[TimG]

gnasher, on Jul 31 2010, 01:17 PM, said:

Also, Cherdano's conditions included "South has at least 4 hearts". but the opposition bidding implies that South has six hearts. That must significantly increase the chance of both spades being onside.

"If north can rebid 2♦, he does" so it also sounds like north has 6 diamonds. I changed the simulation conditions to give north 6+ diamonds and south 6+ hearts and came up with north holding ♠KQ 28.2% of the time.

[Phil]

Not sure this is a great hand for a bidding contest if there is going to be this much debate about what the top contract is.

[cherdanno]

gnasher, on Jul 31 2010, 01:17 PM, said:

TimG, on Jul 31 2010, 06:41 PM, said:

If you allow declarer to make 9.3% of the time plus 30.1% of the remaining 90.7% (cherdanno's percentage for KQ in north), you get 5♣ making 36.6%.

Don't we get anything for a non-trump lead, or a bit of card-reading?

Also, Cherdano's conditions included "South has at least 4 hearts". but the opposition bidding implies that South has six hearts. That must significantly increase the chance of both spades being onside.

Well, on many auctions we will only have learnt that South has at least 4 hearts (see 655321's comment). But actually it doesn't make a big difference:

(Same constraints as above, but South 6+hearts:)

Makes 5C: 0.6067
North has S KQ:=0.3256
North has S Hxxx:=0.3289

[TylerE]

Just registering my unhappiness with this is scored... A thin, nearly even-money minor sut game at MP can hardly have an EXPECTATION of a near top. The significant part of the time that it's down those in 5♣ are getting essentially a bottom...this is not a 3 or 5 hand.