Bidders' lab

[Edmunte1]

Playing in a strong MP's tournament, you hold in the first seat:[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saq632hk53dj872cq]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

and bidding goes:

 

S -- W -- N -- E

p - 3♣-- p-- p

?

 

Do you feel sorry that you didn't open in the first place? Would you balance now?

[pbleighton]

"Do you feel sorry that you didn't open in the first place?"

 

Yes. What was I thinking?

 

"Would you balance now?"

 

No, but it's thisclose. Move a small diamond to hearts and it would be a clear balance.

 

Peter

[MFA]

This is an opening bid. The ♣Q IS worth something on average.

 

I'll double now and remove 3♥ to 3♠. Ugh, this is ugly, but white all is very attractive for crazy competitive moves. :P

[pclayton]

I'd open this too. The good spades make up for the ratty diamonds and the dubious ♣Q.

 

I now double. If I'm wading out into the 3 level, I want to have some options on what the strain is. I love defending 3♣ too if pard chooses to pass.

[whereagles]

I'll join the "I'd open, but dbl now" crowd :P

[jtfanclub]

This is an opening bid. The ♣Q IS worth something on average.

 

I'll double now and remove 3♥ to 3♠. Ugh, this is ugly, but white all is very attractive for crazy competitive moves. :P

I'd open, I double, but I do NOT remove hearts to spades.

[hrothgar]

What system am I playing?

 

If I'm playing Precision, I have a clear 1♠ opening.

If I'm playing 2/1 GF, I think that I have a clear cut pass

 

I'd balanced with a double

[Fluffy]

I'd open and I'll try to bid as if LHO was the dealer, so 3♠.

[gwnn]

I think the only respectful thing I can do to myself is to pass. Any other call is just inconsistent. Next board I'll open, but now I've endplayed myself into passing.

[helene_t]

With a passed hand, I see no reason not to dbl since I can always remove hearts to spades. Whether I should do so is a more difficult question.

 

And yes, I would open, even playing SA.

[han]

I'd open 1S, now I'd pass.

[mikeh]

I would have opened, and I consider myself fairly conservative on opening bid decisions: but I have no rebid problem, I hold 3 controls and 12 hcp (altho the ♣Q is dubious).

 

Having passed, I am torn between deciding that I should stick with my first call: if it was wrong to open, surely it's wrong to bid now?

 

Would I have reopened after 1♠ [3♣] p p ? Yes.

 

So I think, reluctantly, that I should reopen now.. but what?

 

I think double: it has several ways to win.

 

Partner may sit, in which case we should do very well, since I have extra defence.

 

Partner may bid 3♦: I am going to be very happy with that, even if we miss a 5-3 ♠ fit, since in ♠s I may get tapped.

 

Partner may bid 3N or 4♣( that latter, being very unlikely) and I will be delighted in either event.

 

Partner may bid 3♠... I will want to raise, and we may have missed a game, because I cannot raise.

 

Then, partner may bid 3♥: and I will NOT bid 3♠, which I would do if 5=2=5=1, for example. I have to hope that our ♥ fit will be adequate.

 

So, unless RHO starts doubling, I am going to be reasonably happy with most choices partner will make over double, while 3♠ seems unilateral.

 

Should 3♠ promise a side suit? I don't think so: what if I held Qxxxxxx AJx Kx x? I'd probably reopen 3♠ and I sure wouldn't have opened any number of the suit.

[jdonn]

My comment when I first read the question was going to be "No one who passes out 3♣ is a bridge player" and that was going to be it. Then I began reading the responses and almost fainted! Not only from the passers (yes, there are really passers! plural!!) but from the tone of the comments suggesting it was even a close decision! No amount of exclamation points can do that last sentence justice!!

 

I will simply ask two questions to which I can not fathom logical answers.

 

In what way is not opening the hand inconsistent with doubling now?

 

If I double, exactly what can partner do that I WON'T like?

 

It is actually a very interesting and difficult question whether to remove partner's 3♥ reply to 3♠ or not. I don't think pass is completely obvious, partner could easily be not only 3-4 in the majors, but even 4-4. However it seems clear that balancing with 3♠ is wrong, since obviously of the three potential plans (double and pass 3♥, double and pull 3♥ to 3♠, bid 3♠) the second is far superior to the third, regardless of how the seconds compares to the first.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

certainly I feel sorry, that I did not open,

... because I would have told my story.

You could have opened 1S or 2S.

 

Now I double.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[sceptic]

I would bid 4 spades to punish myself for not opening in the first place

 

I doubt I would ever find myself in this position so I cant speculate (although that is what I just did, by saying 4 spades) see what you have done to me I am confused now

 

and what the heck you may even make it, I don't think I come from the school of scientific bidders, but I do have some fun

[MFA]

My comment when I first read the question was going to be "No one who passes out 3♣ is a bridge player" and that was going to be it. Then I began reading the responses and almost fainted! Not only from the passers (yes, there are really passers! plural!!) but from the tone of the comments suggesting it was even a close decision! No amount of exclamation points can do that last sentence justice!!

 

I will simply ask two questions to which I can not fathom logical answers.

 

In what way is not opening the hand inconsistent with doubling now?

 

If I double, exactly what can partner do that I WON'T like?

 

It is actually a very interesting and difficult question whether to remove partner's 3♥ reply to 3♠ or not. I don't think pass is completely obvious, partner could easily be not only 3-4 in the majors, but even 4-4. However it seems clear that balancing with 3♠ is wrong, since obviously of the three potential plans (double and pass 3♥, double and pull 3♥ to 3♠, bid 3♠) the second is far superior to the third, regardless of how the seconds compares to the first.

Agree that the most interesting part is what to do after a 3♥ response. Double in the first place is marginal but clear cut.

 

All you doublers please - Pass or 3♠ after partner's 3♥? What is your plan?

 

As stated I prefer 3♠, which I consider a typical matchpoint effort. At imps, I would pass. The upside of improving the partscore tends to be worth more at matchpoints. And the biggest downside, that the enemy suddently comes alive with a penalty double when we are in deep trouble, tends to be worse at imps.

[mcphee]

I simply can't understand how anyone would elect to pass after the 3C opening. Similar to another post failing to protect in the balancing seat is losing bridge. While opening the bidding would have been ok, passing after failing to open is silly. I can't believe so many votes for passing. Shocked I am.

[kenberg]

I would have opened 1S but I consider it a closer call than some do. Having passed, I believe a reopening double is a clear favorite. I would not consider bidding any number of spades or correcting a 3H response to 3S. Among other reasons, ruffing a club in the dummy with hearts as trump increases the trick total. Ruffing with the long suit, spades, does not. If partner has four small hearts I don't suppose hearts will play well but with Axxx it may play fine, at least as well as spades. Anytime partner has five hearts removing to spades will likely be a disaster.

 

Often I really want to know how the had actually turned out at the table, thinking maybe I'll see a need to revise my thinking. This is not one of those hands. However the actual hand turned out, I double here and I leave 3H in place.

[SoTired]

However it seems clear that balancing with 3♠ is wrong, since obviously of the three potential plans (double and pass 3♥, double and pull 3♥ to 3♠, bid 3♠) the second is far superior to the third, regardless of how the seconds compares to the first.

He buried it deep in his article, but to me this logic is a definitive refutation of 3S rather than dbl.

 

If you dbl, you can always pull 3H to 3S, which shows JUST THIS HAND. A 3-card heart suit and a poor 5-card spade suit, although normally you do that in direct seat with a strong hand, the same principle applies here in 4th seat by a passed hand.

[han]

I'd open 1S, now I'd pass.

I meant to write that I would double now, not pass.

[Edmunte1]

Of course acting was right, and both double and 3♠ worked (partner held Kx Axxxx K10x Kxx). As cards lie you'll score +170 in both majors, but you'll feel better playing in ♥ than in ♠. A good score for those who opened 1♠, that will probably reach game

[kenberg]

Of course acting was right, and both double and 3♠ worked (partner held Kx Axxxx K10x Kxx). As cards lie you'll score +170 in both majors, but you'll feel better playing in ♥ than in ♠. A good score for those who opened 1♠, that will probably reach game

There is some reason partner would not bid 4H over the double with his five hearts and thirteen points? Sure (from his viewpoint) the defense might begin with a club ace and a club ruff but what do they do for an encore? Anyway partner is more likely to have the stiff, if there is one. Bidding 4S over 3S is tougher of course. On the actual hands club to the ace, diamond to the AQ followed by a ruff is possible but I think 4H over the double is a clear cut bid for all but the most confirmed pessimists.

 

I usually avoid the "What's the problem" type of response but it seems appropriate here.

 

Ken