Chew the Fat! > Sleight of Hand
Shape, LOTT, all that jazz
kenberg:
We had some good luck on the challenge yesterday. I'll post the last hand. I am curious as to what everyone thinks should happen. For example, what is the par contract? Is it plausible to reach it? NS have 17 cards in the majors, and so EW have 17 cards in the minors. Is LOTT accurate and can it be confidently applied during the bidding?
https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|S,W,N,E|md|4SKQ8763H973DT82C2,SA95H4DK654CAQJ54,ST42HAKJT6D7CKT73,SJHQ852DAQJ93C986|sv|b|rh||ah|Board%2010|mb
I am assuming that a discussion of these boards is welcome. There were more than the usual number of shapely hands yesterday, and that always leads to some guesswork.
jcreech:
Ken, the best way to paste a hyperlink is to use the hyperlink format around the actual hyperlink - that way the whole thing is treated the way you want. On my screen, it is the second button on the second line (below the italics button) - it puts in ["url"] hyperlink [/"url"] without the quote marks.
kenberg:
Ah yes I should have thought of that. I use URL hyperlinks all the time in other contexts.
blubayou:
Hi; just claiming my seat ken and james.... seems to me the lott is doing ok on this example ( i see 10 tricks in !d and 9 in !S, with a chance to screw up and bring the TNT number down to 9+9 which is the TNTrumps in the main fits and disregarding the [size=78%]'plus" tweaks for (both) secondary good 8-carders.[/size]
[size=78%] We were DESTROYED in the late challenge match, being down by 45 on this the 20th deal....Our teamies nailed this one buying it in 4 !D, but my table ran from 5!DX to 5!S -300....turning +9 into -9. [/size]
[size=78%] ACROSS THE BORDER will petition for these opps next month / we cannot let our honor be so be-smerched!![/size]
kenberg:
Yes, LOTT is correct but not quite as you say. There is a 9 card fit in both D and S so LOTT says 18 total tricks. and so there are, the spade contract can be held to 8 tricks, and there are 10 tricks in diamonds. So LOTT is right, but it illustrates issues with LOTT. 130 to EW is the par contract, but if I (I was S) open 2S and the opponents compete then surely pard will raise to 3S, and double dummy I am off 1 for -200. But of course they won't double, and they might not hold me to 8 tricks if they do. In reality, the other table got to 4S and were off 3. And, at one point during the play of 3D, it could have been held to 9 tricks. Further, I didn't open 2S, it seemed a bit pushy when vul wit KQxxxx and nothing else. The problem with opening it 2S is not that I am worried, or not terribly worried, that I will be playing 2S off a few but rather I worry that partner will expect, or at least hope for, more with my vul opening and compete at too high a level, as happened at the other table.
So, first round, I just passed, after which Lho opened 1D, partner overcalled 1H, Rho bid 2D, I bid 2H and then 3D ended the auction.
I asked in my post if the LOTT total could be discovered during the auction, and I guess the answer is maybe yes, maybe no. As we bid it, we knew we had an 8 card heart fit but we never learned of the 9 card spade fit. W knew of their 9 card diamond fit but I doubt E could be sure of it.
So double dummy LOTT is right, there are 8+10=18 total tricks in S and D, or at least there are 18 total tricks if everyone declares and defends optimally. We arrived at the par contract of 3D played EW but there is a certain amount of stumbling into it since we have a 9 card spade fit we never explored.
Bridge is an interesting game.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version