener. So, you look to see how true blue the five are.

This hand has A-A internal and an Ace external, for three clear. Getting KQJ to two covers is possible, but very questionable. Hence, this seems low-end expectancy.

So, I'd bid 4♥ also.

[cherdanno]

I guess I am the odd man out, but when the original post says 2NT shows 18 to bad 20, I assume that 2NT showed 18 to bad 20.

[jdonn]

As usual on these problems I think Ken sounds like he is giving the call on the Kentucky Derby. Anyway if my choice was between 4M and something above 4M I would sign off, but I will bid 4♦ since I get to make my try below game.

[Phil]

This hand really isn't that bad in the context of the bidding. Our clubs will provide useful pitches. I'll cooperate with 4♦, but I'm not moving over 4♥.

[MarkDean]

Oh, you mean I am supposed to read all of the post?

I would still bid 4♥, but obviously, it is closer.

[MarkDean]

Phil, on May 15 2009, 03:05 PM, said:

This hand really isn't that bad in the context of the bidding. Our clubs will provide useful pitches. I'll cooperate with 4♦, but I'm not moving over 4♥.

Which suit are we pitching?

If partner is 4423 we have zero pitches. If she is 4432 we can either pitch the diamond we could ruff, or a spade where we have a 44 fit. If partner is 4441 or 4450, then yes, pitching two spades could be useful.

I think the chances that "our clubs will provide useful pitches," is below 30%.

[Phil]

MarkDean, on May 15 2009, 06:10 PM, said:

Phil, on May 15 2009, 03:05 PM, said:

This hand really isn't that bad in the context of the bidding. Our clubs will provide useful pitches. I'll cooperate with 4♦, but I'm not moving over 4♥.

Which suit are we pitching?

If partner is 4423 we have zero pitches. If she is 4432 we can either pitch the diamond we could ruff, or a spade where we have a 44 fit. If partner is 4441 or 4450, then yes, pitching two spades could be useful.

I think the chances that "our clubs will provide useful pitches," is below 30%.

If pard is 4423, we have bigger problems than pitches since the club is probably getting ruffed. I doubt thats the case since RHO has advertised length.

[kenrexford]

MarkDean, on May 15 2009, 06:06 PM, said:

Oh, you mean I am supposed to read all of the post?

I would still bid 4♥, but obviously, it is closer.

I had the same problem.

It's one of those things. I had to look a couple of times to see "18 to a bad 20" even after told it was there. My mind must not have wanted to accept that, kind of like one shuts down with a catatonic trance after trauma. That range was just too shocking for my system to accept.

[whereagles]

allright, allright, next time I'll use a

bigger font

for the 18 to bad 20 range

I'll be out today. Back tomorrow with the "solution"

[whereagles]

Thx all. Hands were

Scoring: MP

2NT 3♣ (dbl)
3♦ 4♣
??

---

North was planning to bid only game but, after the double, he re-evaluated due to the singleton. As it is, if you encourage with 4♦ or 5x, you'll end up in the lousy slam.

I'm not too sure of this, but I think South's club holding is a minus-value. It's only good if pard has something like xxx, and even then there's the risk of a ruff.

For Ken: what's your problem with the range? In some variants of precision you bid

1♣ 1♦
2NT

with 19-21. Although that's an hcp higher, the range is slightly bigger and you already know pard is a bit on the weakish side.

[Phil]

whereagles, on May 17 2009, 12:26 PM, said:

Thx all. Hands were

Scoring: MP

2NT 3♣ (dbl)
3♦ 4♣
??

---

North was planning to bid only game but, after the double, he re-evaluated due to the singleton. As it is, if you encourage with 4♦ or 5x, you'll end up in the lousy slam.

I'm not too sure of this, but I think South's club holding is a minus-value. It's only good if pard has something like xxx, and even then there's the risk of a ruff.

For Ken: what's your problem with the range? In some variants of precision you bid

1♣ 1♦
2NT

with 19-21. Although that's an hcp higher, the range is slightly bigger and you already know pard is a bit on the weakish side.

Oh, we can't bid key card and find out about the missing ♥Q and ♣A?

What a shame.

[gnasher]

whereagles, on May 17 2009, 06:26 PM, said:

For Ken: what's your problem with the range? In some variants of precision you bid

1♣ 1♦
2NT

There are three bad things about auctions that start with a natural 2NT:
- We might be too high already (or might belong in a 3-level partscore that we can't reach)
- We have limited space for investigating game contracts
- We have limited space for investigating slam contracts
In the Precision auction you probably can't have a slam on, so you have only two of these three disadvantages.

Quote

with 19-21. Although that's an hcp higher, the range is slightly bigger and you already know pard is a bit on the weakish side.

18-bad 20 is more common than 19-any 21. Using the figures from here:
  HCP Probability
  21  0.38
  20  0.64
  19  1.04
  18  1.61
19-21 = 1.04 + 0.64 + 0.38 = 2.06
18-bad 20 = 1.61 + 1.04 + P(bad 20) > 2.65

Those figures are for any hands, not just balanced, but I can't see it affecting the ratios significantly.

[kenrexford]

I routinely open 19-counts (good ones) 2NT.

I also have contemplated 18-20 as a reasoned range when holding a 5-card major (maybe even some 17's) because of problems after 1M-P-1NT when 2NT is artificial.

So, I can easily imagine people having a need for an 18-20 2NT opening.

I was just having fun.

[hanp]

I think a 18-20 2NT opening is bad. It's too high too often and the range is wide.

[TylerE]

Actually, I would expect balanced hands to be a bit higher, perhaps signifigantly. After all, a 13-0-0-0 can only contain 10 HCP, whereas a 4-3-3-3 could be as much as 37.

[Cascade]

TylerE, on May 18 2009, 12:17 PM, said:

Actually, I would expect balanced hands to be a bit higher, perhaps signifigantly. After all, a 13-0-0-0 can only contain 10 HCP, whereas a 4-3-3-3 could be as much as 37.

I am not 100% sure what you mean but here are the numbers for probabilities of HCP in general and in a balanced hand:

Quote

HCP Overall Balanced
0 0.00363896 0.00416452
1 0.00788442 0.00844079
2 0.01356119 0.01452011
3 0.02462364 0.02555190
4 0.03845438 0.03972463
5 0.05186193 0.05261603
6 0.06554096 0.06573727
7 0.08028087 0.07971910
8 0.08892189 0.08806771
9 0.09356228 0.09194543
10 0.09405115 0.09198398
11 0.08944680 0.08778422
12 0.08026865 0.07888831
13 0.06914332 0.06810480
14 0.05693323 0.05644521
15 0.04423679 0.04442587
16 0.03310919 0.03352847
17 0.02361695 0.02425520
18 0.01605084 0.01679307
19 0.01036173 0.01105687
20 0.00643536 0.00700382
21 0.00377867 0.00422106
22 0.00210043 0.00241625
23 0.00111904 0.00132238
24 0.00055903 0.00068450
25 0.00026428 0.00033537
26 0.00011668 0.00015388
27 0.00004907 0.00006745
28 0.00001857 0.00002680
29 0.00000667 0.00001007
30 0.00000220 0.00000350
31 0.00000061 0.00000103
32 0.00000017 0.00000031
33 0.00000004 0.00000007
34 0.00000001 0.00000001
35 0.00000000 0.00000000
36 0.00000000 0.00000000
37 0.00000000 0.00000000

[whereagles]

hanp, on May 17 2009, 11:02 PM, said:

I think a 18-20 2NT opening is bad. It's too high too often and the range is wide.

Actually, I only play it to keep pard happy.. lol. I was a bit weary when we started playing this range but, as of now, we never had any major problems because of it.