[Fluffy]

My partner had to play 3NT yesterday with

♠KJ9
♥AK72
♦A4
♣J975

-----

♠A65
♥653
♦QJ
♣AK832

She won the spade lead with the jack and played a low club, from dummy, winning the trick with the 8!, when it held and defense was 'not best' she finished making 13 tricks.


I told her Buratti-Lanzaroti were banned for finding Q10x onside with this exact holding, but she doesn't even know who they are .

[gwnn]

copy this hand into the ESP thread. it ought to be the final evidence.

[whereagles]

5-year ban for abusing psychic powers

[Free]

Did you make any signs?

[jtfanclub]

Fluffy, on Jun 1 2007, 05:28 AM, said:

My partner had to play 3NT yesterday with

♠KJ9
♥AK72
♦A4
♣J975

-----

♠A65
♥653
♦QJ
♣AK832

She won the spade lead with the jack and played a low club, from dummy, winning the trick with the 8!, when it held and defense was 'not best' she finished making 13 tricks.


I told her Buratti-Lanzaroti were banned for finding Q10x onside with this exact holding, but she doesn't even know who they are .

Looks like 9 tricks is guaranteed...3 spades, two hearts, a diamond, and 4 clubs. Oh, wait, that's 10 tricks. At any rate, the only holding that would be a problem would be RHO holding all four clubs. Except that isn't really a problem either.

If it's IMPs, why not make the spectacular play? It won't cost you more than one IMP under any circumstances. I suspect that declarer forgot that the diamonds weren't vulnerable and was protecting against the 4-0 split, since if diamonds were, say Ax across Qx that would be the play to guarantee the contract.

If it was MPs, well, then it's psychic.

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 09:46 AM, said:

If it's IMPs, why not make the spectacular play?

Yes, blow 1 imp when clubs are 2-2 or singleton queen on the left (46.25%) and win 1 when they are QTxx or QTx on the right (17.5%). Brilliant play at imps!

[FrancesHinden]

Even if diamonds are Ax opposite Qx a club to the ace still guarantees the contract.
Even if LHO discards on the first club you play a club to the jack and later finesse against the 10.

I'll stick with 'psychic'

[cherdano]

Obvious decision. We need to ban you, Gonzales, for the improper signaling, your partner is excused for her inexperience. Thanks you brought this up, abuse@ is informed.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

Brilliant play at imps!

You mean you've never made an anti-percentage play just to freak the opponent's out? For example, in 6 hearts, with all of the other suits secure, you have

Jxxx across
AQxxx

You play a low one from dummy, and when RHO plays low, you play the ace! King drops, the opponents spend the rest of the night holding their cards close and wondering if they're hesitating too much, or not enough.

If it doesn't work, well, you lost an IMP. But if it works, you haven't gained an IMP, you've gained the psychological upper hand.

Am I really the only person who does that?

[FrancesHinden]

jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 05:13 PM, said:

If it doesn't work, well, you lost an IMP. But if it works, you haven't gained an IMP, you've gained the psychological upper hand.

When people do that sort of thing against me, I just think "oh good, they don't know how to play the suit properly, that bodes well for the rest of the match"

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 11:13 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

Brilliant play at imps!

You mean you've never made an anti-percentage play just to freak the opponent's out? For example, in 6 hearts, with all of the other suits secure, you have

Jxxx across
AQxxx

You play a low one from dummy, and when RHO plays low, you play the ace! King drops, the opponents spend the rest of the night holding their cards close and wondering if they're hesitating too much, or not enough.

If it doesn't work, well, you lost an IMP. But if it works, you haven't gained an IMP, you've gained the psychological upper hand.

Am I really the only person who does that?

Uh lol I believe that you are. You keep trying to freak them out, I'll keep taking the imp.

If you did that vs. me I wouldn't be intimidated, I'd be very optimistic about my chances on the next hand.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 12:00 PM, said:

If you did that vs. me I wouldn't be intimidated, I'd be very optimistic about my chances on the next hand.

Yeah, you and Frances, you guys are very good, experienced players who aren't going to be intimidated by stuff like that. And you probably mostly play against people who aren't easily rattled.

Actually, if you don't mind me going even further off subject, have you ever successfully rattled your high-flight opponents? How did you manage to do it?

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 12:11 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 12:00 PM, said:

If you did that vs. me I wouldn't be intimidated, I'd be very optimistic about my chances on the next hand.

Yeah, you and Frances, you guys are very good, experienced players who aren't going to be intimidated by stuff like that. And you probably mostly play against people who aren't easily rattled.

Actually, if you don't mind me going even further off subject, have you ever successfully rattled your high-flight opponents? How did you manage to do it?

I'll admit there are certainly people who would get rattled if you drop their stiff king offside.

Obviously it's tougher to rattle good opponents, and I wouldn't even worry about doing it, the best way is too give away nothing which I think can slowly frustrate them in a match.

[jtfanclub]

Oh, and on an even more unrelated note, happy birthday!

[foo]

Frances and Justin are making good points.

Unless you are desperate and must assume particular distributions, or Unless table feel told you that C's were QTx or QTxx onside (17.22%), you should definitely play the suit by the percentages.

(FTR, the percentage line has an expectation of 4.53 tricks and begins by cashing the ♣A and ♣K)

Same goes for deciding to try and drop "the Rabbi" (the stiff king) or not with Jxxx+AQxxx (Rabbi is present 12.43% of the time here.)

Over the long haul, making anti-percentage plays or calls is losing Bridge.


...and if you "take a view" and take an anti-percentage action that doesn't work when you don't have to, you lose the postmortem automatically and apologize. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Even at that it can be hard on partnership harmony and longevity.

[Fluffy]

Fro teh same season I got:

♠AJ7
♥9863
♦52
♣K643

You are vunerable, MPs

E - S - W - N
1♥-ps-2♣-X
2♦-ps-4♥-X
ps-??