[rona_]

Our opps in an acbl tourney today had sayc on their cc. I will post a link to the hand. 4 spades doesn't make the way he played it, but I assumed that in sayc if someone has 5 hearts and 4 spades will open a heart and vice versa. We had a bad score because I jumped up with the queen of spades assuming opener had 5 and my partner had none left. The td said some open with 4 in sayc, but I omitted to tell her he had 5 hearts http://online.bridge....php?id=6524379 Any comments or opinions please?

[inquiry]

Is it legal? Yes it is legal. SAYC is a five card major system, but of course people can choose to bid differently if they want. Perhaps tony was was afraid he had no rebid after opening 1H and getting a frocing 1NT or 2 of a minor bid. Perhaps he misclicked. Perhaps he thought this was the time to strike out with an odd bid.

If it is any comfort to you, he could always make by beginning spade JACK from dummy, givnng you the same bad score you got on your own. And you gave him a lot of credit to lead a low spade on second round from Kxxx in his hand trying to trick you into ducking with Queen third. I have seen that play, and it usually works, because it looks so stupid... so you believed his bidding a lot more than his play. Oh well.. Look at it this way, now you know how to play against this declarer in the future.

[hrothgar]

rona_, on Oct 4 2004, 08:01 PM, said:

Our opps in an acbl tourney today had sayc on their cc. I will post a link to the hand. 4 spades doesn't make the way he played it, but I assumed that in sayc if someone has 5 hearts and 4 spades will open a heart and vice versa. We had a bad score because I jumped up with the queen of spades assuming opener had 5 and my partner had none left. The td said some open with 4 in sayc, but I omitted to tell her he had 5 hearts http://online.bridge....php?id=6524379 Any comments or opinions please?

Playing standard American, it is normal to open 1♥ holding 5 hearts and 4 spades. With this said and done, bidding systems are a set of guidelines rather than absolute rules. Players are permitted to deviate from their agreements if they see fit.

In particular, playing "vanilla" system like SAYC, players often need to make non-systemic bids to compensate for holes in the system.

[rona_]

Quote

Is it legal? Yes it is legal. SAYC is a five card major system, but of course people can choose to bid differently if they want. Perhaps tony was was afraid he had no rebid after opening 1H and getting a frocing 1NT or 2 of a minor bid. Perhaps he misclicked. Perhaps he thought this was the time to strike out with an odd bid.

If it is any comfort to you, he could always make by beginning spade JACK from dummy, givnng you the same bad score you got on your own. And you gave him a lot of credit to lead a low spade on second round from Kxxx in his hand trying to trick you into ducking with Queen third. I have seen that play, and it usually works, because it looks so stupid... so you believed his bidding a lot more than his play. Oh well.. Look at it this way, now you know how to play against this declarer in the future.

Except that next time, when I duck, declarer will have 5 and I will give him an overtrick. . Yes we got a bad score because others were in hearts going down. No complaints here, the TD is my favourite acbl Td and this has nothing to do with her. And yes that was clever play and yes he could have made it but I said in my post *the way he played it*. Thanks for the info. I now understand why people would open one spade with that hand.

[Flame]

In any serious event if 1sp can be 4 card suit you should know about it.
If for example they normally bid 1sp with 4 spades and 5 hearts you should know about it.
I dont know what exactly is sayc, maybe sayc isnt a pure 5 card major, but if you see 5 card major in their cc, or you ask and get a response that it show 5 card, you have a case imo.

[pclayton]

I can't imagine a competent declarer ducking the 2nd round holding AKxxx opposite JTxx (unless he looked into your hand - pretty tough on BBO ). Declarer's play on the actual hand didn't make too much sense either.

If you want - chalk it up to a Grosvenor.

BTW, your pard had a clear opening bid as well too.

[Flame]

rona_, on Oct 4 2004, 12:43 PM, said:

we got a bad score because others were in hearts going down.

Maybe im missing something, but 4h should be made, its easier then 4sp. On a club lead, taking out 2 trumps and playing club to the J, after clubs are out, you play diamond, and the opponents will open spade for you.
You can also play A of spade and then diamond and the player with the Hx will be endplayed. If you get a ruff and discard, you trow one spade on it and the other one on the club.
Or if you can just play J of spade as in 4 spade (thats the worse option)

[rona_]

Yes flame you are right. Out of 12 pairs only two bid and made 4 hearts. The others were pushed to 5, that went down, or did not bid game. Some were in 5 diamonds doubled. Sayc is Standard American Yellow card.

Quote

I can't imagine a competent declarer ducking the 2nd round holding AKxxx opposite JTxx (unless he looked into your hand - pretty tough on BBO  ). Declarer's play on the actual hand didn't make too much sense either.

So right. I should have taken more time and thought about his play, but I took long enough already to check their cc and was running out of time and I did not know that people open 4 card majors in sayc...I thought he wanted to make an overtrick, since it was matchpoints, and thought he could fool me into believing my partner had the king. Remember he has expert on his profile and I have intermediate. Way too funny actually.

[hrothgar]

Flame, on Oct 4 2004, 08:44 PM, said:

>In any serious event if 1sp can be 4 card suit you should know about it.
>If for example they normally bid 1sp with 4 spades and 5 hearts you should
>know about it.

I agree completely that players should pre-alert the basic system that they are playing.
With this said and done, it is critical to recognize that one deviation does not a system make.

>if you see 5 card major in their cc, or you ask and get a response that
>it show 5 card, you have a case imo.

Completely wrong. Players have an obligation to disclose agreements, not specific hand holdings.

[luke warm]

yet another example of why that fine convention, flannery, is used by so many world class players

*seriously ducking*

[Flame]

hrothgar, on Oct 4 2004, 02:18 PM, said:

Flame, on Oct 4 2004, 08:44 PM, said:

 

>if you see 5 card major in their cc, or you ask and get a response that
>it show 5 card, you have a case imo.

Completely wrong. Players have an obligation to disclose agreements, not specific hand holdings.

Ok i agree that a 5 cards major system doesnt have to have 5 card on every hand, but what about a specific question, you ask "what does this 1sp show" and they responde "5+ cards in spades"
This isnt a complete answer because they know there are hands which they open on 4 card, the question is should they tell us about it. I think thoreticly they should, because saying it show 5 spades is not true, or in other words a lie, practicly im not sure maybe it suppose to be common sense.

[jdulmage]

A great flannery hand!

Anyway...I frown on them opening 1♠ with that hand, but in any fashion, do you honestly think if he had 5 spades opposite 4 spades with the Ace and King that he would all of a sudden play out Ace and then small? That's your clue in right there to duck the spade. Why wouldn't he just go for the drop in spades otherwise?

Mistake on both sides.

No penalty.

[dogsbreath]

hi..
.. very naughty of 'Luke warm' to stir up the Flannery-haters
..i can smell a long thread on this ..must be one of the most loved/hated of conventions .
Rgds Dog

[the hog]

"A great flannery hand!"

That is an oxymoron.

[EricK]

The_Hog, on Oct 11 2004, 03:49 AM, said:

"A great flannery hand!"

That is an oxymoron.

But surely, if you had agreed to play Flannery (let's say your partner had bribed you sufficiently), then you would want as many hands as possible like this to turn up, and as few as possible which would have been handled by your preferred 2♦ methods! So this is a great Flannery hand.

Or do you believe that Flannery is a losing proposition even on "Flannery hands"?

Eric

[the hog]

In my mind linking the words "great" and "Flannery" is an oxymoron, Eric, regardless of how suitable or not a hand is for Flannery.
Actually it wouldn't surprise me if it were neutral even on "perfect" Flannery hands.