[MickyB]

If I started with 5♠, I'd be tempted to bid 6♠ over 6♦. If I was going to be on lead to 6♣ I'd pass it out.

[mike777]

If pard is on lead it may be worth a shot to x 6c or 6H and hope we can beat it on a D lead.

I do not understand bidding 6s, why bid 5s, make the opp guess, and then bid 6s after they guess?

I could understand a direct 6S.

[mikeh]

In my post advocating 5♠, I thought I had made it clear that I was not planning on bidding again: I have made them make the last guess. However, if they have bid 6♣ I will risk a lightner double... partner will almost certainly have the right red shape to be able to lead a ♦.

I would also double 6♥, altho that will be less clear: partner might well be 5=0=4=4 in that event, given my xxxx in ♥.

[MickyB]

I'd bid 6♠ having previous bid 5♠ because when they bid 6♦ and pard doesn't double, I think they've guessed correctly. It's not an attractive way to bid, but it certainly has its advantages.

[Echognome]

When given this problem I bid 5♠ and passed any slam they bid. If they guessed correctly, well done.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Sep 5 2006, 05:12 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 5 2006, 11:23 AM, said:

mikeh, it's true that 5♠ is the law bid. But the law isn't always correct and in my experience 4♠ often buys the pot. Especially if pard has a med-max hand.

I like the LOTT, but I don't use it on this type of hand... we simply lack the requisite information as to total trumps, plus the LOTT breaks down on freaks.

Well, that's what I said

[EricK]

Maybe it's best to occasionally go slow with this sort of hand (I am sure it is best to vary your bidding plan somehow).

What would happen if I bid a pre-emptive 3♠?

[mike777]

whereagles, on Sep 6 2006, 03:11 AM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 5 2006, 05:12 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 5 2006, 11:23 AM, said:

mikeh, it's true that 5♠ is the law bid. But the law isn't always correct and in my experience 4♠ often buys the pot. Especially if pard has a med-max hand.

I like the LOTT, but I don't use it on this type of hand... we simply lack the requisite information as to total trumps, plus the LOTT breaks down on freaks.

Well, that's what I said

LOTT may break down alot but I still prefer 6s directly. Was curious how many would try 5S or less on this hand.

With my 12 spades and a long suit adjustment I will be a slave to LOTT here.

[MickyB]

Scoring: IMP

The board was taken from a Camrose match. Both Norths opened 1NT! At our training session, one South passed over the double. Personally, I much prefer a redouble! 6♠X didn't go for 1100 at our table, was a round suit led? Another reason to bid 6♠ directly, although I still think 5♠ is reasonable.

---

[mike777]

Needless to say partner has a clear 1nt opener, oh well

[mikeh]

It is far from clear that West would or should bid 5N over 5♠. After a pass, the auction will proceed p x p ?

Now, we can all say that West has a clear 5N here, and indeed I would agree. I expect, however, that we would have seen the problem posted from W's point of view had North held, say, AQxxx AKx xxx xx and East x QJxx AQxx AKQx.... any reason the auction would be different through 5♠?

[mr1303]

Mike got the hands slightly wrong:

---

[HeartA]

5♠ is high enough for me.

[akhare]

I am late to the party, but it's a tossup between 5♠ and 6♠ for me. However, since the former bid doesn't solve my problem if they bid say 6♦, I might be inclined to swallow the pill now and bid 6♠.

[mike777]

With all the jokes and attacks poor LOTT takes on, lets note that it worked on the actual hand. 12 spades and adding one for a long suit adjustment and even bidding 7Spades works on the actual hand. I do think LOTT is more than an "even a broken clock is right twice a day" theory for most non world class players.

[mikeh]

Sorry, but I really do NOT understand how a LOTT analysis is any guide AT ALL to resolving this issue.

IFF (that is not a mis-spelling.. it means 'if but only if') EW can make a slam, then the LOTT says that NS should save.

There are two main areas of competitive bidding where the LOTT helps... I am not speaking of the LOTT arguments in favour of Bergen or 5 card weak twos etc.

One is when we are deciding whether to sell to a partscore (or double it) or bid our own partscore, when we DO NOT have any strong reason to think that either contract will make or fail. We then think more or less as follows: If we bid 3♥ over their 2♠.... they rate to hold 8♥ and we 9♠.... if they make 2♠, we rate to go down only 1 and even if they double (we being nv) we lose 100 against 110... while if they fail in 2♠, we rate to make 9 tricks, thus 140 against their 100...ok I better bid.

The other is when the opps have reached a good game... or slam... and bridge logic tells us, on the auction and our hand, that they will probably make, then we can use the LOTT to help us decide whether a save is profitable.

However, the LOTT is NOT a guide to whether their slam is making. We have to make that evaluation on bridge factors and then use the LOTT to help us decide what to do about it.

Look at the counter-example I put forward: N with AQxxx AKx xxx xx and East with x QJxx AQxx AKQx... W and S are unchanged, the auction to West's first call is unchanged... EW will bid or not bid a slam with the same frequency, yet on my counter-example, N cashes the ♥AK.

The LOTT numbers are precisely the same: whether you are considering the LOTT number or the real life numbers (and they are NOT the same).

[mike777]

I could not find anything on advanced saves and the LOTT in my books. Perhaps a forum member can find a discussion.

So we are left with a couple of thoughts.
1) It is a crapshoot
2) Bid one more when in doubt.

In MikeH's example 6S is a good save even against 5 of minor but we lose the option of the opp bidding 6 of a minor and going down against the AK of H.