[JLOGIC]

 SteveMoe, on 2012-July-11, 13:22, said:

1) No one has mentioned whether the prospect of 3=5 split in ♠ should factor into a decision to simply make the hand. I would like to better understand the full odds decision process for choosing overticks vs simply making...

As far as this goes, a 3-5 split in spades is probably very likely if LHO has led from a 4 card heart suit (as he might have led from a 4 card spade suit with 4-4). That is why we should watch RHOs signal at trick 1, which will almost certainly be honest count. This kind of thing is what people should be watching instead of thinking about the field: try to figure out the hand.

If LHO has 5 hearts he might be more liekly to have 4 spades based on the lead, but now we have empty space considerations making 3-5 likely again.

How easy will a spade shift be for righty? It might depend if the opps play smith or suit preference or whatever, but given that we bid 2N he might think we have a spade stop. This will make a spade shift dangerous from some holdings. The problem is we have to cross to our hand if we want to give the illusion that LHO might have the HA, which will give away our diamond holding. There will still be room for us to have a spade card, but RHO might realize there is a danger we cash a lot of minor suit tricks. This will again depend on the level of RHO.

This hand is just not that simple, but hands like this are exceptions and we see these types a hugely disproportionate amount of the time if we read a lot because obv interesting hands/situations are the ones that we are going to see, and what makes them interesting is that they are unusual.

[JLOGIC]

Being good at MP will always require watching their signals well, and figuring out the layout of the cards in order to make high probability plays. Trying to hedge your risk or increase/reduce variance or whatever by predicting the field is all well and good, but at the end of the day your goal is to figure out the layout of cards, or leave the opponents in the dark and force tough decisions on them early. Field arguments are usually a copout, work on figuring out the best play at your table to make the most tricks.

[SteveMoe]

Thanks Justin! Good Luck this week.

[dburn]

Do not worry about the field. It isn't worrying about you.

[akwoo]

 JLOGIC, on 2012-July-11, 13:30, said:

Since it's far from an exact science, I would go with don't ever worry about it. I see so many stupid plays/bids by otherwise good players who are trying to go with the field, or go against the field, or estimate the field but doing it horribly, or whatever.

Yes, there are some hands where it might be a relevant thing to do. THESE HANDS ARE EXTREMELY RARE. You must realize you read about/think about/talk about a grossly disproportionate amount of these hands because they are interesting theoretically, and offer possible debatable lines.

One caveat: If you are playing a system played by a minority (e.g. weak nt or strong club in the US), then there are some common situations where you end up against the field. If you are a weak no-trumper, the 1N vs 2 of a major thing comes up something like once a session, which is frequent enough to spend some time thinking about and understanding it away from the table. (Don't try to figure it out at the table! It's too late!) Fortunately it's really not that complicated.

Of course, people who dare to play unusual systems probably don't need to be told this.

[32519]

 Fluffy, on 2012-July-10, 14:48, said:

I posted the hand because I didn't know what to do at the table, in the end I opted for one line, then I switched to other and even played spades myself to muddy the waters

This doesn’t help much for those interested in this thread. Did you –
1. Start off by testing the ♦ as suggested by helene_t?
2. When they did not break, decided to take the ♣ hook?
3. The ♣ led from hand towards dummy becomes irrelevant as midway through the play you “opted for one line and then switched to another” and went up with the ♣A realising that if the ♣ hook failed you stand to lose 7-tricks in total:
a. 1X♣ (the offside K)
b. 1X♦
c. 5X♠ for a possible down 3?
4. At this point you tried to “muddy the waters” by leading a ♠ yourself?

Justin has already posted that this is a very interesting MP hand. Kindly post the full hand for the benefit of all.

[paulg]

 32519, on 2012-July-12, 03:59, said:

Justin has already posted that this is a very interesting MP hand. Kindly post the full hand for the benefit of all.

It is a very interesting hand. The full hand is nowhere near as interesting as it kills much of the debate. Keep it hidden

[billw55]

Yeah, what I was saying is a pairs thing, not a MP thing.

However, some things are still lost at matchpoints as a form of scoring. For example, devising a scheme of deception to set a contract which will work a minority of the time but concede an overtrick the rest of the time.

[FrancesHinden]

 32519, on 2012-July-12, 03:59, said:

Justin has already posted that this is a very interesting MP hand. Kindly post the full hand for the benefit of all.

The full hand is irrelevant to the discussion.

The decision of whether to play exactly two rounds of diamonds (or only one) depends a lot on the opponents. If they play Smith then you won't get a useful count on diamonds (particularly having opened 1♦) and LHO will have a chance to discourage hearts. So then I think I'd simply go for a diamond to the king and the club finesse. Also, I wouldn't start with the CQ, because RHO can duck in order to get a suit preference signal for partner while if I start with low to the 10 he will find it much harder to duck.

The problem with playing on spades ourselves is that while it might work, it's giving up on the maximum number of overtricks when everything comes in.

In an English field the auction will have been 1NT-3NT; no-one will be in 5 minor. (We'll be in 3NT on a slightly different auction after a 1D opening).
I think it's right to take the club finesse and quickly. Even if diamonds are 3-3 you still don't know whether to take it or not, and now they'll have had plenty of chances to signal.

[FM75]

It might be nice to know whether the opponents are advanced enough that you could expect them to be familiar with Bird - Anthias "Winning Notrump Leads", or the article that they wrote in Bridge World. The auction could just as well have been 1N-3N, since north had the opportunity to show a 4 card major and declarer is very unlikely to have 5 card major. That auction was extensively analyzed, and the winning leads from declarer's perspective must be a major, but much less likely 4th here - most certainly not in hearts.

If they are likely familiar with Bird - Anthias, there is some reasonable chance the the ♥5 is a doubleton, not 4th. If West were short in spades, on this auction a spade, even A from Ax is the "book" lead. Also W is unlikely to have AKQ, AK, or even KQ in the spade suit. Opponents are 8-7-6-5. The majors seem reasonably likely to be dividing fairly evenly. No preemptive overcall by W, though W could easily be short in hearts and long in spades but holding little in the way of honors.

Why not play the 8!H, just to see which of JT96 East has? If W has JT9, then J is probably his best lead. Can East afford to duck? So I think we should at least take a look.

Next consider the major splits. You can reasonably consider ♠6-2 and worse as less likely than normal after this auction. ♥ 2-5, or 1-6 is possible, after this lead, (if they have read the book), otherwise, 4-3 heart split odds increase (intuition). That should marginally improve the odds of 3-3 diamond split as well as a 3-2 club split.

To me, playing the diamonds first looks best for the reasons mentioned, and looks perhaps to have better percentages than the a priori odds. Nothing about the bidding suggests that the location of the ♣ king is better than 50-50 guess, and you will get no improvement on that guess during the play of the red suits.

If it gets to that point, you will have to decide what line is best after 2 discards by each opponent.

[Statto]

Do opps have a reading list attached to their CC?

[EricK]

 Statto, on 2012-July-12, 17:51, said:

Do opps have a reading list attached to their CC?

Instead of wasting your time at the start of each round finding out irrelevant stuff like the opponent's NT range etc, you should engage them in conversation about their reading habits. eg ask them about Rodwell. If they mention "The Rodwell Files" then be cautious against them. If they think you're talking about a tennis or basketball player, bid up.

[FrancesHinden]

 FM75, on 2012-July-12, 15:31, said:

It might be nice to know whether the opponents are advanced enough that you could expect them to be familiar with Bird - Anthias "Winning Notrump Leads", or the article that they wrote in Bridge World. The auction could just as well have been 1N-3N, since north had the opportunity to show a 4 card major and declarer is very unlikely to have 5 card major. That auction was extensively analyzed, and the winning leads from declarer's perspective must be a major, but much less likely 4th here - most certainly not in hearts.

If they are likely familiar with Bird - Anthias, there is some reasonable chance the the ♥5 is a doubleton, not 4th. If West were short in spades, on this auction a spade, even A from Ax is the "book" lead. Also W is unlikely to have AKQ, AK, or even KQ in the spade suit. Opponents are 8-7-6-5. The majors seem reasonably likely to be dividing fairly evenly. No preemptive overcall by W, though W could easily be short in hearts and long in spades but holding little in the way of honors.

Why not play the 8!H, just to see which of JT96 East has? If W has JT9, then J is probably his best lead. Can East afford to duck? So I think we should at least take a look.

Next consider the major splits. You can reasonably consider ♠6-2 and worse as less likely than normal after this auction. ♥ 2-5, or 1-6 is possible, after this lead, (if they have read the book), otherwise, 4-3 heart split odds increase (intuition). That should marginally improve the odds of 3-3 diamond split as well as a 3-2 club split.

To me, playing the diamonds first looks best for the reasons mentioned, and looks perhaps to have better percentages than the a priori odds. Nothing about the bidding suggests that the location of the ♣ king is better than 50-50 guess, and you will get no improvement on that guess during the play of the red suits.

If it gets to that point, you will have to decide what line is best after 2 discards by each opponent.

It's possible to have read the book (or the article) and disagreed with the conclusion.

[Fluffy]

LHO had this time AQxx Jxxx xx xxx

He pitched lowest club on third diamond and I decided to play for CK to be offside, so I pitched a club and played a spade myself, LHO won SQ and played a club inmediatelly. I won CA and exited with CJ, RHO cashed his 4th diamond on wich I ptiched another club from dummy and RHO didn´t read the position in the end so I made 4D, 2C, 3H

[phil_20686]

This hand is too hard.

If you are going to play diamonds, you should win the first heart in dummy though. That much seems clear. Obviously concealing the heart ace makes it slightly more difficult to find a spade switch, so maybe its right to do that anyway.

Winning the heart in dummy and playing a club to hand is likely to work against many poor players: if its on the left they might not contiue spades, poor opponents lead fourth best, and if they didint lead a spade they probably have a holding that you don't lead. If rho has the club K they might well not play it.

Cashing diamonds and then taking the club hook is obviously best at imps. But you should 100% win in dummy if you do this , as concealing the heart ace will leave him more in doubt about your spade holding.

If you play clubs its probably right to run the 9 rather than the Q. The Q is more `expected' so you might get a better read off leading the 9, which lho might not have thought of already.

Too hard.

I would have cashed dimaonds and taking the club hook att.