[ONEferBRID]

Agree the hand is too strong for a weak 2, but it could be a poster child for opening 1C with a minimum or subminimum 5-5 in the blacks .

[Winstonm]

gwnn, on Apr 18 2010, 12:38 PM, said:

loser count is for losers

Quote

This method (losing trick count) did not gain very much popularity with the bridge community (published in 1934), but was revived by Mr. Maurice Harrison-Gray and has become an acceptable counting method. It regained popularity when the Italian teams used it successfully in combination with the Roman System.

And we all know how badly that Italian experiment turned out....

[gwnn]

yeppp everyone plays Roman nowadays

[MFA]

North is not out of range for slam purposes. It may be an ugly hand for a vul vs not two-bid, but it's not out of range for slam.

When south decided not to look for slam, it was his decision all alone, and it worked out poorly. We could argue if he was unlucky or too conservative. But blaming north for having an ugly hand is beside the point, since the 'ugliness' as such was irrelevant for the success of his partner's decision.

[gwnn]

Hm MFA? I think most people were arguing that N was too good, so S's conservativeness was at least partly justified.

[MFA]

gwnn, on Apr 18 2010, 11:13 PM, said:

Hm MFA? I think most people were arguing that N was too good, so S's conservativeness was at least partly justified.

Well, I just stated my evaluation of north's hand for slam purposes. That's all. As long as I evaluate it in range for slam purposes, I can't use the assign the blame format meaningfully, since all then hinges on south's lone decision.

Just as if, say, I have evaluated a given off shape 1NT opening as in range for slam purposes, then doing an 'assign the blame excercise' after partner's conservative and unfortunate 3NT bid would be equally meaningless, no matter how much I happen to hate the opening bid with the particular hand because of its off shape nature.

Some posts in this thread just generally don't like opening 2♠ with north's hand and that is beside the point. At least for discussing the missed slam.

[cherdanno]

I think a 5-5 hand with KQ of trumps and A in the other suit IS out of range for slam purposes (opposite most responding hands, that is).

[the hog]

aguahombre, on Apr 18 2010, 08:43 PM, said:

Even a Pass by North to start with works better, leading to 6S by South after 2NT. I might have overlooked the fact that my stiff heart was the Queen and accidentally passed.

South is not blameless after the 2S start. So:

100 % North (for the opening)

50% South (for not exploring)

25 % Ogust (for not being useful on this hand)

Hey thats 175%

[awm]

I'd certainly open 2♠ with any of:

♠KT9xxx ♥x ♦xx ♣Axxx

♠KQTxxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣xxx

Even ♠KQTxxx ♥x ♦xx ♣Axxx seems okay at unfavorable.

I don't think a good suit plus a side ace is at all out of the question at these colors. South should try for slam. While I don't personally like the 2♠ bid, this has more to do with suit quality (five card suit with no spots? at red vs. white?) than playing strength. I'm blaming south for this missed slam: it's not like you can't bid ogust and then get out in 4♠ if partner shows a bad hand.

[P_Marlowe]

mohitz, on Apr 18 2010, 03:07 AM, said:

<!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> N/S </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> KQxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> Q </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AT9xx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AJxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> Kx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AKx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> KQxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end -->

2♠ - 4♠

First time partner. 2NT would have been Ogust ask. New suit forcing one round.

Hi,

In a first time partnership 2S is unwise, to put it mildly.
You have no idea, what p expects your preempt openings to look like,
you have a 5 card suit, instead of a 6 card suit, you have a side Ace
and a 5 card side suit.

Your best bet as North is either Pass, or if you cant stand it, 1S.

So the blame goes to North, without even looking at the South hand.

Of course the South hand is nice, control rich, whatever, and as a reg. p
South most likely would and should have made a move, if sure, that 2S
at the given colors is not based on garbage, ..., but what does he know.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hanp]

jillybean, on Apr 18 2010, 08:41 AM, said:

2♠ killed any chance of a normal auction, why is this posted as a problem?

Ditto.

[Phil]

I play a lot of different styles of weak 2's with different partners, and you sometimes get awful results when you play loosy-goosy methods. You also get some excellent results when partner can bounce.

Still I hate 2♠ - we are r/w and there is no reason why partner should even think about 6♣ with a hand like x AKxx Axxx KQxx.

(aguahombre - si)

This post has been edited by Phil: 2010-April-19, 12:10

[aguahombre]

Although Phil seems to have reversed the Black suit honors of the OP 2S opener, the point is still valid.

[jjbrr]

both N and S were hopeless in this auction.

4♣ preempt keycard is a good idea.

[billw55]

jjbrr, on Apr 19 2010, 12:43 PM, said:

both N and S were hopeless in this auction.

Ditto.