Made it but

[kenberg]

Hi,

In Jack's session yesterday I was dealt xx / AQTxx / x / Axxxx.
I'm not big on the rule of n, whatever the number n is for whatever the situation, but all the points are in my two suits and I do have the T, or at least I think I did (I  did not save the hands).

So, rightly or wrongly, I opened 1 :

1 - Pass - 1 - 2
Pass - Pass - 3 - Pass
?

I bid 3 but commented later that I think that this was a mistake. It's true that I barely had an opener and considered passing, but I have already  passed over 2 and now partner wants to hear more from me. By passing 2 I have denied holding three spades, so I think I  should now  just bite the bullet and bid 3 .  We can argue about whether I should have opened the hand but I did open it and my hand has not gotten worse. In fact, with the stiff , it has gotten a little better. I have two spades, partner has asked for a further description, I think that I should just bid 3 .

Neither 4 nor 4 should make, but I think 4 has a better chance.

Note: It seems to me that hands from the lesson sessions are often worthy of further discussion, but that does not much happen. Your thoughts?

[Masse24]

I completely agree, Ken. I mentioned it at the time. Since you've already denied holding three-card support, a subsequent spade bid by you should show exactly two cards and no better bid.

Also, it is my belief that your partner's 3 rebid is a game-force, which is something I brought up. A couple of people disagreed, stating it was merely invitational. But (in my opinion) that was because responder held a barely invitational hand--not due to what the bid should mean. There was no further discussion. Obviously, I disagree with the 3 bid. Better would have been a spade rebid. As I recall, your partner had six?

Oh . . . I, too, would open. 

[kenberg]

Partner has a 6=3=3=1 shape. The diamond holding was Kxx and I think after the 2 overcall to the left, thatK could be of lesser value.
I think 3 to re-open after 2 -Pass-Pass would be good. That should be passable with three card heart support (with four card heart support there would be no reason to bid 1 on the first round). I would pass 3 !h, but if I had a better hand I could, but probably wouldn't) accept the game invitation by bidding 3 to offer a choice of games.

If that K were the A, the chances for making game are still not great but definitely better.


There was also the interesting question: Against 4 what should be led from T8x? The T has the advantage that when Kxx hits the board, and declarer plays low, third hand, with AQJxxx can duck so my Lho can continue another . If the 8 is led, as some do, third hand has to worry it is from 8x, meaning I have Tx,  and so he must play the J. And if the x hand been the opening lead then  I cover it from the board forcing my Rho to take the trick. It would, this time,  be best for third hand  to allow the T to hold. But Rho was, I assume, worried that the T might be a stiff (as it could have been) and so, thinking that it was either stiff or doubleton (so then I would have two) decided to overtake, cash the A and lead a third . But I was the one with the stiff so I ruffed the A and now the K on the board is good.

It's a bit of a tricky situation.

[jcreech]

I would open as well - 5-5 with 2 1/2 QT all in the two suits.  I would almost never pass with that holding, and the rare times I would pass, I would be playing a forcing pass system (so not in the US).

I also agree that 3S is the correct call.  You don't have anything extra to say about your hearts, but you do have the undisclosed doubleton in spades.  Having not made a support double, this perfectly describes your spade holding.  It also has the added benefit of not going past 3NT, in case that is where partner was headed.

[blubayou]

[quote author=kenberg

Neither 4 nor 4 should make, but I think 4 has a better chance.

Note: It seems to me that hands from the lesson sessions are often worthy of further discussion, but that does not much happen. Your thoughts?



Wacko's selections are usually joyously full of choices rather than "right answers"--that's why we love them.  But this explains why shy folk are even more reticent than usual to speak up, I suppose.   Even not-reticent moi  sits on his hands a lot since the key decisions seem to be toss-up, and I prefer to weigh in weigh in when I see a clear "right bid But don't change, Jack we love your rich food for thought  examples!

[kenberg]

This hand illustrates the iea that it can be better to be lucky than to be good. A hand I played today is a further illustration:

AQ
AKJ4
AQJ5
Q32


Ok, a flattish 32 count count. Matchpoints, red against white. my Rho deals and passes, I open 2 :
Pass - 2 - Pass 2 - 2

We are playing control responses (not my fav but it's ok) so partner's 2 showed no ace and at most one !K, nothing at all about anything else. I decided to just continue on with 2nT and this was followed by three passes and the opening lead of the T.


J986
9853
732
96


AQ
AKJ4
AQJ5
Q32


I played the J. Surely Rho will not play the K but he did and I played the A (seemed right).  Now I played the AK and the !Q fell on my left. So J and small to the board, cash the two good spades. That's 8 tricks, whew. I led a from the board, small ono my right, I decided this was my lucky day so I played the Q, holding. +180 is a decent score on this hand, especially since my Lho holds KJT754 so if he leads a at T1they take the first six club tricks.

Now 2 X probably scores better but +180 was decent enough, and I did not know that pard had J986. I figured my Rho had, at least perhaps, done me a favor with the 2 bid so I would just stick with the bid I was going to make w/o the intervention. I had no idea how much of a favor.

About being right. I try to be clear. I long ago gave up on being right.

[jcreech]

Note: It seems to me that hands from the lesson sessions are often worthy of further discussion, but that does not much happen. Your thoughts?

I agree.  That being said, it does not happen very often in my sessions and I am not entirely certain why.  I usually begin with hands where there was a difference of opinion either in bidding or play at the table.  From there, I try to be objective by identifying when I have done something bad, when I have done something good, when the defense has presented a gift, and when there has simply been something lucky that has happened.  There are all part of the game.

I like it when I have found something on my own to discuss, such as conventional choices, a situation where you need to count out the hand (either points or distribution), a situation where you need to keep your eye on combining chances (and what order, so that you don't accidently ruin any chance of success).  But I also recognize that there are things I don't see, or that I may get wrong.  The sessions should be two way streets.

[kenberg]

Here is an amusement from yesterday,with bidding agreements (or lack thereof), play, and luck (much luck) all get into the act.

Matchpoints, vul against not vul, partner deals and opens 2 .

This is a Prime free tourney: I belong to Prime, and part of the package is a free tourney each Saturday where each player plays 12 boards with the robots. The robots tell you what the bids mean, both theirs and your, but you have to look.

My hand:

2
AKQJ54
AK52
QJ

Ok, surely 3 is forcing, why bother to look. So I bid 3 , followed be three passes.

KQ9763
T2
JT
T82


2
AKQJ54
AK52
QJ

We have an obvious six heart tricks plus two diamond tricks, the opponents have an obvious three tricks, two in clubs, one in spades so two tricks are up for grabs. Remarkably, the two minor suit tens are the key to taking ten tricks. The finesse is off, the A is with my Rho, and the finesse is off. However, it they take the top clubs then my T is good and I can develop a spade trick.  On the  other hand if they don't take their clubs, either before or after I establish a spade trick, then I can toss a club on the high spade, and lose one club, one spade and one diamond. Not everyone did this, so +170 scored54 %. Of course 620 scores 84% but not everyone who bid the game made the game so, with more luck than I am entitled to, I survived.

I really thought the bots played Raise Only Non Force. But maybe I should just look at what the self-alerts say!
Live and Learn.

Huh: I just now (Monday) checked the Gib cc. They do indeed play RONF. I had thought so. Seems I am entitled to a raise to 4 !

[blubayou]

For some years, I was convinced that the BBO deal-programs were "editied" or worse,  to give us  GOTCHA! deals,  so I have abandonned  RONF  for the first time a couple years back........-->after a century od believing in 'RONF!"

[kenberg]

For some years, I was convinced that the BBO deal-programs were "editied" or worse,  to give us  GOTCHA! deals,  so I have abandonned  RONF  for the first time a couple years back........-->after a century od believing in 'RONF!"

Before covid I had a f2f pard who did not like RONF. Initially he was not up for BBO but lately we have been playing 2 or 3 times a week.
We don't play RONF.
It's remarkable how seldom it matters.
But it does matter that we know which we are doing.

I asked him what he would do if he held the hand I held above, after a 2 opening and not playing RONF. He first said he would bid 2NT (Ogust) but if partner bids 3 (good hand, good suit) then  what?  There is hardly a reason to bid Ogust unless you will bid 6 over 3 . There is no reason to think they cannot take the AK to start, or for that matter maybe the two black aces. Six spades to the KQJ and the K probably warrants a 3 response to Ogust. Maybe the same applies even if 3 is forcing. What do I do over a raise to 4 . I guess there is something to be sid for playing that over 3 call a bid in a side suit be opener shows a fit for and a control. But I have never discussed that with anyone. If 2 - 3 - 4 shows a heart fit and first or maybe second round control in then it would be safe to bid 4 !NT to see if we have first round control.
But no, I have no such agreement.

As mentioned, 4 was not clear cut and not everyone managed ten tricks. There are three obvious losers.

As to gimmicking around with the hand generator, I had a partner in the early days of  computer dealt tournament hands who told me she had a friend who worked for the acbl and said they did that. But really? No. Not a chance.  Plenty of downside, no upside for doing that. When I was in high school a teacher asked me why I was reading a comic book in class, I explained that it was a Classic Comic and I was preparing my book report. I was 14 and my purpose was to be annoying. 14 year olds do such things. But programmers at BBO? No.