[Free]

MATCHPOINTS!

Scoring: MP

---

EW are silent:
1♦ - 2♣ (nat (3)4+♦ ; 10+HCP nat)
2♦ - 2♠ (5+♦ any strength ; GF with values in ♠ and 5+♣)
3♣ - 3♥ (3 card support ; 4th suit)
4♦ - 5♣ (not clearly defined ; decided not to cuebid)
pass

5♣+1 scores 15.5%

Spoiler

3NT+3 scores 50%
6♣= scores 86.2%
6NT= scores 91.38%
6♦ is down

EDIT: at the table 4♣ was actually 4♦!

[mcphee]

I think I will point my finger at S. The 3H bid was a worthless bid having already created a GF with 2S. S should bid 3D and see what that leads to. It is not so easy for N for try 3N with only 1 H stop having never heard any encouragement of his source of tricks. So I feel 3H was confusing and had the effect of getting partner thinking toward slam. Would this bidding not make you think that slam might be at least worth considering? It would me.

[gwnn]

oops, sorry about this post

[billw55]

What has north done to tell partner he has a big hand? OK, maybe 4♣ could be looked at as slow arrival .. but even so north hasn't begun to communicate the playing strength of his hand.

[helene_t]

Looks to me as if N's 4♣ bid was ill-defined, it may be a system issue but it could also be that N needs to bid 4♥ to show a good hand for 6♣. Over 4♣ S can't do more. So mainly N and/or the methods.

But Bob makes a good point, 3♦ would have been better than 3♥.

Edit: Just noticed that 6♣ is a lousy contract and will probably go down on a heart lead since if you are in 6 you take the spade finesse. In 5♣ you play three rounds of diamonds and make 6.

BTW if I analyze this correctly, 6NT may make on the spade/club squeeze against W but you need to concede a heart trick to rectify the count, and if E wins the heart trick he can play a spade to kill dummy's entry for the 5-card endgame.

[billw55]

helene_t, on May 5 2010, 07:29 AM, said:

Edit: Just noticed that 6♣ is a lousy contract and will probably go down on a heart lead

Tricky for west to lead from ♥Kx. But you never know.

Can north just bid 3♦ at his second call? Per the OP's comments they are not playing 2/1.

[rhm]

mcphee, on May 5 2010, 07:01 AM, said:

I think I will point my finger at S. The 3H bid was a worthless bid having already created a GF with 2S. S should bid 3D and see what that leads to. It is not so easy for N for try 3N with only 1 H stop having never heard any encouragement of his source of tricks. So I feel 3H was confusing and had the effect of getting partner thinking toward slam. Would this bidding not make you think that slam might be at least worth considering? It would me.

So let's look at the bidding from the North perspective:

At the point North bypassed 3NT at pairs, was North assuming that South, who forced to game with a ♣ suit, where he held at most 3 HCP, had virtually no points in the red suits either?

But then South must have at least the QJ of ♣ and AKQ in ♠ to justify his game force, in which case 3NT will still be lay-down and 6C must have some play.

It seems to me that North has quite a good hand opposite a game force.
Passing in a minor suit game, when you have extras and know that 3NT makes, just risks this kind of disaster at match-points.

I would rather invest and risk 15.5% to get a top score.

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on May 5 2010, 07:29 AM, said:

Edit: Just noticed that 6♣ is a lousy contract and will probably go down on a heart lead since if you are in 6 you take the spade finesse. In 5♣ you play three rounds of diamonds and make 6.

Yeah, but this is matchpoints, so you want to play 3N or 6C.

Presumably 2C is F2N by these methods as I wouldn't have only rebid 2D.

Over 3H, I would have bid 3N (or 4N quantitative, would use 4H as KC here) with the N hand, N has bid the same minor suit holdings with xx, xx in the majors.

On that basis I'd crime N, S has (over)bid his hand.

[Codo]

I think the system did its part when you had never been able to show the strength of the north hand.
I think north bid the hand without much thought. There are too many hands, where 6 club has play, so he should bid 6 club after 5 club.

South however was guilty. He bid 3 ♥ for no purpose instead of 3 ♦. And he refused to cuebid the crutial ace of diamond oer 4 ♣ again.

I had reached 6 ♣ -1.

And the lead from Kx is nearly obvious after both opponents deny strong hearts and that they hold enough diamond tricks to pitch all possible heart losers if you give them the time to do so.

[Free]

helene_t, on May 5 2010, 01:29 PM, said:

Edit: Just noticed that 6♣ is a lousy contract and will probably go down on a heart lead since if you are in 6 you take the spade finesse. In 5♣ you play three rounds of diamonds and make 6.

6♣ makes because after ♣AK you can run your ♦s, discarding 2 ♥s in the South hand before LHO can ruff and play another ♥.

[helene_t]

Yes but I don't think that is percentage play. You are playing for the short trumps to be with the short diamonds, that has <50% chance. Better to take the spade finesse.

Obviously if you are in 5 you don't take the spade finesse as you only make nine tricks if the spade finesse is off. So you play ♣AK and then the diamonds, as you say.

[whereagles]

Since 3♥ shows 3 cards and 2♠ shows cards there, what more does North need to bid 3NT?

[Jlall]

3H is fine, it's not a 2/1 auction it's a sayc auction. So 2C then 2S then 3D shows real diamond support since 3D over 2D is NF. Ergo 3H.

After that north has a very fine hand, certainly too good to bid 3N imo. Partner doesn't have T98xx that often. After 5C I think north has to kick it in though considering that it's MP.

[jdonn]

Yeah overall it seems reasonable but I think north must bid slam at the end. It won't take much.

North bidding 3NT on a hand this good would be so awful. If south had Qxxxx of clubs he would have no reason at all to pull and there you would be, taking 14 or 15 tricks.

[mikeh]

I had a sense of disbelief as I read the posts advocating a 3♦ call by S. That should show real diamonds, not Ax, since it appears that he had to make an artificial force over 2♦, and couldn't show a gf diamond fit, absent (I assume) a splinter.

One minor point: the OP defined 2♠ as spade values, gf, 5+ clubs. That left me wondering how the partnership finds a 4-4 spade fit.

Does opener have to bid 2♠ over 2♣ when holding 4 spades, regardless of diamond length or hand strength? I haven't played a non 2/1 method for so long, and always have agreements about 1♦/2♣/2♦ anyway, because it is a horrible sequence absent specific agreements.

As it is, if S could have 4 spades, might he not be (and often be) 4=3=1=5, in which case N should be thinking 3N even with his extra values.

Given the conditions of contest (mps), and the fact that it is far from clear that 6♣ will, in any event, be a good contract, I'd bid 3N.

Were I not to bid 3N, I think I'd commit to slam as North, altho I'm not convinced about my next call. And that lack of conviction is one reason for choosing 3N.

As for blame for the poor result, we are not told what the score would be for 3N, but we do know that it would be more than 15.5%. Since it is N's fault that 3N was not reached, and probably his fault that slam was not reached (I mean, how slammish should S be with a 10xxxx trump suit that was not raised immediately?), I'd give all of the blame to N.

[aguahombre]

Another serendipity. Bad use of bad system gets a lot of matchpoints.

1D 2NT (invite)
3NT....simple souls blither into 3NT from the side that will not get a heart lead from KX. Making six, next case.

Now everyone will confirm what I already said ---that South should bid the ten-fifth suit and explore scientifically, instead of just blasting on the first round with what he thought was a size and shape bid.

[Codo]

mikeh, on May 6 2010, 07:41 AM, said:

I had a sense of disbelief as I read the posts advocating a 3♦ call by S. That should show real diamonds, not Ax, since it appears that he had to make an artificial force over 2♦, and couldn't show a gf diamond fit, absent (I assume) a splinter.

If you have real diamonds, why did you hide this support so long?

You bid 2 ♣ - no raise
you bid 2 ♠ - no raise

So if you assume that there had been no forcing raise avaiable after 2 ♦, you have a point. But I do not read this in the OPs text.

[hanp]

I think south made two bad calls, 3H and 5C. 3H is a particularly lazy bid.

4C is clearly forcing since 3S was available as an attempt for 3NT.

The final pass doesn't seem right at matchpionts.

Edit: if 3D by north would have been NF (and that doesn't seem unreasonable, I don't know the system) then 3H was indeed fine.

[Free]

mikeh, on May 5 2010, 11:41 PM, said:

As for blame for the poor result, we are not told what the score would be for 3N, but we do know that it would be more than 15.5%. Since it is N's fault that 3N was not reached, and probably his fault that slam was not reached (I mean, how slammish should S be with a 10xxxx trump suit that was not raised immediately?), I'd give all of the blame to N.

The scores are hidden, below the score of 5♣+1. Apparently it was hidden too well

[Free]

Damn, I just realized North didn't bid 4♣, but 4♦! Sorry for the mistake!