Matchpoint problem

[mikegill]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=sak9xhkt98dkq9c92]133|100|Scoring: MP

1N* P P 2D**

P P X*** P

?

*14-16

** d+M[/hv]

*** takeout

[Fluffy]

2 spades

[Finch]

2H

[Free]

2♥

[pclayton]

Pass could be right, but I takeout pard's TO x's. Sounds like pard is a moderate 3=4=1=5 or 4=3=1=5, since no garbage stayman was used (do we play that?)

[whereagles]

pass and lead ♦K

[jdonn]

Pass is way too swingy and will lead to disasters more often than it works. Partner made a takeout double and I have two four card majors, and I'm considering passing with 3 trumps?

 

Incidentally, since 2♦ showed a major, and since partner's double showed 3 or 4 in each major, we know dummy will be short in a major and declarer will get ruffs. The more I think about pass the more I dislike it, I would rather even play in RHO's major than pass.

[whereagles]

I've seen some pretty unsuitable 2♦ bids as of lately. That's why I pass :)

[Halo]

2S

 

I will take out and this is my best suit.

[Guest Jlall]

2H. Hearts should be a better trump suit than spades. It looks to me like partner has done well to balance, he may have taken a risk with a hand like 4414 5 count. Let's not hang him.

[awm]

It seems like opponents may well have 9 diamonds. At a minimum they should have 8. This is not to say that 2♦ is making of course, but if you bid 2M in tempo you just might draw a 3♦ call from LHO... :)

[jdonn]

It seems like opponents may well have 9 diamonds. At a minimum they should have 8. This is not to say that 2♦ is making of course, but if you bid 2M in tempo you just might draw a 3♦ call from LHO... :)

And I'm not even so sure I want to double that. Maybe, but faaaaaar from automatic.

[Guest Jlall]

It seems like opponents may well have 9 diamonds. At a minimum they should have 8. This is not to say that 2♦ is making of course, but if you bid 2M in tempo you just might draw a 3♦ call from LHO... :)

And I'm not even so sure I want to double that. Maybe, but faaaaaar from automatic.

I wouldn't.

[mikegill]

Ok, I suppose my judgement was off here. My thinking at the time was that partner was likely to be (43)24 on average, and that if I pick a major, I was only 50% to be right, whereas I might beat 2d for 200, which would be a top. I was thinking I had about 5 defensive tricks, but that's definitely way too optimistic.

 

As it turns out they were only in a 7!-card fit (pard was 4333 for his t/o x), but RHO is 0544 and RHO was 5134 and 2d is cold because they crossruff the first 11,000 tricks.

[jdonn]

Partner's double seems pretty silly. Even if you bid say 2♥, it might go 2♠ p 3♣ from there, and he pushes them to even a better fit than before. He should know they might not be in their best contract.

 

Call me crazy, but if I made a takeout double with 3 of the suit and partner passed for penalty! and they made, I would start thinking twice about my double.

[Fluffy]

If they bid 3♦ I will bid 3♥, that's why I bid 2♠ first

[whereagles]

jdonn, if pard has a 4333 and like 6-7 hcp he has to do something at MPs. And dbl seems pretty normal under those circumstances.

 

If you pass and they make.. well, bad luck :P

[jdonn]

jdonn, if pard has a 4333 and like 6-7 hcp he has to do something at MPs. And dbl seems pretty normal under those circumstances.

 

If you pass and they make.. well, bad luck :P

Says who? It's illegal to defend with over half the deck and a balanced hand when the vulnerable opponents might be in a bad fit and we don't have a good fit either? Sorry, I missed the memo!

 

All partner's double did was change the contract from 2♦ making by them to either

2♦X making by them

3♣ making more by them

3M doubled down by us

 

Well done partner!

[mikeh]

jdonn, if pard has a 4333 and like 6-7 hcp he has to do something at MPs. And dbl seems pretty normal under those circumstances.

 

If you pass and they make.. well, bad luck :P

Says who? It's illegal to defend with over half the deck and a balanced hand when the vulnerable opponents might be in a bad fit and we don't have a good fit either? Sorry, I missed the memo!

 

All partner's double did was change the contract from 2♦ making by them to either

2♦X making by them

3♣ making more by them

3M doubled down by us

 

Well done partner!

Exactly!

 

It strikes me that partner is one of those players who has discovered that the passivity that afflicts most beginning bidders is a bad thing, but has not yet learned that winning bridge still requires the use of the pass card on occasion...even at matchpoints.

[whereagles]

Guys, I used to go passive on occasions like those (pard opens 1NT, we got 21-23 hcp and opps compete) only to get close to a zero in practice.

 

There are, of course, times where pass is right, but odds are being aggressive is the right action. At matchpoints, that is. At imps I couldn't care less :P

[jdonn]

Guys, I used to go passive on occasions like those (pard opens 1NT, we got 21-23 hcp and opps compete) only to get close to a zero in practice.

 

There are, of course, times where pass is right, but odds are being aggressive is the right action. At matchpoints, that is. At imps I couldn't care less :P

Actually I think you are backwards here. At imps it would be more reasonable to double, to guard against a partscore swing against you, but at mps any time you turn -90 into -100 or -90 in 2♦ to -110 in 3♣ (irrelevent at imps) or partner aggressively passes like he did and it makes, you will have made things much worse.

 

I wouldn't double at either, just saying I don't think the matchpoint argument follows here.

 

Your comments pertain to when you have at least a little shape, not when you are totally balanced.

[skjaeran]

Partner's double is for take-out.

Since I'm thus expected to take it out, and we might end up playing in RHO's 4 card major, partner need to have some shape - that is, he'll have a singleton or - at worst - a doubleton in diamonds.

 

There's no need to get active here on a balanced 6-8 count. Frequently we'll just improve opponent's score.

 

It seems more or less automatic to bid 2♥ over the double. Partner might move to 2♠ with a 4225. I'm not going to bid again over 3♦.

[Apollo81]

Partner's double seems pretty silly. Even if you bid say 2♥, it might go 2♠ p 3♣ from there, and he pushes them to even a better fit than before. He should know they might not be in their best contract.

 

Call me crazy, but if I made a takeout double with 3 of the suit and partner passed for penalty! and they made, I would start thinking twice about my double.

 

Have fun looking up the MPs from your -90. We aren't always playing in the Blue Ribbons.

[bid_em_up]

2S

 

I will take out and this is my best suit.

This thinking is backwards, imo.

 

Partner has made a takeout double and I have both majors. It is usually right to take the weaker suit (in my hand) as trumps where the small cards may potentially win tricks via ruffs, and save the stronger suit for top tricks.

[bid_em_up]

Ok, I suppose my judgement was off here. My thinking at the time was that partner was likely to be (43)24 on average, and that if I pick a major, I was only 50% to be right, whereas I might beat 2d for 200, which would be a top. I was thinking I had about 5 defensive tricks, but that's definitely way too optimistic.

 

As it turns out they were only in a 7!-card fit (pard was 4333 for his t/o x), but RHO is 0544 and RHO was 5134 and 2d is cold because they crossruff the first 11,000 tricks.

Why did you not lead a trump? (I'm guessing that you didnt).

 

I am also guessing that it goes down on a trump lead. While leading a trump from KQx seems counterintuitive, you will normally gain the trick back with interest by being able to subsequently draw 2 more rounds later (if declarer wins it). If declarer ducks it, you havent lost the trump trick and get to see the board.

 

jmoo.