From: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)
Subject: Re: Problems from Portland - results and summary
Reply-To: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 02:18:02 GMT

sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com (Steve Myerson) writes:

>* 2. Both vul. South dealer. You are East: T74, KJ52, K7, Q975
>* 
>* West   North   East   South
>*                       1D-1     1. Shows at least 4
>* dbl    1S      dbl-2  1N       2. Responsive, 6-9 HCP
>* pass   5D      ?

>Correct answer: PASS.
>net.experts: 5 pass
>             2 double

>My partner doubled. Declarer can always make 7D,
>due to 2 finesses working, but only 2 pairs bid 6D.
>This declarer managed to take 12 tricks, losing a heart trick.
>West (me) had a distributional take-out double: KJ2, QT98, 2, AT843.


Whether they make 6D or 7D is not important -- the key is that it
appears very likely that opponents can make 3NT and are in the wrong
strain (assuming no slam).  So, there is no need to try to gild the
lily by doubling...


>* 3. NS vul. West dealer. You are West: Q863, J63, 632, AQ6
>* 
>* West   North   East   South
>* pass   1C      2N-1   3H       1. 6-12 HCP, at least 4 spades and 4 diamonds
>* 3S     4H      pass   pass        with at least 9 cards total in the 2 suits
>* ?

>Correct answers: DOUBLE (best) or PASS.
>net.experts: 6 pass (2 suggested that they might double)
>             1 double

>I bid 4S, which got doubled and went down 2

4S is wrong for one simply because you should have bid it first if you
were going to bid 4S anyway.  There are only two possible actions you
can take -- bid 3S first or 4S first.  the latter forces North to
decide whether to X or not when he has not yet showed his hearts.  By
bidding 3S and then 4S you are giving the opponents the best of both
world -- North can show his hearts and then can whack or pass
(forcing) over 4S confident of having shown his values...

Secondly, some pairs may have bought the hand in 3S, so you will be
getting a bad score versus them...

As to double, it may be BEST on this deal (clearly it is always right
to double when opponents are going down) but again, the primary
principle of not trying too hard for that super top stands out -- for
all you know 4H is the normal constract at every table and in that
case you may convert an average score into a bottom , and if they are
going down (and should not be there) you get a top anyway...

there is a small case for doubling to protect you partscore of +110 ,
but that only applies if they go down 1 exactly -- in that case, on
most other tables pairs sitting as you will be netting -140 (versus
3H) or -50 playing in 3S -- so +100 should still be very good...  I
think pass, is the right choice, but would not quibble with double.

>* 4. Both vul. South dealer. You are North: QJ95, T97, AKT762, void
>* 
>* West   North   East   South
>*                       1S-1     1. 11-15 HCP, at least 4 spades
>* pass   2C-2    2H     pass-*   2. artificial, forcing to game
>* 3H     ?                          opener may not pass short of game

>* so the pass says only 4 spades, no heart suit or decent stopper,
>* not a distributional hand, and on the low end of the HCP range (11-13).
>* In other words, your basic garbage balanced opener with 4 spades.

>Correct answer: DOUBLE (best) or 3S (forcing) or 4S (to play)
>net.experts: 1 double
>             6 either forcing pass, 3S (forcing) or 4S (to play)

If the opponents have tehir bids, double will not turn out well -- the
opponents in this case clearly didn't, but competing against decent
pairs i would like better hearts to whack -- I guess, I lack the
cajones to whack this...

>My partner bid 3S (yes, forcing), agreeing spades and demanding me to cuebid.
>(The way we play it, if one partner starts a cue-bidding sequence,
>the other is obligated to also cue, up to the level of game,
>even without extra values).

If 4S shows less than 3S in your system, that is clearly the right bid...

>Partner decided slam was a good bet if I had a singleton heart
>(then I would have been exactly 4-1-4-4).

No comments on this -- I would like to play in 4S and would wonder if
that was making --  to try for a slam hoping for partner to hold the
magic hand, plus some luck, is asking for waaay too much.  Especially,
when your system could have got you to a contract where no one else
is... 

>The 2H bidder had bid on AKxx of hearts,
>for "lead-directing purposes since we were going to game".

I take it back -- against such opponents you should defintely whack --
too bad you didn;t have 4 hearts then a whack would be easy... sigh...
But I repeat, against good opponents X will usually be wrong.

>His partner raised to 3H on Jxx.
>3Hx goes down 4 on perfect defense, 3 otherwise.
>Double would have been a top, but +620 in 4S would have been OK, too.

A double on your hand would have been a wild shot in the dark -- just
take the plusses of your system and bid 4S...

>* 5. NS vul. East dealer. You are South: 9, J4, AK7654, JT94
>* 
>* West   North   East   South
>*                pass   ?
>* 
>* Do you preempt or not?
 
>Correct answer: 3D.
>net.experts: 4 pass
>             2 2D
>             1 3D

>I decided not to open, due to a) the decent 4-card club suit
>and b) East had passed.

This has very little to do with your 4 card club suit -- and
everything to do with being (a) SECOND SEAT (b) RED versus WHITE.
This is the absolute worst case to prempt, and you need an almost
perfect hand to bid 3D... 

>On *this hand* I should have preempted (playing result merchant)
>but I'm still not sure if there's a definitive answer on whether
>or not to preempt in a similar type of situation
>(vul vs not, second seat, side 4-card suit).

Advocating a 3D opening on this hand is 100% result-merchanting.
There is no doubt whatsoever that 3D is wrong -- read Woolsey's
Matchpoits where he talks about precisely this situation -- you have
too many things going against you and so a PERFECT hand is needed --
this is not even close.

The 4 card club suit is a problem, but the 6 card non-solid diamond
suit is more of a problem.  With x,x,KQJTxxx,JT9x  a 3D opening is
fine...

This may be a reasonable 2D opening however -- I would expect a better
suit at this vulnerability, but at matchpoints this seems reasonable
for its lead directing quuality... 

>Steve Myerson (sgm@sgfb.ssd.ray.com)

Bharat
--
R. Bharat Rao                          E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu 
AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801  (217)337-6498(H)
Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
OFFICE: (217)244-0292, 333-5978 (NOTE new numbers)