Apportion the blame

[Guest Jlall]

NS are white vs red at MP

 

North holds: J9xx AJxxx xx Tx

South holds: x QTxxx ATxx KQ8

 

The auction went 1H by south 11-15, X 4H by north. 4H is very wide ranging as 1H was limited to 15. It can be a normal preempt or a balanced 13 or 4 trumps and a 10 count and a stiff, etc etc. East now bid 4S and south Xed which meant he wanted to bid 5H opposite a preemptive hand type, but partner was welcome to pass with a decent hand. North bid 5H and it went down 1 undoubled when declarer dropped the stiff king of hearts offside. North and South both immediately apologized.

 

Did south have too much defense to save over 5H? Should north have sat with an ace and J9xx of trumps? Was everything fine and this is just one of those things?

Apportion the blame.

[Winstonm]

North should pass with the potential for 2 tricks against spades - North shoulders more blame but system gets some and opps get some and one of those things gets some.

 

Winston

[han]

Tough decisions, the opponents did well to bid 4S.

 

I think that south should pass, but as I said, it is tough because the white vs red sac looks appealing. I think that the pull by north is correct, south is more likely to have K-6th of hearts and less defense.

 

Obviously this would be much easier if the colors were different because south would need a better hand to double and therefore north would have an easy pass.

[cherdano]

I don't understand the double. South is just one card away from the weak no trump shape (I will assume 1H could be 11-13 balanced), North may be able to diagnose that, and in addition the high-card location is pretty defensive given our shape.

 

Arend

[mikeh]

I think it is one of those boards where you shrug and carry on. If I was being called upon to settle a bet about how I would apportion the modest 'blame', I would attribute almost all of it to South for the double: but I want to stress that I don't mind the double at all and I would certainly pull as North given the agreements (which I also like in the context of the system).

 

So 'nobody' 80%, South 16%, N 4%. And I may be letting 'nobody' off too lightly.

[mike777]

I assume that North with a preemptive hand bids the "Law" legal limit and not an automatic 4H. If so then either 4h is the preemptive limit on the hand from North's viewpoint over your 1h opening bid or North has a hand with some defensive tricks and hcp and can double on her own accord over 4s?

 

If so why is South inviting 5h if North has already bid the "Law" limit with South's shape of 1=5=4=3 shape and outside defense?

[luis]

With the description you make of pass and double I think South is closer to pass than double and North is much closer to pass than 5♥. So it will be 40% south 60 north in my view and not a big crime by any player.

With J9xx of spades and the heart ace, knowing that pd has 11-15 should be enough to think 4♠ might go down.

[tysen2k]

Given the definitions you provide, I don't see any blame. Next board.

[000002]

south too aggressive, i deem his hand should be :

x

Qxxxx

AKQx

xxx

[MickyB]

I guess this vul will always lead to some accidents - you will want to either double or compete to 5♥ on on a large proportion of hands, and opener will not be in a position to make a unilateral decision on many of them. I agree totally with North's call, he has no reason to believe that 4♠ isn't cold. I disagree with South's double, but I think it is close.

[mghmaine]

I agree with poster Luis. South does not know to sac and North's hand closer to a pass than a sac. But I do give more blame to South, as it may well seem to North that South is longer in Hs to express the sac preference.

[jdeegan]

:huh: I am still a little confused as to what south's double showed. What would a pass have meant? More high cards than the actual south hand or less?

 

Regardless, north has a dilemma - a preemptive hand but with a likely trump trick. At MP the premium is for guessing exactly right; there is no 'insurance' to take out against the opponents possible -620. The fact that a 5♥ 'save' should be cheap means little if 4♠ does not make. 4♠ down one doubled for +200 should be a near top, while 5♥ down one for -50 or -100 rates to be well below average. On that basis, a pass has a lot to gain (or lose). 5♥ figures to be below average except in the rather rare instances where it makes. I like a pass with the north hand for three reasons - the probable trump trick, the heart ace, the 4-5-2-2 shape (as opposed to 4-5-3-1, etc.).

 

In a weird sort of way I see north as 'fixed' by the opponents' enterprising 4♠ bid. A pass has, I think at best, a 50-50 chance for an expectancy of a 50% board (or less). 5♥ has an even lower expectancy.

 

Applying Mike and Anders' evaluation method (from I Fought the Law) clarifies why the 4-5-2-2 shape is so bad. From north's point of view, we appear to have 13-3-1 = 9 tricks. They likely have 13-3-0 = 10 minus the spade trick (maybe) - a 50-50 shot at best. I don't see much blame to apportion here - whether 4♠ goes down or makes is pretty much a pure guess from north's perspective.

[Guest Jlall]

pass would be pass. It shows a hand that doesn't want to bid.

 

I was south, I felt that partners 5H bid was clear and readily took the blame. Thx for comments.

[Kalvan14]

The bidding has been stretched a bit on both sides, and it is always a bit of a guess in this kind of situation [white vs red makes a saving more attractive]. However, and contrary to the majority of posters, I do feel that N should have passed the double.

[whereagles]

North shoulders more blame but system gets some

Sorry, but system gets none. One of the advantages of playing limited openers is the ability to make ambiguous-style 4M bid like this one, which put a lot of pressure on 4th player. In this case North bid correctly, as he had no way to guess his LHO would dig up cards in the most unlikely of unbid suits.

 

As for who should have done what after 4♠, I don't really know. Both North and South have mildly defensive hands, but there's another interesting hint that you should play defense: the 4♠ bid might have been made on the "bid 4♠ over 4♥" lore rather than on technical reasons.

[bearmum]

NS are white vs red at MP

 

North holds: J9xx AJxxx xx Tx

South holds: x QTxxx ATxx KQ8

 

The auction went 1H by south 11-15, X 4H by north. 4H is very wide ranging as 1H was limited to 15. It can be a normal preempt or a balanced 13 or 4 trumps and a 10 count and a stiff, etc etc. East now bid 4S and south Xed which meant he wanted to bid 5H opposite a preemptive hand type, but partner was welcome to pass with a decent hand. North bid 5H and it went down 1 undoubled when declarer dropped the stiff king of hearts offside. North and South both immediately apologized.

 

Did south have too much defense to save over 5H? Should north have sat with an ace and J9xx of trumps? Was everything fine and this is just one of those things?

Apportion the blame.

Let me stste that I play Precision where I would open the S hand 1♥ (11-15 with 5♥)

 

My partner would raise to 4♥ -- using LOTT (considering we are white V red)

 

SO when opps bid 4♠ (GREAT bid ) I will PASS as I am mininum for my first bid AND I am not sure that 4♠ is making as P MIGHT have 4 of them :)

 

 

BUT allowing for the system N/S were playing :angry:

 

I blame S 40%for the X as N HAD to bid 5♥ <_< :o BUT 60% blame to the system :P

[david_c]

North shoulders more blame but system gets some

Sorry, but system gets none. One of the advantages of playing limited openers is the ability to make ambiguous-style 4M bid like this one, which put a lot of pressure on 4th player.

You misunderstand - saying that system gets some of the blame doesn't imply that the system is bad. It just means that this is a bad hand for the system. Call it "bad luck" if you prefer.

[Winstonm]

North shoulders more blame but system gets some

Sorry, but system gets none. One of the advantages of playing limited openers is the ability to make ambiguous-style 4M bid like this one, which put a lot of pressure on 4th player.

You misunderstand - saying that system gets some of the blame doesn't imply that the system is bad. It just means that this is a bad hand for the system. Call it "bad luck" if you prefer.

Exactly - the system itself is very good; however, every system has holes and this hand doesn't fit in well within the framework. System fix type hand. Forget it and move on.

 

Winston

[Guest Jlall]

The 4H bid indeed makes them guess and is one of my favorite bids in strong club. That being said when they do bid, opener has to guess too. That is why we have adopted a X saying I'd like to bid 5H opposite the preemptive hand but you can pass with a good hand in order to give us more flexibility and intelligence in these kind of auctions. That being said, we give up on the penalty X.

[Chamaco]

The 4H bid indeed makes them guess and is one of my favorite bids in strong club. That being said when they do bid, opener has to guess too. That is why we have adopted a X saying I'd like to bid 5H opposite the preemptive hand but you can pass with a good hand in order to give us more flexibility and intelligence in these kind of auctions. That being said, we give up on the penalty X.

Seems like a good agreement if X is made by a limited opener.

 

I have faced some guesses of this sort playing strong club, and we have decided that 1M-(interference)-4M shall never be done with a low/medium ODR hand with 3/4 trumps, but will guarantee almost always 4+ trumps, so that potential saves might be less out-of questions.

 

Having said that, this would not have helped here :-)

[whereagles]

That being said, we give up on the penalty X.

You mean, by opener, right?

 

A 11-15 hand will hardly want to penalize opps anyway :)