BBO Discussion Forums: San Jose 1 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

San Jose 1 ATB

Poll: Who's to blame? (16 member(s) have cast votes)

Who's to blame?

  1. All North (1 votes [6.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.25%

  2. Mostly North (4 votes [25.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

  3. North and South equally (1 votes [6.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.25%

  4. Mostly South (1 votes [6.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.25%

  5. All South (1 votes [6.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.25%

  6. What blame? It's a reasonable slam. (8 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   Echognome 

  • Deipnosophist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,386
  • Joined: 2005-March-22

Posted 2009-April-05, 22:45

Scoring: IMP

1 - (2) - 4* - (P);
4 - (P) - 4 - (P);
5 - (P) - 5 - (P);
6 - All Pass


*Fit Jump

After the spade was cashed, the heart finesse lost. Down 1.

ATB
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
0

#2 User is offline   JLOL 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,033
  • Joined: 2008-December-05

Posted 2009-April-05, 23:13

Driving to the 5 level with the north hand is aggressive. Driving to the 5 level and then cuebidding 5D shows a lack of understanding of the auction, 5D just shows a hand that is better than a signoff in 5H. Since it would be impossible for north to drive to the 5 level with less, he should signoff in 5H.

South could just bid keycard over 4S imo, 6 can never be bad opposite 3 keycards.
0

#3 User is offline   655321 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,502
  • Joined: 2007-December-22

Posted 2009-April-05, 23:21

In so far as there is any blame, I can't see how South can get any blame at all.

I would not have done as much bidding as North, but the final contract is not terrible - on a finesse, which OK, is more likely to be wrong, but we have all been in worse slams.

Edit: Changed my mind to agree with everyone else - South should have keycarded over 4, and would have found 2 keycards missing, so South does get some blame.

This post has been edited by 655321: 2009-April-06, 08:41

That's impossible. No one can give more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
0

#4 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2009-April-06, 03:59

4 is impeccable.

5 shows lack of leadership. Opposite a likely spade singleton, the slam is good as long as there are keycards. So South should rise to his responsibilities and bid 4NT. This isn't a time to show what you have. It's a time to make decisions.

5 is "I started something I can no longer control. Let me pass the bucket." Not ideal, but liveable. Perhaps 5 would have been better.

6 is a confession of inability to sort out what's going on. 5 would be better.

That being said, I've bid much worse slams :)
0

#5 User is offline   mtvesuvius 

  • Vesuvius the Violent Volcano
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,216
  • Joined: 2008-December-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa-Area, Florida
  • Interests:SLEEPING

Posted 2009-April-06, 08:19

I've been in way worse slams, including a grand off 3 keycards ;)

Anyway, I think over 4 South should bid Keycard, and I'm not thrilled with North's 5, since north has already shown his entire hand...
Yay for the "Ignored Users" feature!
0

#6 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,093
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2009-April-06, 09:38

Discussed this last night with Matt.

1. I don't love the fit jump, although thats the call I'd make without thinking too much about it. With AKQ, how is partner going to re-evaluate properly? It preempts us unneccesarily, I think.

2. Either member could have used RKC, but its easier for North to. Inconceivable South has an opening bid that does not contain a club control.

3. 5 is redundant and dangerous, although in a practiced partnership it should be LTTC. 4 described the hand nicely, but North has nothing left in the tank and 5 is warranted. South guessed, and guessed wrong.

So I'll give 70% to North.

All this being said, sometimes a r/w preemptor holds a key King. But if that were the case, this wouldn't be posted I'm sure :P
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#7 User is offline   RichMor 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 279
  • Joined: 2008-July-15
  • Location:North Central US

Posted 2009-April-06, 10:48

Agree with the posters who say South should bid 4NT (RKC) over 4.

An extra round of minor suit cue bidding won't tell South anything useful, asking for Aces and the trump King will.
0

#8 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2009-April-06, 14:41

Phil, on Apr 6 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

2. Either member could have used RKC, but its easier for North to. Inconceivable South has an opening bid that does not contain a club control.

Is Ax KQJxx xx QJxx an opening bid?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#9 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2009-April-06, 14:53

The 4 bid was aggressive, but the auction was ok until north made a clear overbid with 5. But the final contract turned out fine so how can you allocate blame? A little less than 50% but no disaster.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#10 User is offline   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,756
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2009-April-06, 14:53

I have no major problem with the auction up until the final call of 6. I am not arguing that keycard, presumably by South, would not have solved the problem, but I don't see it as necessary. I also agree that 4 was a little ambitious. But we all do things like this, without real cost.

I think the final leap was overly-exuberant... 5 would have sufficed.. partner will know that we have bad trumps if he is looking at great trumps.

The club Queen was a probably-wasted value on the auction, and the stiff diamond is not a positive opposite a player who made a fit jump.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

#11 User is offline   cherdanno 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,640
  • Joined: 2009-February-16

Posted 2009-April-06, 18:16

I really think bidding 5 is a mistake. South is clearly good enough to force to slam opposite a hand that goes to the 5-level by themselves - if we have enough keycards. RKCB simplifies the auction and will give us the best shot at deciding about grand. Bidding 5 suggests we are looking for something other than keycards, and I still don't know what that is supposed to be.

If I forced to the 5-level with the North hand, I would bid 4 rather than 4 followed by 4 fwiw. The actual sequence doesn't show spade shortness, and it's not like we need partner to upgrade his diamond honors.

As usual, I am in favor of simplifying the auction whenever that seems to do the job.
"Are you saying that LTC merits a more respectful dismissal?"
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users