Another Interesting Hand

[glen]

You are playing in an IMPs pairs ACBL BBO Tourney, and you hold:

 

♠: ---

♥: AKQ74

♦: J82

♣: 98743

 

You are vulnerable vs. not, and the opponents have told you they play "anything goes" weak two bids.

 

Your RHO opens 2♠s, alerted as a "weak two, could be just 5♠s". You pass, responder passes, and partner balances with a double. It goes pass to you, and your bid now is?

 

I was surprised by the decision the player made.

 

Here was the full layout:

 

 

 

 

 

Board 7, EW Vul

 

____ ♠: T6

____ ♥: J8632

____ ♦: KQ96

____ ♣: JT

 

♠: --- _______ ♠: KQJ972

♥: AKQ74 ____ ♥: 95

♦: J82 _______ ♦: A7

♣: 98743 ____ ♣: KQ2

 

____ ♠: A8543

____ ♥: T

____ ♦: T543

____ ♣: A65

 

 

The West player decided to pass, and the result was down 2 for +500 and 9.9 IMPs.

 

The tournament director was called by the South player when West revealed the ♠ void, in case there was a failure to alert (and since penalty doubles were not on convention card).

 

The TD determined that the "auction was produced by reasoned decisions based on the alerted, potentially 'off-shape' weak two bid", and EW had no special agreements (e.g. penalty doubles).

 

The NS players accepted this ruling.

[Fluffy]

congrats to EW

[luke warm]

just because the weak 2 doesn't have to be 'disciplined' doesn't mean it isn't.. i think west took a big gamble here... frankly, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me but what do i know? i don't think passing a supposed t/o double with a void in their suit is logical

[cinvent77]

just because the weak 2 doesn't have to be 'disciplined' doesn't mean it isn't..

 

Let me see if I can decipher all those negations ... :huh: NS play a weak two which does not have to disciplined = NS play undisciplined weak two's. But that doesn't mean that it is not disciplined = NS weak two can be disciplined. Right? :unsure: But a weak two on ace-fifth-nothing and a side ace in first position even when white vs. red wouldn't you consider that 'undisciplined'? :)

 

Anyway instead of a take-out double a pass seems better. And passing your partners supposed take-out double is unheard off and suggests at least a partnership habit in a regular partnership.

[Gerben42]

And the full hand was:

 

[hv=n=skqjt6h632dq93cjt&w=shakq74dj82c98743&e=s72hj985dak76ckq2&s=sa98543htdt54ca65]399|300|[/hv]

 

And it could be worse!

[glen]

EW could argue that this layout is impossible since North did not raise ♠s

[Gerben42]

True, but partner made a takeout double of 2♠ so one could argue that he doesn't have many ♠ either. Of the two impossibilities, I like to believe partner.

 

But I guess not this partner?

[Al_U_Card]

Can't be the whole story. A bid of 3S is even possible on west's cards, but a direct 4H would be acceptable.......Pass is so unusual as to be suspicious.......

[joker_gib]

Pass is only possible if you cheat or if you don't know what the red card is ! :P

[Fluffy]

This kind of doubles exist, I saw them working once, and also failing once (my fault) before. However, never after a weak 2, but with other bidding where it was clear the partner had no big fit.

[Echognome]

I've had this happen before.

 

You open 1♥ and there is a double on your left. It goes 3♥ from partner, passed back to the doubler who doubles again, all pass.

 

1♥ - (X) - 3♥ - (P)

P - (X) - All Pass

 

You are not so surprised that trumps are 4-0, but rather that the 4 trumps are to your left.

 

The issue is that your opponents were beginners and LHO didn't think to bid 1NT rather than double. RHO didn't know what to bid and "figured" his partner's second double meant he had general defense rather than a stronger takeout double. As long as there is no UI, there's nothing you can do. There is nothing suspicious at all. It might be frustrating that you got caught by overbidding, but you cannot regulate bad bridge judgment.

 

It is only suspicious if the opponents know what they are doing and have an agreement. For example, if the opponents play power doubles where this hand is possible, then they must alert the double. Otherwise, you take your loss on this board and chalk up +730 another time.

[Gerben42]

Maybe you saw such doubles, but such sitting for it I've never seen working. It's the "I can't believe partner has a TO double since there are so many trumps missing so I will pass"-pass. Terrible!

 

 

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=sat86hdq987543c97&w=skj5hk986432djcq6&e=sq93hajt75dtcj842&s=s742hqdak62cakt53]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Auction (if you are under 18 please close your eyes)

N E S W

--- Pass 1♣ 1♥

Dbl 2♥ Pass Pass

Dbl Pass Pass Pass

 

Post mortem: I had only 1♥ so I thought naturally you had ♥ length and your double was now for penalty. At least the Austrian Schools were happy because they won more IMPs than the age and got the special prize for that.