The title of this article is also a big Internet forum, the appreciation society for The Prisoner. Patrick McGoohan plays Number Six, as all fans of the Prisoner know. Number One in the Prisoner is never revealed, and "Six of One" is a play on Six of One and Half a Dozen of Another, a phrase which first appeared in print in the 18th Century. The earliest known use of the expression occurred in a journal kept by a British naval officer, Ralph Clark, in 1790.
Ken Barnett had six of one and half a dozen of the other on the hand below, and it did not matter which slam he bid, or indeed whether he bid the grand or not, as bidding either slam would have been a top. It is what Andy Robson referred to in a learned article as a "30-point pack", with the opponents' 10 points in spades of no value in defence at all. If one is playing Rubensohl over 2S, one can transfer to hearts, but even playing Lebensohl, one can bid 3H forcing. 4H is not necessary and an underbid. However, After East shows big spade support with 4S, North should now offer a choice of slams with 6C. South can correct to the higher scoring slam, or play the slightly safer 6C. It matters not, as the idiom says.
There is something to be said for South raising to 6C anyway, and 5H+2 was an average. One East-West went on to 5S and that was 800. Robot and Robot had a fine win with a solid 60% today. Which leads me to a quiz question.
Who played Number 5 in The Computer Wears Menace Shoes?
Solutions to Christmas Conundrums
The first of these was relatively easy.
The second one was 6NT. This was the layout:
The East-West hands have to be exactly as shown for South to make 6NT. And the only lead to defeat it was a heart, which tangles declarer's entries irreparably. On the diamond lead, South wins and ducks a spade. West now switches to a heart, but you win in South, finesse the nine of clubs, and now cash the remaining clubs throwing diamonds from South. East gets progressively squeezed.
Both simple when you see it!
Paul seems to have missed something. Per Kit Woolsey: "When looking at all 4 hands, it can be very difficult to see things from the single-dummy point of view, which the player is looking at." On this occasion he can see the X by Chantal, which led me to believe that she had the SA and subsequently less in the other suits. If she had passed, I would have bid 6C.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is always easier looking at all four hands. But I don't think the double of 4S tells you much, as Pass would not have been forcing when you are white against red. I think it denies 4H, and you would have missed grand opposite Jxx Kx Axxx Kxxx. I think partner's double tells you that she is likely to have the AD, and may or may not have the AS.
ReplyDeleteDoubling without the SA makes no sense. I already know she has 12-14 points, so the X must tell me something else. My 4H has only told her that I have long Hearts. She may have Ax xxx KQxx KQxx. 6H now depends on the HK being on my right. Or a Spade being led, and my D2 discarded. On reflection, I should have bid 6H!
ReplyDeleteDouble suggests wanting to defend 4Sx, and discouraging partner going on to 5H, unless holding an exceptional hand. To me, that suggests quick tricks i.e. spade ace and ace and king of diamonds. Wouldn’t it also imply two hearts, as you are playing partner for one trick? Assuming partner may have something like AQxxxxx hearts and no other values.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, to me it suggests a lack of interest in hearts and high cards in clubs appear less likely, as they wouldn’t be quick tricks (though still possible), so I think I agree with Ken’s 5C (for once!), although not the initial 4H.
Liz