From: grove@triangle.Berkeley.EDU (Eddie Grove)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: Yet another assign the blame
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:32:40 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: triangle.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Jul28.143618.7288@linus.mitre.org> bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.132031.12341@wam.umd.edu> pi@wam.umd.edu (Raymond L. Gilbert) writes:
>:
>:    The following nasty sequence happened to my partner and
>:me last night, playing 5cm S/A.

Please, please, please include vulnerability and scoring.
For example, playing Matchpoints would make a big difference.

>:    North             South
>:S: A Q J T 9 x    S:
>:H: x              H: T x x x
>:D: J              D: A K x x x x
>:C: A K J x x      C: x x x
  
>:The bidding (E/W passing throughout, not even a double!):
>:    North             South
>:     1S                1N
>:     3C                3D
>:     3S                3N
>:     4S                5D
>:     5N                P

3N was the worst bid, except 5D was the worst bid.  It is
so hard to choose.  3N shows a solid heart stop opposite a
stiff, and 5D should be a cue bid with fitting black honors.
They are both so deserving of worst bid honors.

You might guess that I assign 100% blame to South, but 5N
is also outrageous, unless it shows two high trump honors
and denies first round control of hearts.  75% blame to South.

>It looks as if neither of you trusts the other.

>The first mistake came with the 3S bid.  4C (showing a 6-5) is correct.
>What is the point of 3S?

Here is the point to 3S.  Presumably partner has denied 4 clubs (or
s/he will jump in clubs later, but we may safely ignore it for now).
The spades will usually play for 1 loser, but the clubs need
Txx or better  support for the same performance (presumably you get forced 
opposite Tx fairly often).  So long as there was a chance of
a good club fit, it was worth exploring a club slam.  But how
likely is 5C to make when 4S is going down, now that partner has
implied at most 3 clubs?  At matchpoints it would be even clearer.

If partner has SK, red ace, and CQ, s/he will make a loud noise later.
Otherwise we want to play in 4S.  3S seems the best pointer in
this direction.

>This is a nice simple easy hand to bid:
>
>1S	1NT
>3C	3D
>4C	5C
> 
>I note that 4S is actually the best contract on this hand, but I
>confess that I don't see any valid way to get there. If North shows
>a 6-5 hand as he should, it is hard to see how South can NOT simply
>raise clubs.

Bob's auction is the straightforward approach.  Certainly all of East's 
bids are clear.  The "fault" lies with 4C.  Opener shouldn't want to
show a generic 6-5 game force for precisely the reason that s/he
may end up in 5C.  There is a huge difference between AQJxxx and AQJT9x.
I think it is extremely unlikely from opener's point of view 
(after hearing 3D) that 5C is a better final contract than 4S.

Now here is another one:  1S - 1N; 3C - 3D; 3S - 4C; ?
4S is right even here.  Give partner a generic hand 
including Qxx of clubs, and 4S is still better than 5C.
Responder will go on over 4S with what is needed for slam.  
This seems clear to me, but perhaps someone will be kind enough
to point out something I overlooked.

Eddie Grove
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge