wacko hands

[kenberg]

I played a few of the Wacko hands yesterday. As I think I have said before, one feature that I really like is that is that many of the hands present problems that have no clear cut right approach.

Here is  a hand, we are non-vul, our opps vul,  I am dealer, I hold a 2=3= 2=6 shape with  (as near as I can recall)

Kx
xxx (maybe 9xx)
9x (the 9 turns out to be useful)
AKxxxx

So, do I open? I passed, much to the disagreement of others. If you put a gun to my head and tell me I must open, I open 1 not 3 .

This led to a very chancy but good result. The auction went as follows:

Pass - 1 - Pass - 2 (weak jump shift)
Pass - 3 -   X  -  Pass
?
Ouch. If I had opened 1 ,  if they then reached 3 (as they would),  and if then my partner doubled, then surely I must pull. Partner, because of my opening, would be  expecting help in setting this.  Actually, had I opened 1 I doubt partner would have doubled 3 . I expect we would end in 5 off 1. Here is partner's hand (again as best I recall)

x
KQxx
KQJ8
QJxx

A 14 count, a stiff in their suit, support for my suit, and no doubt he will have figured me for long and strong clubs. Why? Well, it will begin 1 - X - 1 -  some number of . Our vul opponents will be bidding up their spades (they have ten of them) I will not be supporting partner's hearts, and I did open the bidding. With 4-4 in the minos I would have opened 1 so surely for my 1 ~!C opening I have 5 at least. And some values. Where are those values? In clubs it would seem.

So we would end in 5 off 1 when they cash their aces.

With my initial pass, I can reason that I never said I had any values at all, partner is doubling, for take-out but I should think with good values,  in a live auction, not the pass out seat. My values might well be enough, when added to his, to beat this. And so it was.

I started with the K, dummy came down as 4=4=4=1, I switched to the 9. Dummy has  ATxx in . Terrific. Whether he plays the A, or the T, or ducks, we are establishing some tricks.

Dummy has the A so declarer can pick up my K but that's only if he can get to his hand. He can't. He tries the A and another , I take my K and lead another . Partner cashes the KQ, we now have 4 tricks, he plays another riffed, and now pard just waits to collect his trick. Declarer is 6=2=3=2. there is nothing for him to do as near as I can see.

Yes we can make 4 , but if I open this hand 1 it is going to be very hard to stop in 4 . Basically, I think we can't.


I have no quarrel with a  opening.  I think opening it 3 carries a high risk of missing a game (when the other cards are laid out differently) but different players will see this differently. As I said, I like the Wacko hands because there is room for a difference of views.

Note that we have 10 clubs, they have 10 spades. LOTT claims that there should be 20 total tricks. We can easily take exactly 10 in , I don't see how the opponents could have made 3 ,  I think they have only 8 tricks coming. LOTT is often off by a trick, here it is off by 2 tricks.  LOTT can be a useful guide, but I would not want my life to depend on its accuracy. I am more than willing to admit that passing that X was risky.

The hands were interesting, and fun. I made some errors. What else is new?


We could discuss some of the others.

[Masse24]

Here is  a hand, we are non-vul, our opps vul,  I am dealer, I hold a 2=3= 2=6 shape with  (as near as I can recall)

Kx
xxx (maybe 9xx)
9x (the 9 turns out to be useful)
AKxxxx

So, do I open? I passed, much to the disagreement of others. If you put a gun to my head and tell me I must open, I open 1 not 3 .

Busy at work, so missed it.
Apparently I would have been in the minority? This does not look like an opening hand.

[kenberg]

I think it is close, but I passed.

Here is another:

Jxx
KJT
J9xxx
QJ

Partner opens 1 , Pass on you right, and you have to decide whether to respond 1 or 1NT.  I went with  1 , but I can imaine 1NT.

And in the discussion afterward, I made an error.

The auction went along as

1 - -Pass - 1 - 1
 X and there was discussion as to whether the X is a support X for or if it shows .

I said that with discussion I like support, but that's not right.

 I think that after  1 - -Pass - 1 - 1 then X should be three card support, since with four opener can simply bid them, but when the overcall is in I think the X is needed to show .

This might depend on just how Walshie we are. If responder can be trusted to not have four unless he has a GF hand then maybe using X as support is ok over the 1 as well. But usually I am not that Walshie.

As it happened, partner had both four and three .

[jcreech]

On the first hand, I am with you and Todd and would passed at the table (most times).  I qualified it with a most times because I do occasionally get a wild hair up my but and recently opened in first chair Axxxx x KQTxx xx, so I cannot say it as an absolute.

As for the second hand, it depends on agreements.  Playing in a Walsh-style partnership, it is clearly a support double.  In a bid-em up the line partnership, I think it has to show hearts because someone has to take responsibility for the suit.  Without hearts, I pass and wait for the reopening double.  Now I can bid diamonds - I don't have four because I did not raise immediately.

[kenberg]

The second hand had some interesting features. Partner has a 1=4=3=5 shape (he kept getting singleton spades) and his were something like AQ9x, And he had good values so that 4 rates to be playable: Let the opponents take the first three tricks holding on to all four !h in the hand. Then a further could be ruffed in dummy, trumps drawn,  after which he has 10 tricks. Unfortunately, split 5-1 so that's out.

I do not recall his hand in detail, but I think 5 is off as well. We were in 5!D, off 1.

The auction, as I recall:

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

Possibly I am a hero if I again pass here. This time they have only a 9 card fit and maybe we beat it. But after mulling over the choices of Pass, 4 , 4 , 4 I finally settled on 4 and pard, with good values, raised to 5.


Whatever one thinks of Richard's views of 4m, I think here, after I pass over the 2 call, we can definitely treat my 4 as non-forcing. But pard had quite a good hand, and took a reasonable shot. I did seriously consider 4 instead of 4 . Again I am guessing that partner has one and four and so, if he bids as I do, he will not be 4-4 in the minors he will be 5-3.   But I think he gets his five tricks, four tricks and the A. I do not recall the hand exactly.

Probably 4 is the most reasonable contract. Makes on a 4-2 split, too bad about the 5-1.

Good hands for a discussion. Best choice is not clear.