Bidding over preempt

[twcho]

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=shak6dk873ck98754&w=saqt96542hj2d42c6&e=skj8ht9873da5cqt3&s=s73hq54dqjt96caj2]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Bidding went as:

W    N    E    S

             P    P

4♠   X    P    P

P

[/hv]

 

I kibitzed the above hand in a BBO team match played by high calibre players. The result is 4♠X-1.

 

My feeling was that the double by north is normal but the pass by south is doubtful. However, when I asked the other kibitzers whether the pass was their choice and most replied that pass is normal.

 

I am a bit puzzled because what I have been taught is that take out double is for take out. For this hand, south have 10 working pts outside ♠ and such a good suit as ♦, how can one consider passing the double. For me, 5♦ is automatic and even 6♦ is not impossible.

 

Another renowned kibitzer replied to me that this was a borderline choice for south but the main culprit is the double by north which she said that 5♣ would be her choice.

 

All the kibitzers' comments were different from mine. Is that my bridge logic really so poor?

[mr1303]

Is that my bridge logic really so poor?

 

No. I would bid 5D as well as South, and I would double as North.

 

The problem is, is that doubles of 4H/S pre-empts are not well defined, as to whether they are for take-out or penalty, and more that that, when someone should pull or sit for it.

 

I guess that's why these 4S pre-empts work so well.

[Walddk]

I think double is normal, and I also think pass by South is the percentage bid. Double of 4♠ is merely card showing, not a take-out double in its traditional sense.

 

Responder should only take out with a shapely hand that expects to make at the 5-level. I am pretty sure that most experts play it like this. South's hand is too balanced to take out in my opinion.

 

North could very well have been balanced or semi-balanced, and then you surely want to take the money against 4♠X. I was also watching, and I also saw that a well known American player and vugraph commentator suggested 5♣ with the North hand.

 

It's a matter of style I suppose, but it's not mine. They need to twist my arms before they make me bid 5♣ with that hand. Introducing Kxxxxx at the 5-level vulnerable opposite a passed partner is .... well, strange.

 

Roland

[joker_gib]

I would also pass with south hand.

 

Too balanced to bid on.

 

Alain

[twcho]

What is the minimum strength for a double of 4S by north with passing partner?

 

I am thinking that if you double at higher level, you need to increase your hand strength by about 2 pts for each level.

 

Supposing 1SX require at least 11HCP with typical 1444 hand. Then 4SX imo needs 17 or at least 16 with typical holding.

 

With north hand void in S, he can lessen his requirement but I think his hand is a minimum. And even facing such a minimum, 5D is cold with south hand and 6D makeable.

[cherdano]

What is the minimum strength for a double of 4S by north with passing partner?

 

I am thinking that if you double at higher level, you need to increase your hand strength by about 2 pts for each level.

 

Supposing 1SX require at least 11HCP with typical 1444 hand. Then 4SX imo needs 17 or at least 16 with typical holding.

 

With north hand void in S, he can lessen his requirement but I think his hand is a minimum. And even facing such a minimum, 5D is cold with south hand and 6D makeable.

Well, for playing diamonds this hand is not a minimum. Doubler needn't be void in spades. He needn't have 4-card support, he need not even have 3-card support (what else but double can you do on a 17-count with 2425?)

 

I think it was right to pass, but I would not be surprised to be wrong when I did that.

 

Arend

[ArcLight]

Doubling a 4♠ bid forced pard to the 5 level.

Was Norths hand really good enough for that?

His pard had passed a chance to open.

Was 4♠ likely to make?

What if South had more Spades and fewer diamonds, might not the contract go down a lot.

 

It depends on your opponents preempting style, but in general, I think too many people see a preempt as a red blanket waving in front of them and charge!...

 

Into a horrible contract thats doubled.

 

 

In this case Diamonds makes. Other times it goes down, converting a positive score into a negative.

 

 

I would have passed as North.

[luis]

I thik North's double is borderline I'm not sure if he wants to play at the 5 level with 8 or 7 cards in hearts.

Once North doubles pass by south is automatic to me, nothing to justify a 5 level bid in diamonds.

[han]

Same as Luis, Double by north is close, pass by south is clear (I pass with most balanced hands including this one).

[Guest Jlall]

I strongly agree with both players bids. North's hand has very powerful offensive potential and quite a bit of defense. You will go for the occasional 590 with this bid, but if partner does have the hand to bid you may pick up a double game swing, and if he passes you will beat them more often than not. A 5C bid would be lunacy to put it mildly.

 

Souths pass is very normal. Passing with balanced hands is the percentage bid, it's wrong on a hand like this when partner is void but you can't achieve complete accuracy after the auction starts this way. Takeout Xs were meant to be taken out does NOT apply at the 5 level.

[Guest Jlall]

I thik North's double is borderline I'm not sure if he wants to play at the 5 level with 8 or 7 cards in hearts.

South is going to pull to a 4 card suit? What hand would that be. South will very rarely pull to even a 5 card suit, if he has a second suit he will probably try a more flexible 4N.

[luis]

I thik North's double is borderline I'm not sure if he wants to play at the 5 level with 8 or 7 cards in hearts.

South is going to pull to a 4 card suit? What hand would that be. South will very rarely pull to even a 5 card suit, if he has a second suit he will probably try a more flexible 4N.

Probably not but if you play the double as takout as I do then sometimes South will pull because the penalty in 5x might be better than 4♠x making one or two overtricks

I agree a 4th card suit will never pull but with 5 maybe...

[joshs]

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=shak6dk873ck98754&w=saqt96542hj2d42c6&e=skj8ht9873da5cqt3&s=s73hq54dqjt96caj2]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Bidding went as:

W    N    E    S

             P    P

4♠   X    P    P

P

[/hv]

 

I kibitzed the above hand in a BBO team match played by high calibre players. The result is 4♠X-1.

 

My feeling was that the double by north is normal but the pass by south is doubtful. However, when I asked the other kibitzers whether the pass was their choice and most replied that pass is normal.

 

I am a bit puzzled because what I have been taught is that take out double is for take out. For this hand, south have 10 working pts outside ♠ and such a good suit as ♦, how can one consider passing the double. For me, 5♦ is automatic and even 6♦ is not impossible.

 

Another renowned kibitzer replied to me that this was a borderline choice for south but the main culprit is the double by north which she said that 5♣ would be her choice.

 

All the kibitzers' comments were different from mine. Is that my bridge logic really so poor?

This is a VERY difficult hand.

 

First there are different styles here about the x of 4S. Some (like myself) play it as mostly takeout (so 1-1.5 spades on average), others play it as more flexible (2 spades on average), a minority play it as penalty (at this level thats probably only 2.5 spades on average). What you do with the other hand depends on the style of your x's. Playing my way (takeout) I would bid 5D over it, but it is somewhat close (I wouldn't ever bid a 4 card suit at the 5 level over a takeout x). As the style tends toward the flexible to penalty treatments, you are more likely to pass with the south hand, which is, after all, balanced. What to do with both of these hands is a frequent topic of discussion in the Master Solver Club writeups in the bridge world, and their are all sorts of opinions...

 

This hand is made even more difficult by the fact that south is a passed hand, so north is taking a big risk with the takeout x. He does, after all have, at least 2 probable tricks in hearts, so its unlikely that there will be too many overtricks. But when you x with the north hand, you would not be totally suprised by 4S-x making 4 or even making 5 if the 3'rd hand 4S pre-empt was heavy, as it sometimes is.

 

I was at the other table, and had a different set of complications. At our table it went, P-P-3S-?

Now we were playing a strong club, so partner was about 1-1.15 points more limited than at the other table. Partner rarely will have an 11 HCP hand and will open some good unbalnaced 10 counts. On the other hand, 3S is much less likely to be a strong hand than 4S (but might still have 11-12 HCP opposite a passed hand) is, so my partner is really likely to have around 8 HCP, although thats not guaranteed. I didn't want to risk a takeout x here and have partner pass, and my club suit was kind of weak, so I made a [VERY] whimpy pass. In retrospect, I think I should have bid 4C which keeps the auction alive, but its very close. Partner had the best hand possible. As it happened while trying to set 3S we let them make 4 (I played partner for the stiff club A, but lazily led a card that would confuse him if he had more than 1 club...)

[awm]

Well, I agree with most people that the double is cooperative, asking partner to pass with a balanced hand and bid only with distribution. My question is, would you double with:

 

xx

AKx

Kxxx

Kxxx

 

For me, a double here (especially opposite a passed partner) normally shows something more like a strong notrump opening. I think I'd pass with the balanced hand above.

 

But if you'd pass that hand, the actual hand is worse for defending. The club length makes it more likely that your club king is not working, for example. With a spade void, it also becomes very likely that partner has something like 2-3 spades and will leave the double in. So doubling with the actual hand, you are weaker on defense and substantially more likely to end up defending, which seems a little off.

 

I think I would bid 4NT on the example hand (two places to play) because I'm not that interested in defending 4♠X opposite most balanced passed hands, and I think the odds of partner being balanced are overwhelming given the auction. I'd place pass as a second choice and double as a fairly distant third.

 

Then again, maybe there are people for whom the balanced thirteen-count above is a routine double of 4♠?

[Fluffy]

I double for take out, partner can pass if balanced, but a good 5 card suit is normally enough. I remember my partner passign 4♠ with 20 balanced once to get +100 instead of -200.

[Kalvan14]

Double by N is aggressive, but it is the only possible bid. 5♣ is lunacy, and 4N would work on the posted hand, but not on a majority of others (and should be 5-5 or 5-6, not 4-6).

 

Pass by S is the percentage bid: if there was a shade of doubt on N double, there cannot be any doubt on this pass.

[Chamaco]

Well, I agree with most people that the double is cooperative, asking partner to pass with a balanced hand and bid only with distribution. My question is, would you double with:

 

xx

AKx

Kxxx

Kxxx

 

For me, a double here (especially opposite a passed partner) normally shows something more like a strong notrump opening. I think I'd pass with the balanced hand above.

 

But if you'd pass that hand, the actual hand is worse for defending. The club length makes it more likely that your club king is not working, for example. With a spade void, it also becomes very likely that partner has something like 2-3 spades and will leave the double in. So doubling with the actual hand, you are weaker on defense and substantially more likely to end up defending, which seems a little off.

 

I think I would bid 4NT on the example hand (two places to play) because I'm not that interested in defending 4♠X opposite most balanced passed hands, and I think the odds of partner being balanced are overwhelming given the auction. I'd place pass as a second choice and double as a fairly distant third.

 

Then again, maybe there are people for whom the balanced thirteen-count above is a routine double of 4♠?

I agree with Adam.

 

From what I have learned from literature, double should show more something like a 17+ hcp hand, AND doubler'w partner, with any nondescript yarborough, should sit for the penalty rather than tring a "rescue" by bidding a suit at the 5 level...

 

I am not claiming this is right, just that this is what players are taught in books by the usual authors (e.g. Mike Lawrence).

 

It is possible that this is outdated, this I cannot tell.

 

But, playing this way, I'd rather bid 4NT than double with a hand that has only 13 hcp: yes I know the void makes it much more powerful than 13 hcp , but only in offense.

Playing the above mentioned style, I think double should show much more defensive power in case pard passes.

[cherdano]

I disagree with Adam, FWIW. With the North hand, you double, because it may be a double game swing when partner pulls (and you still have fair hopes of beating it when he passes). With Adam's balanced hand, you would be more certain of beating it when partner passes, but you would often convert a plus into a minus when partner is pulling.

 

Arend