IMP Redouble Decision

[pigpenz]

auction:

1♥ x 2♣ 3♠

p 4♠ x p

p xx p p

?

NV vs Vul

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=shkj843dk10987ca53]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

[kenrexford]

Let it ride!!! I live for redoubled contracts at IMP's. Plus, if partner did not pull it, I can blame him.

[pbleighton]

I would trust partner, and pass (i'm assuming his double of 4S was penalty).

 

If pd made an unsound double at IMPs, let this be a lesson for him :lol:

 

Peter

[whereagles]

Hum.. assuming 2♣ was nat and non-forcing, 5♣ might make, or go 1 or 2 down. You need a ~75% chance that 4♠ goes down to make pass the percentage bid.

 

I guess it depends who pard is. Opposite a trigger-happy pard, I might pull it out if I didn't want to take chances. That might get me into a discussion at the end of the board, but I'm willing to take the risk because I haven't showed my club support. 4♣ the previous round would probably have been better than pass - at least now you could pass without a qualm.

[keylime]

I pass and stay saintly when the post-mortem hits.

[inquiry]

I would like to abstain, auction is impossible. When partner doubles 4♠ I am not passing. Come on, partner has 2-3 spades, 5-6 clubs and 4 diamonds and his 4♠ dbl was takeout.

 

Ok, but you have placed me in this position (original south having suddenly come down with some terrible medical problem). I will bid. As 5♦ might be superior to 5♣ I will trott out 4NT and let partner pick. Or if I think partner might be confused, I will simply bid 5♣.

 

I'd rather win the hand than the post-mortem

[joshs]

I expect that partner has something like:

Kxx x Axx Qxxxxx

 

Opposite that hand we likely have 1S, 1H 2D and 1C trick on defense

 

Down 1 or 2 xxed sounds good to me. I don't know, maybe you should have bid 4C over 3S, then you could respect his decision in good concious.

[pclayton]

I would have bid 4♣ so I'm tempted to abstain too.

 

But pulling the xx isn't our decision, its pards.

[whereagles]

Come on, partner has 2-3 spades, 5-6 clubs and 4 diamonds and his 4♠ dbl was takeout.

This reasoning is valid if you play 2♣ as forcing. If it isn't forcing, which is the standard meaning, it's less probable that pard would want to compete and thus his double should be penalties.

[Al_U_Card]

Lets give responder his bid, so 5S cards with 8 hcp (or 4S with 9-10)

The doubler, under the sircumstances is showing a decent t/o dbl with 4S cards

This leaves pard with 9-10 hcp and 5C and 4S cards with 0-2 H. The H ace is with them so they have a tempo. Once they get control, the only question is whether they have enough D tricks to get to 10 on a cross ruff. (Doubler has at least 3C cards but since we are giving him a mini, then his shape must be the best 4144)

 

Therefore responder could easily be 5530 or 5521. I think they have a better than average chance to make and you cannot lead a trump to reduce the cross ruff, so I will pull.....because we control the C suit and I can ruff S leads.....

[keylime]

I don't think you can win the hand when pard has put you into the box. You're already in a lose-lose; the double is coming at a runout and pard might just redouble you as pard to teach you a lesson. I'm passing and trusting my pard to do the right thing.

[inquiry]

I don't think you can win the hand when pard has put you into the box. You're already in a lose-lose; the double is coming at a runout and pard might just redouble you as pard to teach you a lesson. I'm passing and trusting my pard to do the right thing.

I don't understand all this put trust in partner talk. Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing. Now LHO has redoubled and partner is scratching his head.. thinking.. I made a takeout double of 4♠ expecting partner to pull. Partner decided to defend. Fine, partner must know what he is thinking, so he PASSED so you would do the right thing.

 

I think the problem here, as such, is the meaning of partner's 4♠-DBL. Can this be penalty? I know what you are thinking, if responder who made a non-forcing 2♣ bid (or was it forcing?) wanted to FORCE you to choose between the minors he could have bid 4NT. But the problem with that logic is two fold. First, 4♠X might be right when he holds ♦ and ♣ if your values are in hearts and especially spades. Partner could even be 1-2-4-6 or 1-1-4-7 or 1-1-5-6 for this auction, and he might think YOU Have spades (I still bet he is 2-1-4-6 or 3-0-4-6 or similiar).

 

If you are 100% certain the initial double was penalty, you probably should still pull. But for me, that first double was takeout... with an option to leave in (since partner could have but didn't bid 4NT) and for me, partner denied as many as 4 spade when he bid 2♣, so they have AT LEAST 10 spades, and I am willing to bet we have 9 clubs and 9+ diamonds. A reasonable hand for partner is...

 

S-xx H-x D-QJxx KQJxxx

 

Also bear in mind the opponents are VUL and we are not. They are very unlikely to be fooling around. RHO is looking at 5 to 6 spades, and LHO certainly has at least four. They could easily have singleton diamond in one hand and singleton club in the other and make two overtricks, while 5♦ or 5♣ has some play. At this vul, passing with the plan to blame partner here seems criminal to me.

[pbleighton]

"Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing."

 

Ben, do you think that viewing this double as takeout is standard bidding, or is it your agreements? I ask because I remember that you play takeout doubles through a much higher level than usual in North America.

 

Peter

[joshs]

I don't think you can win the hand when pard has put you into the box. You're already in a lose-lose; the double is coming at a runout and pard might just redouble you as pard to teach you a lesson. I'm passing and trusting my pard to do the right thing.

I don't understand all this put trust in partner talk. Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing. Now LHO has redoubled and partner is scratching his head.. thinking.. I made a takeout double of 4♠ expecting partner to pull. Partner decided to defend. Fine, partner must know what he is thinking, so he PASSED so you would do the right thing.

 

I think the problem here, as such, is the meaning of partner's 4♠-DBL. Can this be penalty? I know what you are thinking, if responder who made a non-forcing 2♣ bid (or was it forcing?) wanted to FORCE you to choose between the minors he could have bid 4NT. But the problem with that logic is two fold. First, 4♠X might be right when he holds ♦ and ♣ if your values are in hearts and especially spades. Partner could even be 1-2-4-6 or 1-1-4-7 or 1-1-5-6 for this auction, and he might think YOU Have spades (I still bet he is 2-1-4-6 or 3-0-4-6 or similiar).

 

If you are 100% certain the initial double was penalty, you probably should still pull. But for me, that first double was takeout... with an option to leave in (since partner could have but didn't bid 4NT) and for me, partner denied as many as 4 spade when he bid 2♣, so they have AT LEAST 10 spades, and I am willing to bet we have 9 clubs and 9+ diamonds. A reasonable hand for partner is...

 

S-xx H-x D-QJxx KQJxx

 

Also bear in mind the opponents are VUL and we are not. They are very unlikely to be fooling around. RHO is looking at 5 to 6 spades, and LHO certainly has at least four. They could easily have singleton diamond in one hand and singleton club in the other and make two overtricks, while 5♦ or 5♣ has some play. At this vul, passing with the plan to blame partner here seems criminal to me.

The stdard meaning of x's after 1 player has defined his hand type is penalty. Partner's 2C, was non-forcing, showed a club suit (usually 6) and no fit. Yes you can have conventional agreements that later x's by both players are still takeout, but thats an unusual agreement. It would be really wierd if responder's x's were takeout, but openers were penalty - how does responder ever make a penalty x?...

[pclayton]

I just can't see the double of 4♠ being takeout. If pard has some weirdo 4-7, 4N is available.

[inquiry]

"Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing."

 

Ben, do you think that viewing this double as takeout is standard bidding, or is it your agreements? I ask because I remember that you play takeout doubles through a much higher level than usual in North America.

 

Peter

I play all doubles until we found our fit as takeout.. just the higher they are. the more likely they are to be left in. My views are hardly ever standard. :-)

[keylime]

Ben,

 

My pard finds a double of 4 spades in an auction. Do I really want to play the five level? Heck no. For the one time a redouble gains there's going to be 6-7 substantial losses when I bid anything but pass. Also, consider the ramifications of pulling a penalty double that was going set.

 

Furthermore, if 2♣ was nonforcing, then yanking it begs for a severe beating with a whip off the tree of my choosing. Pard's doubling to PREVENT you from bidding on, not encouraging. You didn't table 4♦ en route to 5♣, surely you're not going to rescue him when he finds a double playing you for two defensive tricks? Pard has ZERO reason to make both a nonforcing call AND a takeout double in the same hand - otherwise he redoubles to set up a forcing pass situation. It's totally counterintuitive to me and illogical.

 

Let's give pard credit for having a semi-real hand and defend. And in the long run, maintain trust. You don't mind having one accident to clarify your exact connotation here. You do though mind the "why the ^&*#^ you yanked my penalty double?" speech.

[pigpenz]

"Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing."

 

Ben, do you think that viewing this double as takeout is standard bidding, or is it your agreements? I ask because I remember that you play takeout doubles through a much higher level than usual in North America.

 

Peter

I play all doubles until we found our fit as takeout.. just the higher they are. the more likely they are to be left in. My views are hardly ever standard. :-)

Ben If its Takeout the why not use 4NT or is that for penalty? :wub:

If you feel that we may have 9+clubs and 9+ diamonds make life easy on partner and bid 4NT, dont give him a chance to go wrong.

[kenberg]

The 2C was not forcing, or so I assume. But it is not on trash either, or so I assume. And partner can have some spades. At any rate, partner thinks we have a reasonable shot at beating 4S and while I wish I had more quick tricks, I'll pass and hope he is right. Partner should only mean this double for take out if he has previously told me so. Some doubles still mean that you believe you can set the contract. Few perhaps, but some. No doubt the redouble is ominous, but if we take it at face value from a competent opponent it not only means he expects to make 4S he also expects to demolish any run. Else he settles on 4SX. Or perhaps he is confident of at least nine and is gambling that either a tenth trick appears or that he can frighten me into a run. I'll gamble on taking 4 tricks in a spade contract. Most likely all roads lead to ruin, but I am passing. This is partner's show.

 

I lead the ace of clubs.

 

K

[hatchett]

I like to play a lot of take-out doubles but if 2♣ is non-forcing then I agree this is a clear penalty double. 4♣ the round before which seems very clear, would save us any problems this time round.

[bid_em_up]

Personally, I wouldn't open this hand B) Yea, yea, heard it all before, I manage just fine passing in first seat with this, tyvm.

 

Having been forced to do so, I cannot come up with a rational justification of leaving the XX when I have:

 

a) a void in their suit (great for offense, not so good on defense)

b ) a side 5 card suit that hasnt been shown

c) absolutely no semblance of the defensive tricks that I originally promised with the opening bid (my hand might take 1 trick, 2 if its lucky), and

d) support for partner that has not been disclosed.

 

This hand is meant for offense, not defense, and I wouldnt be too surprised to find 4S xx'd making, possibly with an overtrick (or two). If pard has a hand that is good enough to be able to defeat 4S....then he probably shouldnt have bid 2C.

 

Although I voted for 5C, 4N is probably a better call (and I cant go back and change the vote) since it brings both minor suits into the picture.

 

I also dont think I would have passed the original X of 4S either.......for the same reasons listed above, nor would I have passed 3S, so asking me what I am going to do over 4S xx'd is kind of a moot point. :-)

 

As always, jmoo.