Another 1H-X-1S hand

[kenberg]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=saj7653hdak82cq42&w=st8haqj985d976ck8&e=sqhkt762dj543ct97&s=sk942h43dqtcaj653]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

 

The auction, starting with W, the dealer:

 

1♥ X 1♠ X

2♥ 3♦ P 3♥

P 3♠

All pass

 

The setting: I am S in a pick-up partnership in a tourney that costs a buck to enter. My partner was unhappy with the way this went, unhappy with the opponents for psyching, unhappy with the director for not doing anything about it, and perhaps unhappy with me as well although nothing was said.

 

The director and I know each other, and the day after the event we had an online conversation. Since he is functioning more as a kibitzer at this point, I will call him kib.

 

Kib: Your partner was really unhappy that you didn't expose the psych.

 

Me: I believe I did. As I play, the double of 1S shows four spades.

 

Kib: The double is responsive. You show four spades by bidding NT.

 

Me: I play 1H-X-2H-X as responsive showing the minors. I don't think I can bid 1NT without heart stops.

 

Kib: Be that as it may, you could have raised 3S to four.

 

Me: Yes, I could and I considered it. From my viewpoint I have shown four spades with my double and extra values with my 3H bid. On my ten points that seemed to be enough bidding. For all I knew at the time, partner has three spades, no heart stop, and wants out.

 

Anyway, we discussed this a bit more and agreed I would post it for comment.

 

 

Ken

 

 

PS: I wasn't unhappy with anyone, but that's probably due to my lobotomy.

[Blofeld]

To my mind, your bidding is fine.

[david_c]

Kib: The double is responsive. You show four spades by bidding NT.

That doesn't sound right. I would expect a NT bid to promise a heart stop, but could have nothing in spades (the doubler is presumed to have those covered).

[whereagles]

How about (1♥) dbl (1♠) 2♠?

[pigpenz]

only think i would have done different is raise 3 spades to four.

I would play the first double as responsive and then when partner bids 3 spades after first bidding diamonds, i think the joke is out

[Flame]

Why double with a simple 1♠ overcall ?

[Free]

For me, south's Dbl shows ♠. So the 3♦ bid is quite foolish. I don't understand why 1NT would show 4+♠... If you're playing natural, not looking at psychs, then you want to bid 1NT on hands with ♠AQ and some sidevalues.

 

Agree that North's double is unnecessary. 1♠ is better, you can still invite later.

[inquiry]

1NT does not show 4♠'s, it shows a ♥ stopper

 

Dbl of 1♠ is by partnership agreement, either responsive (i have minors and enough to bid) or psyche exposing -- i have spades. I have long used dbl to show the clown suit 1♠ bid as a psyche

[luke warm]

if there is a standard, i think your double of 1S as showing spades (exposing a psych) is the standard... i don't like north's first double, i like your x of 1S just fine, i don't like your final pass

 

(1h) 1s (4h) 4s is how i see the bidding going

[hotShot]

North has been digging his own grave. N's dbl is ok, but it reduces his 6 card suit to a possible 3card suit, as it is possible to bid it with just tolerance for ♠. A lot of people play X here for strength and do not promise 4♠'s, so one can not bank on it. Bidding 1♠ would have been better.

 

How can south know of a psyche? Since north might have only 3 to 5 ♠'s, it is possible that east holds 4♠. Why should south bid 2♠, if there is a strong possibility of an unfavorable ♠ break. 1NT requires

♥ stopper, dbl is a fine bid from south.

South 3♥ bid should make north think a lot. South has no idea of north 6♠'s, south has no ♥ stopper, no simple ♦ raise and does not bid ♣'s, but noth is strong and he's got to have 13 cards. North knows that 2♠ might be enough.

All trouble is caused by north hiding his 6 card major.

[kenberg]

1NT does not show 4♠'s, it shows a ♥ stopper

 

Dbl of 1♠ is by partnership agreement, either responsive (i have minors and enough to bid) or psyche exposing -- i have spades. I have long used dbl to show the clown suit 1♠ bid as a psyche

Partnership agreements are always nice but in a pick-up we must do what we can. It's my thinking that folks have been psyching 1S over 1H-X for at least fifty years and that this has been dealt with by doubling to show four spades for at least forty-nine and a half years.

 

Of course it has happened more than once that what I thought was completely standard practice turns out not to be, and from the kib's comments as well as some responses here, it seems that not everyone agrees with me. I hope to hear more views. Especially from those who agree with me. (Another joke. Please all weigh in.)

 

Ken

[Double !]

Why double with a simple 1♠ overcall ?

I Agree

 

IMO, North's decision to double is not my choice, and I don't care if he/she has a strong hand. North will be able to tell his/her story more via rebid. South should respond to the overcall (which, as I play, promises a viable rebid: I play new suit by responder is forcing one round). I know that many will disagree with my methods, and they might not be the standard Expert method, but they work in my partnerships against good competition. When you have 2 suits, better to start bidding them. IMO, leave the doubles for hands that more closely resemble the classic 4441 distro template if possible.

 

 

BTW: 1H - X - 1S -X shows 4+ spades and enough to warrant some form of call. It is not responsive.

 

 

DHL

[Finch]

I believe it is completely standard to play 1any x 1S x as showing 4 spades, and 1any x 1S 2S to show 5 spades, but non-forcing (so on a very good hand with 5 spades you double first).

 

Be that as it may, I disagree with most of the rest of the auction

- I hate the double of 1H with a 6-card spade suit

- I hate the 3D bid, though it's consistent with thinking partner's double is responsive, so it's only one bad call, not two (if you see what I mean)

- I would have thought 3H was now game forcing, and I wouldn't have dreamt of passing 3S

 

That said, it's tough (virtually impossible) to get to slam after 1H 1S 4H 4S

[mikestar]

Clearly the correct auction starts (1♥)-1♠-(4♥)-4♠. If they go on to 5♥, I would definitely blast 6♠ with the North hand--partner doesn't need much for it to be good, and he can't know about my heart void. Also they may well sacrifice in 7♥, in which case we do OK whether or not our slam makes. Blasting 6♠ when they pass 4♠ is too much for me but I have a sneaking admiration for it. The odds aren't as good because we are less likely to induce a phantom save.

 

 

The partner who makes the first bonehead bid shouldn't be criticizing the double even if the criticism were correct--and it isn't. Responsive doubles don't apply here--even if there were no psyche, doubler will have at least three spades unless very strong and you have four spades and enough high cards to have the balance of power. If you can't go for blood here, when can you?

[kenberg]

I believe it is completely standard to play 1any x 1S x as showing 4 spades, and 1any x 1S 2S to show 5 spades, but non-forcing (so on a very good hand with 5 spades you double first).

 

Be that as it may, I disagree with most of the rest of the auction

- I hate the double of 1H with a 6-card spade suit

- I hate the 3D bid, though it's consistent with thinking partner's double is responsive, so it's only one bad call, not two (if you see what I mean)

- I would have thought 3H was now game forcing, and I wouldn't have dreamt of passing 3S

 

That said, it's tough (virtually impossible) to get to slam after 1H 1S 4H 4S

I'm glad to hear of your views on 1H-X-1X-X, Thanks. I also appreciate the view that after 3H I cannot pass out the hand. Passing 3S seemed odd to me, but as I thought about it, as I did, it also seemed right. On the auction as it went, up to 3D, my thinking was that if partner has a heart stop we should have a good play for 3N, when he didn't I decided to give up. It was far from clear to me we had an eight card spade fit, in fact I thought we did not (and of course I was right, sort of) and while you can bring in a game on a 4-3, it's a bit tough if trumps split 5-1.

 

Anyway, I am not exactly disagreeing with you on this. I would have been very surprised to find many people thinking my first double was responsive, and most don't, but I was far less certain of my pass of 3S which seems to get mixed reviews. As the hands were, it seems to me partner might have, somewhere during the auction, mentioned he had a lot of spades by bidding them before his third turn. But that doesn't absolve me from making my own best call. Whatever it might be. I'm content enough with my pass, but I can see other views. It's difficult to base conclusions on the actual result, as clearly partner and I were on different wavelengths.

 

Ken

[Codo]

Pard was silly:

At first he bid X , not 1 ♠

Then he bid his 4 card suit, not his 6 carder.

Then he blamed someone for psyching.

 

Sorry, a new enemy in my point of view.

 

Your first double is quite standard and even when he was not sure about the meaning, he should at least think about the possibility.

 

But all this does not excuse your final pass.

Pd showed something with his bidding, but this seems to be a controll showing bid on the way to 3 NT with good Diamonds. What else can he have? SO, you stopped in a suit, where he may have something like Ax and after creating a game force with your 3 ♥ bid?

No winning bridge...

 

I had played him for a very strong hand with Diamonds. No winning bridge either. :)