[HardVector]

MPs, club game, sub-average field.

---

Have fun.

[etha]

1♠

[FelicityR]

After watching some of the Spingold last night on BBO where a Chinese player opened 4♠ with ♠AQJxxxxx Axx x x or something similar vulnerable against a World Championship Polish pair and got a good result, I'm bidding a no nonsense 4♠ here. [On the other table the opener bid 1♠ and the opponents intervened up to the five level.]

If partner who's already passed turns up with the right cards for 6♠, then that's just the luck of the draw.

[gszes]

these types of hands pop up infrequently but the principle remains the same. LOOK INTO THE FUTURE. Can you dream up a bidding sequence that will allow your side to discover the proper level/strain. If so, then pursue it - otherwise bid what you think you can make. Your side might be cold for 7c opposite void Axxx xxx xxxxxx but how in the world can you find that contract? Even if you could, the NVUL opps might find a very profitable 7 red sac. Be practical and bid 4s. Eat up as much room as possible so it becomes just as tough for the opps to find their best spot as it is for your side.

[HardVector]

 FelicityR, on 2019-July-25, 04:51, said:

After watching some of the Spingold last night on BBO where a Chinese player opened 4♠ with ♠AQJxxxxx Axx x x or something similar vulnerable against a World Championship Polish pair and got a good result, I'm bidding a no nonsense 4♠ here. [On the other table the opener bid 1♠ and the opponents intervened up to the five level.]

If partner who's already passed turns up with the right cards for 6♠, then that's just the luck of the draw.

With the hand that you've shown, 4s DOES seem to be reasonable. What does the hand you've listed have to do with the hand that I've given? About the only thing they have in common, is a 7 card spade suit. Every other aspect of the hand is different.

[nige1]

HardVector 'MPs,.club game, sub-average field.'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I rank
1. 4♠ = PRE Seems best,
2. 1♠ = NAT Slam is possible
3. 2♦ = ART. ♠ & another. But the suit disparity argues against this,
4. Double = T/O.

---

[HardVector]

Well, all this kind of explains the results on this hand. This board was played 11 times. 8 of those were in 4s. 4s should go down 2 easily, but because of the weak defense in the field, 2 managed to get 10 tricks, and 5 got 9 for down 1. Only 1 got the fairly easy -2. Of the other 3, one was in 2s, one was in 2h and one was in 3c.

5c is cold.

---

I don't understand why you would want to make a single suited bid when you have a clear 2 suiter. Especially when your second suit has better values than the first. I was kind of stunned that nobody was in 5c and so many were in 4s.

[Tramticket]

How many diamonds can your non-vulnerable opponents make?

I imagine that opps competing in diamonds makes it very difficult to find a club contract your way.

I would not want to show a 7-5 hand as two-suited, the discrepancy is too great - particularly when the seven-card suit is a major.

[rhm]

 Tramticket, on 2019-July-27, 04:07, said:

How many diamonds can your non-vulnerable opponents make?

I imagine that opps competing in diamonds makes it very difficult to find a club contract your way.

I would not want to show a 7-5 hand as two-suited, the discrepancy is too great - particularly when the seven-card suit is a major.

This is a common view and standard bidding approaches do not cater well for such hands.
Fact remains: slam in club looks very reasonable while game in spades does not.

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

 rhm, on 2019-July-27, 06:29, said:

This is a common view and standard bidding approaches do not cater well for such hands.
Fact remains: slam in club looks very reasonable while game in spades does not.

Rainer Herrmann

yeah, now compare with partner's hand 9, QJxxx, xxxx, Qxx you might make 5♣ but not that often, 4♠ is much better even though he has much better clubs, it's a matter of frequency and partner's actual hand is particularly unkind. I would overcall 1♠.

[pescetom]

 nige1, on 2019-July-26, 17:15, said:

3. 2♦ = ART. ♠ & another.

I would play this as ♠ and ♥ (Michaels), both in my normal partnerships and with pickup partners.
Am I missing something here?

[Cyberyeti]

 pescetom, on 2019-July-27, 15:59, said:

I would play this as ♠ and ♥ (Michaels), both in my normal partnerships and with pickup partners.
Am I missing something here?

You have 2 bids for 3 two suiters, you can make either the cuebid or 2N ambiguous (or you can use 2♦ for the blacks, 3♦ with the majors), but I'd assume michaels in a pickup partnership.

[Zelandakh]

 Cyberyeti, on 2019-July-27, 17:01, said:

You have 2 bids for 3 two suiters, you can make either the cuebid or 2N ambiguous (or you can use 2♦ for the blacks, 3♦ with the majors), but I'd assume michaels in a pickup partnership.

There are many possibilities. One I quite like is:-

2♦ = WJO in a major; or ♠+♣, strong
2♥ = majors, weak
2♠ = ♠+♣, weak
2NT = ♥+♣
3♣ = WJO
3♦ = majors, strong

"Weak" in a red vs white context is naturally somewhat different from Green so no need to speculate on the old split-range versus contiguous debate.

As for the OP hand, I have had a fair amount of success on such hands making a natural 2♠ WJO and then bidding clubs on the next round. I am not sure if that is right on this one - I think it probably depends on the opps and SotM more than the hand itself - but as noone else has mentioned the approach I think it is worth bringing up. One of the obvious disadvantages of the 2-suited scheme above is precisely that such tactics are no longer available.

[nige1]

 pescetom, on 2019-July-27, 15:59, said:

I would play this as ♠ and ♥ (Michaels), both in my normal partnerships and with pickup partners.
Am I missing something here?

In previous threads, I've argued that, over a minor, a cue should show
spaces and another. Partner can reply 2H/3om (P/C) or 2N (relay) without a spade fit

[nige1]

 pescetom, on 2019-July-27, 15:59, said:

I would play this as ♠ and ♥ (Michaels), both in my normal partnerships and with pickup partners.
Am I missing something here?

In previous threads, I've argued that, over a minor, a cue should show
spades and another. Partner can reply 2H/3om (P/C) or 2N (relay) without a spade fit.

[Winstonm]

 HardVector, on 2019-July-26, 19:34, said:

.

---

I don't understand why you would want to make a single suited bid when you have a clear 2 suiter. Especially when your second suit has better values than the first. I was kind of stunned that nobody was in 5c and so many were in 4s.

Because I want to play in the 7-1 insted of the 5-2.

[HardVector]

 Winstonm, on 2019-August-05, 18:28, said:

Because I want to play in the 7-1 insted of the 5-2.

You will note, however, that you don't get a 7-1 and a 5-2...and you'll never find out it's actually 7-0 and 5-4 if you go jumping to 4s and show a 1 suiter. You know you want to be in at least 4s, why not explore a little and find out if it's right or not? Afraid the opps are going to outbid you? Bidding out of fear is what has caused most of the judgemental bidding mistakes I've seen. Either fear of bidding too much and going down, or fear of what the opponents are going to make. Just yesterday, I had someone take me out of a 4h game that was going to go down 2 to bid a 4s game that was going -4 doubled out of fear that 4h was making.

[Zelandakh]

 HardVector, on 2019-August-05, 22:14, said:

You will note, however, that you don't get a 7-1 and a 5-2...and you'll never find out it's actually 7-0 and 5-4 if you go jumping to 4s and show a 1 suiter. You know you want to be in at least 4s, why not explore a little and find out if it's right or not? Afraid the opps are going to outbid you? Bidding out of fear is what has caused most of the judgemental bidding mistakes I've seen. Either fear of bidding too much and going down, or fear of what the opponents are going to make. Just yesterday, I had someone take me out of a 4h game that was going to go down 2 to bid a 4s game that was going -4 doubled out of fear that 4h was making.

I think you are rather missing the point here HardV. Posters are not bidding 4♠ out of fear but because they recognise that this is going to be a good contract a large portion of the time and want to apply pressure to the opponents. As I mentioned earlier, the truth is that there is no right answer on a 7510 hand. There are however plenty of indications on this particular hand to suggest showing spades first and foremost. For example, you are probably aware of the well-known paradox that with 2 5-card suits, QJTxx and AKxxx, it is generally right to choose the suit headed by the queen as trumps all things being equal. The reason for that is that the AK are useful whether the suit is trump or not but the QJT are much more likely to be wasted if in a side suit. Like all good rules it has an exception - it gets reversed for a double-fit when we are primarily scared of ruffs and expect to be able to establish the side suit once trumps have been drawn.

The question is more one of choosing a tactical approach. It is most unlikely that a 1♠ or 2♠ overcall will end the auction so walking the dog with the hope of perhaps also introducing clubs later at a high level (usually 4♣) is certainly a sensible approach against some opponents. A direct 4♠ against that practically guarantees that the opps make the last guess on the hand, which is a good thing. One can easily argue that you are refusing to make the "right" call through fear of missing a somewhat unlikely club fit. It is impossible to cover every eventuality so any choice is going to offer possibilities for failure - which one might equate to fear if trying to make a point.

On this hand, 4♠ is a fairly middle of the road choice. Trying to go slow with a low level spade overcall, either to try and deceive the opps or to share more information, is a valid approach, particularly against certain opps. Selling the hand as a 2-suiter looks to be by far the weakest plan of attack with little upside in the grander scheme of things. Maybe getting hold of a dealer program and generating a hundred valid hands to see how the bidding might go in various scenarios would be sensible for you if you remain unconvinced. But let's be honest, it might be a while before you hold your next hand with ♠QJTxxxx and ♣AKxxx to test out your ideas.

[thepossum]

Possum Sim (Intermediate Version) has game spades as a clear winner ie 4S (67%)

Chance of slams very low (9-10%) and even game clubs (28%) very low

Chance of game diamonds approx 16% for those who feel like competing