Controversial hand

[mr1303]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=s107haqj965d3cqjt8]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Bidding goes:

 

1S 2D 2S 3H

4S P P ?

 

What do you bid here?

 

For the record, 1S 2D P 2H would be constructive, but not forcing. You have no agreement about how forcing your 3H bid is here. Double of 2S would be responsive.

[MickyB]

I double. Opposite a real 2D overcall, I do not expect this to make, and have no reason to believe we have a game of our own on.

[mike777]

Pass

 

I assume my vul 3h bid promised some hcp in hearts and some real values? See no need to bid my values twice. I do not think we are in a forcing pass situation.

[mikeh]

double.

 

this is an easy one, altho I am by no means saying that it has to work.

 

If partner leaves it in (as he probably will) he will lead a red suit. He will lead ♦ with the AK or KQ10.. (or better). He will lead a ♥ with, say, AQ ♦. Either way, we rate to score some red suit tricks plus maybe a ruff or two, and I have the ♣ suit under control.

 

Actually, the best lead for us may well be a trump, but I don't expect partner to find it.

 

If partner pulls, it should NOT be to 5♦: he can pull to 4N with secondary ♣ or to 5♥ with unexpected ♥ length, but I really don't expect him to bid.

 

As for why I double: the 4♠ bid is a standard technique with a long ♠ suit and some shape: it is an assumption of captaincy by that bidder, so he can be doing this with an expectation of making or as an advance save. We cannot afford to pass.

[Al_U_Card]

If they have a fit, we have a fit.....but pard "knows" that you have 6 hearts. He can't have more than 2 S cards so is he 1 H and 4 C? Listening to the bidding it looks like they have good trumps and some shape....with opener holding your H K. I think that shape hands should be bid and this one has a lot of downside potential but 5C is not clear but I would prefer it to dbl (pass is a bit to docile for my taste) and I feel that freely bid games in active auctions tend to make, so why not ours? When they take the push (and they often do... :) ) pard will lead a C when it's right :)

[mike777]

It just seems to me partner would x with most hands and has not for some reason?

She knows we can pull her x with some unusual hand so......

Again it just seems x by us is bidding our values twice.

 

1) What hand does partner expect for our 3h bid?

2) assuming that hand what hand does partner's pass of 4s show that he does not x on?

3) It seems if partner has a 2 suited minor suit hand he needs to do something over 4s, yes?

4) those who bid something seem to assume partner's pass over 4s is forcing?

[mikeh]

  When they take the push (and they often do... :) ) pard will lead a C when it's right :)

I would love to play against opps who would 'take the push' over any bid by me, let alone 5♣: a new suit at the 5-level on a no-fit auction. I very much doubt that a good player, sitting as your LHO, has any intention of bidding again, other than perhaps to say double. And RHO has no rights here at all: except to say double with the type of hand that is sure of a set opposite a preemptive 4♠

 

And as for getting the ♣ lead when its right: do you want partner to lead a ♣ from Axx(x)?

[flytoox]

dbl is clear cut.

[luis]

Pass,

I don't think I can get 500 against 4♠x and 100 instead of 300 is not a crime, double is very very dangerous at this vulnerability, if opener has a distributional hand and he is sure it can't be worst than down 1 he will redouble 4♠ and it will be painful. For example a hand with a void in clubs and 7 spades will redouble in a breeze. Opener is unlimited and pd passed over 4♠. Definitevly doesn't look like the right hand to double.

 

With the usual respect that characterizes my noble person I think the doublers are completely crazy here.

[mikeh]

For example a hand with a void in clubs and 7 spades will redouble in a breeze. Opener is unlimited and pd passed over 4♠. Definitevly doesn't look like the right hand to double.

 

With the usual respect that characterizes my noble person I think the doublers are completely crazy here.

Let's see: opener jumped to 4♠ white v red and we are passing out of fear that he will redouble, partner will pass, and the contract is cold?

 

Playing in fear is no way to win.

 

Your 3♥ bid could be on a poor hand with long, good texture, ♥, without the playing or defensive strength of your actual holding. Pass may work on this board. However, if I were playing a long match, I would expect to routinely beat any team whose members thought that pass was the percentage action on this type of hand/auction.

 

BTW, opener is NOT comletely unlimited, if he is a good player: on many power hands, he would have involved partner in case we bid 5 of a red suit.

[pbleighton]

"Playing in fear is no way to win."

 

Mike, you say this to LUIS?

 

Pistols at dawn :)

 

Peter

[luis]

For example a hand with a void in clubs and 7 spades will redouble in a breeze. Opener is unlimited and pd passed over 4♠. Definitevly doesn't look like the right hand to double.

 

With the usual respect that characterizes my noble person I think the doublers are completely crazy here.

Let's see: opener jumped to 4♠ white v red and we are passing out of fear that he will redouble, partner will pass, and the contract is cold?

 

Playing in fear is no way to win.

 

Your 3♥ bid could be on a poor hand with long, good texture, ♥, without the playing or defensive strength of your actual holding. Pass may work on this board. However, if I were playing a long match, I would expect to routinely beat any team whose members thought that pass was the percentage action on this type of hand/auction.

 

BTW, opener is NOT comletely unlimited, if he is a good player: on many power hands, he would have involved partner in case we bid 5 of a red suit.

Vulnerable opponents tend to NOT bid 5 over 4♠ when the NV side has the strength, I've seen some intrepid red vs red sacrifices but a red vs white sacrifice would be a novelty.

 

Yes I'm afraid they might redouble 4♠ and make me look like an idiot, when double is right you convert 50 in 100 or 100 in 300, do you feel like a hero or what?

 

Luis

[han]

Perhaps Luis and Mikeh expect different hands for the 2D overcall. For me this is an honest bid, so double seems clear.

[dcvetkov]

Dbl is not so clear cut but....

 

I expect them to go down, and shortness in partner suit is always good for defence.

I would expect to go down 1 or 2, and would be surprised if it does not, only if partner bid on his good looks

[civill]

Pass,for no fit,nor defence HCPs.

[mikeh]

Perhaps Luis and Mikeh expect different hands for the 2D overcall. For me this is an honest bid, so double seems clear.

Luis and I are playing different games on this one: I respect my partner's red v white 2♦, and expect opener to be saving, while Luis seems to think that LHO has a huge hand. He's worried about a redouble while I think LHO is out stealing from us.

[Free]

It's MP, DBL! :)

[whereagles]

Double. I can't believe they make an overtrick, and can quite easily go 2 down.

[mr1303]

Thanks all for your views. I agreed that some sort of action was clear-cut, although quite what I wasn't sure. Anyway, the reason I'm posting this one here is actually a UI case. Partner hesitated for significantly longer than the 10 seconds she was meant to pause for, before passing.

 

I chose to double on the hand, and it went 1 off (it could have gone two off, but I think there was a slight misdefence). Director was called etc etc. How do you rule?

[whereagles]

Ruling: no double, and 1 down. Pard's hesitation suggests bidding, and pass is a logical alternative.

[cherdano]

Difficult to say whether pass is LA. (I think Luis overlooked the fact that it is MP and would double too, otherwise.)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Pass is LA, and the hesitation suggest action,

dbl being the most flexible bid caters for any

action was contemplating.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Echognome]

Taking a slightly different point of view, how much have you left unbid with your 3♥? You are definitely more defensive with your singleton ♦, but other than that, you have bid your values with 3♥.

 

One thing about it being MPs is that partner may not have a great 2♦ bid. Suppose partner has KQJTxxx and out, might he not be adventurous at MPs? Maybe he would (shouldn't) be at these colours, but my point is that it is difficult to rule out pass as a logical alternative. Just pass and tell partner to bid in tempo next time.

[inquiry]

The ruling here requires a bit more information. The question is rahter or not 3♥ was game forcing. IF so, then pass of 4♠ here would be (for most partnerships) a forcing pass. In this case, double is clear cut.

 

If 3♥ was only forcing to 4♦, then pass would not be forcing. The longer than necessary pass SUGGEST SOME ACTION (as opposed to pass). Pass is clearly a logical alternative, since you have a minimum for your forcing 3♥ bid. Since an action was suggested, I would roll back to 4♠ undoubled down one. But, since a hesitiation was required the hestation here would really have to have been long.

 

From your description, you had no agreement about 3♥ (I assume even without agreement it is forcing one round), so there can be no forcing pass agreement, so the second situtation exist.

 

As a hint, here, the problem goes away if over 2♠ you bid 4♥ rather than 3♥. Now a forcing pass situation is established and you have made the value bid with your hand. If LHO passes 3♥ and partner bids 4♦, you are not really passing are you?

[luis]

Difficult to say whether pass is LA. (I think Luis overlooked the fact that it is MP and would double too, otherwise.)

Yes didn't see it was MPs.

At MPs I would double automatically, at IMPs as I said I pass automatically and as the result shows converting 50 in 100 or 100 in 300 is not going to be the winning board :-).

 

I understand now why Mike said it was a losers idea to pass, at MPs passing 4♠ seems to be certainly a bad idea.

 

Sorry I'm just too used to IMP problems, my apologies for not noticing it was MPs, everything I said holds for IMPs.

 

For a good player pass is not a LA at MPs.