Analyze This!

[kenberg]

I couldn't get anything right yesterday.  On the hand below we had a chance to set it and at one point a chance to set it two if I could just get my robotic friend to give me a ruff. I have a little sympathy since the opponents have ten between them and never bid , so it might be a bit tough to read my lead as a stiff. Still, he could ask himself why I later made the risky underlead,  the T holding AQJT, ( I did not know pard had five so declarer could have had the stiff K). Trying to get a ruff seems like an explanation.

Anyway, here's the hand.

http://tinyurl.com/y5fj29xv

After 1 - (Pass) - 1 - (1 ) I had options. Had it started 1 - (Pass) - 1 - (Pass) then yes, I was going to bid 4 . After the overcall I decided on 2 . Both clubs and spades are of interest, I have a stiff in and an !A in . Of course 2 does not show an ace, but then when I later bid 4 it seems that it should show an A, or at least Kx. I must have some reason to first bid 2 !s and then 4 instead of just 4 , it seems like a slam try and with xx in , after they bid 1 , I would not bid 2 and then 4 .

That was my thinking.  Oh well.

Had I bid 4 partner, bless his little robotic heart, would have been stunned since he has only two . But now he realizes the opponents have ten and at least one oft them has bid , so we must have a lot of red cards and that makes his two red kings very valuable.

There was still a third option, I could bid 4 . In Bridge World Standard that shows 6+ , 4 , and good suits. And, after the 1 overcall, there could be a reasonable inference that I have a stiff since if I had a stiff I probably, after the overcall, would regard that as important and bid 3 .

I am pretty sure the bots play this way as well, that 4 would show 4 to go with my long .

What, if anything, would get us to 6 . Maybe the 4 bid, although it's far from certain. If, over 4 , now trusts that we have a lot of red cards, he might decide to do something other than 4 !h, namely 4 . This would be Last Train, I think, but that might encourage me just enough to then bid 4 and maybe we get there. That's "might", not "will".

Had I bid 4 !d over 1 of course partner does not know of my A and will just bid 4 .  I doubt that I would be moving after that.


I think as it was, I probably need to bid 5 over their 4 . There is just too much shape, even if I don't know about their 10 card fit. Still, 4 should go down after the !c lead.

I might see how the bots do over a 4 splinter, and also over a jump to 4 . I'll be surprised if they get to slam. But at least if I splinter, and probably if I bid 4 ,  and then we play 4 X, I'll get my ruff. Pard will work it out. 

This was an interesting hand. I have never discussed 1 - 1 - 4 with any partner, but I guess I should. And having it on over a 1 overcall seems right.

[Masse24]

I don't play with bots, so cannot comment on what one would do after my rebid.

That said, 2 would not occur to me. As I whispered to you yesterday (on my way out of the room as I was at work), I would have splintered. But as I mentioned, I'm unsure how a bot would interpret that. Also, while 2 shows a strong hand, it does not indicate support for partner's suit. And while 4 is a possibility, to show a strong 6-4 type hand with support, it generally denies controls in the other two suits. I think. Maybe. I would need to check BWS to confirm. That's how I play it anyway.

So sitting opposite you, I would trot out the 4 splinter.

"Too much shape." Yes. Your Offense:Defense ratio is too great. But I do not think it clear . . . it's close.

Also, opposite a human, you presumably get your ruff. Silly bot! 

[kenberg]

I was just lpayng around with it a little to see what the bots do over what. For oone ting, after 1 - (Pass) - 1 the fourth hand doubles instead over overcalling.

I tried a 4 rebid. indeed they play it as 6+ in and 4 , they make no stipulation about no outside stops. I didn't see it in BWS either. It would seem to ensure that the bid doesn't arise very often if I have to be 6-4 with enough strength for g but no controls in the side suits.  Anyway, over 4 E signs off in 4 and when I tried 4 he signed off in 5 . Very understandable.

Then I tried the splinter 1 - (Pass) - 1 - - 4 , doubled on my left.  Again pard signed off in 4 but this time, when I followed with a call of 4 , he went on to 6 via rkc and then the Q ask.

I have a good hand but even if I splinter, I doubt that I would then bid 4 over the 4 sign-off. 

Not that the bots are an authority on slam bidding, they definitely aren't.  But I think it is a challenge to get to 6.

[jcreech]

I was also in the peanut gallery when this hand came up.  My inclination would be to bid 4 with a partner who was likely to understand the bid (even if specifically undiscussed), and carry on with a 4 cue over a signoff.  If I can get partner to either cue the K (or as the bots did, ask for keys), this is an extremely good slam to be in.

After a splinter, I don't think I would take another move, if partner is unwilling to cue the K.  As a responder, though, I would cue the king after the splinter, despite only having 6 HCPs.  I would do this because, (1) I have a 5th trump, so I know there is a nine-card fit, (2) partner opened diamonds, and a fitting control may be gigantic (and it is), and (3) we are still short of game, so if that does not excite partner enough to continue exploring slam, then we can get out at the level we were already committed to play.

BTW - I too would have given you your ruff, and the bot should have too!

[kenberg]

Here is a good system question. After 1 - 1 - 4 , is 4 a cue? After 1 - 1 - 4 it seems yes, but after 1 - 1 - 4 it might simply be Last Train, indicating a hand where, on the auction so far, slam seems plausible but not showing anything specific. Such an agreement could suffice, since opener could then, over 4 , say 4 trusting that responder has some reason for his Last Train, and then, over 4 , responder bids 5 . He can trust this to be unambiguous since openr would not have bid 4 missing both the A and the K.