Minor hand fix (North was 4-3 in the minors instead of 3-4). I assume this changes nothing.

[spoiler]it didn't for us either[/spoiler]

Field is generally pretty awful, though we've been getting pounded lately, so maybe that's changing.

I might be tempted by 6S instead of 5S. That 5D tells you a lot....

It is tempting, but it doesn't tell you if partner has their actual hand or if they have

AQxxx
x
Jxx
AJxx

(which, with the stiff heart, is a 4S bid I think).

Well, it is the difference bwteen a cold slam and a slam on a finesse that is probably wrong.

If south splinters 4D actually you might reach 6S

4D would be fit for me. I don't have a splinter available after 2H. I agree that a splinter from south is like the only way to get to 6S, but I think the overwhelming majority of bridge players would not splinter with that hand, with the ace in the splinter suit, even if they (correctly, imo) judged the hand strength to be correct.

+1

I found a copy of Practical Bridge Endings by Chien-Hwa Wang, and I'm not entirely sure about the line used in one of the hands. The line I would have used seems a little different, and would have also worked on the lay of the cards. I'm interested in seeing what you guys think. Suppose you end up in 6 at white/red when LHO dealt and opened 3 (opps silent otherwise). It doesn't specify the scoring type, so I guess we assume IMPs.


K 9 6 2
A Q 9 8 4
A
A 5 3


A 5 4
K T 5 2
9 4 3
K 9 7

The opening lead is the K, and RHO plays the 8. Hearts break 2-2. Plan the play.

Hmm. Feels like a spot to either:

1. Try to endplay LHO with the third diamond (works if he's 2=2=7=2, not terribly likely).
2. Try to set up a spade for a pitch (works if LHO is 3=2=7=1, but he might've led a club; the auction matters)
3. Try to set up a squeeze (works when RHO has 4+ spades and 5+ clubs or QJTx, which note this also covers case 1, so rules out the endplay IMO). A double squeeze also works I think if clubs are 4-3 and RHO has the sole spade guard (LHO guards diamonds, RHO guards spades, who guards the club?) but I think they can return a club to break this up so the hell with it.

I'll probably screw up the execution, but:

1. Win trick one (nice play)
2. Draw trumps (leaving A94 opposite T5 just in case I need an entry somewhere)
3. Duck a spade at trick 4. I don't think I want to ruff a diamond before ducking the spade, because LHO may be able to win (with say QT doubleton, I can't duck to RHO) and play a third diamond to be ruffed, which may screw up my timing.

At this point I've typed/deleted a bunch of different lines, so just tell me if I'm down already and if not, what gets returned at trick 5.

I had essentially the same reasoning. After two rounds of hearts, I can pretty confidently place 9 of LHO's cards. All that left is 4 black cards. If he has 3 spades, we can eventually use the spade break to pitch a losing club. If he has 2, I think we can squeeze RHO in the blacks. If he only has 1, I don't think we can do anything (although I could expect it to be lead as well).

I don't think a double squeeze exists here, because both of our threat cards (the small spade and the diamond) as in front of our opponents'. I'm still a pretty big newb on squeeze play, so someone should correct me if I'm wrong.

My line was to win the diamond, pull trump, and concede a spade. Then, I can win a club return on the board (or a spade return in hand), ruff the last diamond, and run my trumps, and cash the high club. At this point, if the clubs haven't fallen, I'm reverting to the spades working out.

Here is the line the book uses:


Not sure which line is better, or if they are essentially equivalent. IMO our line is better, since it caters to the (small) possibility of a 3-3 spade break, and doesn't lose anything (I think).

I suppose one reasonable theory is that if LHO has three spades, they must have a stiff club, and might have led that instead.

Anyone up for BBO tonight? I should be around...

I should be around too.

Or was that last night?

Anyone for tonight?

A few auctions. What do you think x means in these situations?

1NT-(2H) (H&minor)-X

1NT-(P)-2H-(P)
2S-(3H)-X

(1D)-1NT-(2D)-2H (xfer)
(3D)-P-(P)-X

1. I treat this as a hearts overcall, so all my agreements for 1N (2H) are on; in this case, X is neg for us.
2. Cards, no clear direction [similar to a max'l X. Inv, but doesn't promise more than 5 spades. Unlikely to have a H stopper. Convertible.]
3. See (2). 3H would be a re-transfer imo.

Sending this to my reg p right now, lol. I'll post his answers too

edit: we don't play 2H as a xfer in the 3rd auction fwiw, so that is unchartered waters for us. I amended that auction to
(1C)-1NT-(2C)-2D (xfer) [is this a transfer?]
(3C)-P-(P)-X

I think there's a huge reason to play 2D as natural there when we have an opener already in the auction.

Yeah I'm not a fan of xfer there as well. But that is what my partner I was playing with wanted...2d as xfer over 2d is pretty normal though

Also if X is neg in 1, what is 2S. Or does X deny 4 spades?

play leb, keyed around H. 2S is a drop. X can be a wide range of hands (any that the traditional leb sequences don't describe), e.g., not 4+GF, since you can bid 3H or 2N-->3C; 3H with a GF stayman hand. Values should be inv+, since partner may want to convert.

Oh dur, of course I was going to get one of these auctions wrong...2S of course drop dead... I meant

1NT-(P)-2C-(2H)
X

i have hearts

1. "Partner, I don't think they can make 2H."

2. This one is trickier, but I think "partner, I don't think they can make 3H, and I don't feel like bidding 4S or 3NT or something" is still right. This one is eminently pullable IMO if partner has something like KQxx xx AQJxx KJ or something.

3. This one is more takeout-ish. Something like AQxxx Qxx x Jxxx or so seems about right. Partner can pass or take out.

^^ if your meta agreements provide for penalty doubles by responder, I agree with DW on (1) (ldo), and I *might* be able to be convinced on (2), only on the basis that intervenor passed at his first call (and some sort of DOSBAP principle may apply).

Remember that I gave him an alternate auction in 3.

From my P:
1) Negative

2) Points. Not necessarily penalty, but willing to play 3HX. Probably should have at least xx of hearts.

3) It's [Wyman: the 2D call] probably a transfer, but I'm not 100% sure. There's an argument that Lebensohl should be played over all auctions of:

(1X)-1NT-(2X or 2Y)

I think this should be penalty if 2D is a transfer.

------------

I wrote back:
Agree on 1 & 2, except I don't think I need hearts in 2. I think in 3, 2D should be to play. If it's a transfer, I think this shows cards -- sort of maximal-ish -- since I think 3D is (/should be) a retransfer to hearts. But nonetheless, I think there's a huge case as you say for having a natural 2D available when they've opened. Leb on/systems off I think just makes sense. Except we have an issue stayman-ing here, since we don't have the leb relay stayman available.

Yeah, re #2, I obviously don't mean that responder should only be doing this with KJT9 of trumps. In fact, notice that, depending on your agreements, responder CAN'T have four hearts and inv+ values here, because we wouldn't be having this auction, responder would have started with Stayman instead.

To my mind, something like KQxxx KJx xx xxx is about perfect for this.

And, equally obviously, my meta is to play a lot of penalty doubles, and deal with the negative-double type stuff in other ways (that generally involve either overbidding to game or manufacturing a penalty double with non-ideal hands).

If you tend to like a lot of takeout-type doubles, that's fine too. In general, I dislike a lot of takeout actions towards a partner who has already fairly narrowly defined their hand, and won't have the faintest idea what to take it out into a lot of the time.

For instance: how passable is that negative double?