[gnasher]

inquiry, on Jul 28 2010, 02:39 AM, said:

gnasher, on Jul 27 2010, 04:49 PM, said:

Why is 4♠ ranked lower than 5♦?  In 4♠, I'm more likely to make 650 than to go down.

Hanoi5 recommended 4S as a 3 (half the value of 5C). I however didn't use his scores, I gave 4S a 7 (more than 5C). Note the first line of scores was "suggested", the second line was the one used.

Since the only critique was that 4S should score higher than 5C, and in fact, I had it doing so (looking at wrong line). I will assume the scores of this one is not in dispute, so the scores are finalized on it as given above (use the correct line).

I was looking at the correct line, and my objection was that 4♠ should score higher than 5 diamonds. I still think it should.

[Wackojack]

Tricky hand and our auction needs some explanation. We play very light opening 1M bids where with 6 spades the range is 9-15. (This is my partner's system and I just play it) 2/1 responses are corresondingly higher, so I judged this worth a rebid of 3♠ in spite of the ropey suit.

1♠ 2♣
3♠ 4♦
4♥ 5♣

Partner tanked before finally bidding 4♦ which I should take as a cue agreeing spades so I cued 4♥. Then came 5♣. partner's tank before bidding 4♦ was a little embarassing so I sent some messages to Hanoi:

Before 4♦:

->hanoi5: this isnt system.. judgement bid coming up
hanoi5: I bet

After 5♣:

->hanoi5: ***** he hasnt got a 2 suiter?
hanoi5: C'mon! I can't say anything at all.
->hanoi5: i know

So next:
5♦ 6♦
pass.

flycycle: result I think - very tricky hand
wackojack: god that led me up the garden path
flycycle: you took my 4D as cue at first, I reckoned
flycycle: (reasonable)
wackojack: the long pause was not an influence as 5!c was impossible cue
hanoi5: when you bid 5!c, I guess
wackojack: next