What's your call?

[awm]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=saqh76dqt86cakt85]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

You're sitting south, unfavorable at MP scoring. The auction thus far:

 

Pass - Pass - 1NT(1) - X

Pass(2) - Pass - 2♣(3) - X

2♥ - X - 2♠ - Pass

Pass - X - Pass.... ???

 

(1) Announced as 10-12 HCP

(2) Alerted as "scrambling"

(3) Shows 3+♣, maybe longer side suit

 

All the doubles are penalty-oriented by agreement.

 

What do you do now? Would you have made a different call earlier in the auction?

[Echognome]

I don't see any reason not to defend. Partner has heard our pass of 2♠ saying we aren't that interested in defending 2♠. So why not trust partner's decision and take the money? 3NT is no guarantee and the hands may be misfits. So mark me down for defend 2SX.

[pclayton]

When I defend against a mini-NT, I'm not obsessed with nailing them for a number. I want to try to get back to the field contract, and it looks like its 3N.

 

I have a lot more information than the other tables - which may just bid 1N - 3N on our cards. Accordingly, I'll have an advantage to playing the field contract.

 

I play pard's subsequent double as Hxx or better; but it sounds like they wriggled into their 4-4 successfully.

[han]

Pass. I'm going to do something strange and trust partner.

[Guest Jlall]

pass...I don't get it. Tank double pull director call? :)

[cherdano]

Clear pull if partner doubled slowly.

[Gerben42]

I lead the Ace of Clubs.

[bid_em_up]

Nobody's concerned that 3N is making our way for +600 vs. what is likely only going to be 300/500 on defense? We would have to beat 2S by 4 tricks to outscore 3N and I don't think its possible.

[Echognome]

Nobody's concerned that 3N is making our way for +600 vs. what is likely only going to be 300/500 on defense? We would have to beat 2S by 4 tricks to outscore 3N and I don't think its possible.

Of course we're concerned. But you're assuming opponents have found the right spot and that partner has made a mistake. You have already stated your desire not to defend 2♠X by passing! Given that partner thinks it's a good idea to defend, what about your hand makes you not want to defend?

 

Yes, it's possible we are making only 300 or 500 vs 600 from 3NT. But it's also possible we make 800 beating say 3NT+2. More importantly, what about all the hands where either 3NT doesn't make or we aren't getting to 3NT? Then we are going +300 vs a partscore or a negative.

[keylime]

Pass, lead AC, and take the money. I pass regardless of what pard's does in terms of tempo since he's hammered the contract previous to the final double.

[Apollo81]

Dealer: West Vul: N/S Scoring: MP

♠ AQ ♥ 76 ♦ QT86 ♣ AKT85

 

You're sitting south, unfavorable at MP scoring. The auction thus far:

 

Pass - Pass - 1NT(1) - X

Pass(2) - Pass - 2♣(3) - X

2♥ - X - 2♠ - Pass

Pass - X - Pass.... ???

 

(1) Announced as 10-12 HCP

(2) Alerted as "scrambling"

(3) Shows 3+♣, maybe longer side suit

 

All the doubles are penalty-oriented by agreement.

 

What do you do now? Would you have made a different call earlier in the auction?

Pass. 3NT looks like a fishing expedition.

[pclayton]

Nobody's concerned that 3N is making our way for +600 vs. what is likely only going to be 300/500 on defense? We would have to beat 2S by 4 tricks to outscore 3N and I don't think its possible.

This is my concern too.

 

Passing seems like a top or bottom proposition to me. I think we have the values for 3N, and for passing to be right, we have to take the same amount of tricks on our 3-2 or 4-2 fit in spades, as NT.

 

For passing to be right; we have to be getting 2♠ down 4, or 3N to go down with 2♠ getting us some penalty.

 

The club honors appear to be well placed, so we have a nice source of tricks there for 3N.

 

LHO could be 4-4, but he's just as apt to be 4-5/5-4 or possible 5-5. The term 'scrambling' is a little open-ended.

[jdonn]

What I like about 3NT is I think I'm ahead of the field regarding the play in this contract. I know a lot about the strength and shape of the opponents, I know the clubs are onside most likely, and I'm probably getting a spade lead which I don't mind at all. At other tables RHO quite likely didn't have an opening, so it would have been a 1NT opening by my hand and they would have no clues how to play. I think 3NT is a much safer way to probably get a good score, since at worst I'm about average. Passing the double at this vul is just too swingy for me.

[Echognome]

And just how do we know they've found a 4-4 fit? Lefty's going to pass anything undoubled. Suppose we pass and lefty pulls and now we've really got them. Instead, we are going to take them off the hook and bid 3NT. Phew! Opponents rescued us on that one.

[jdonn]

And just how do we know they've found a 4-4 fit? Lefty's going to pass anything undoubled. Suppose we pass and lefty pulls and now we've really got them. Instead, we are going to take them off the hook and bid 3NT. Phew! Opponents rescued us on that one.

Lefty is not pulling 2♠X unless they have had a misunderstanding. It seems like he was showing majors. I'm actually quite sure LHO has four spades, but RHO may not.

[Echognome]

And just how do we know they've found a 4-4 fit?  Lefty's going to pass anything undoubled.  Suppose we pass and lefty pulls and now we've really got them.  Instead, we are going to take them off the hook and bid 3NT.  Phew!  Opponents rescued us on that one.

Lefty is not pulling 2♠X unless they have had a misunderstanding. It seems like he was showing majors. I'm actually quite sure LHO has four spades, but RHO may not.

And partner isn't sitting there with xxx, Jxx, or JTx. I also think Kxx would be a mistake. So partner has 4 trumps. I agree it could very well be righty bidding a 3-card suit. Tough luck for them.

[bid_em_up]

And just how do we know they've found a 4-4 fit?  Lefty's going to pass anything undoubled.  Suppose we pass and lefty pulls and now we've really got them.  Instead, we are going to take them off the hook and bid 3NT.  Phew!  Opponents rescued us on that one.

Lefty is not pulling 2♠X unless they have had a misunderstanding. It seems like he was showing majors. I'm actually quite sure LHO has four spades, but RHO may not.

And partner isn't sitting there with xxx, Jxx, or JTx. I also think Kxx would be a mistake. So partner has 4 trumps. I agree it could very well be righty bidding a 3-card suit. Tough luck for them.

Why isn't he?

 

What do you expect him to be doing on a holding such as:

 

Jxx AQJx xxx Jxx

[Gerben42]

Bid on rather than Dbl them?

[bid_em_up]

Bid on rather than Dbl them?

Bid what? He certainly has no clear direction.

[pclayton]

Pard may have a very good spade suit, or he may not. My personal agreement is that a subsequent double, after one makes a penalty double, is that it promises Hxx.

[mikeh]

I am with Phil and Josh here: 3N... and I only hope that partner doubled in some semblance of tempo...

 

Several reasons, most (maybe all) already articulated and maybe better than I can, but:

 

1. I play 10-12 a lot. While I play a different rescue method, it is clear that LHO has both majors: with ♣s, he'd saty in 2♣, with reds, he'd run to ♦s and with a single suit, he isn't 'scrambling'.. he's going right there. It may be that he has 3=4=3=3, but that is against the odds, since sometimes he'd pass 2♣, and other times he'd bid 2♦ on the way.. hoping to get to a contract that doesn't get doubled... I know about that route, from experience with 4333's :)

 

2. I am way ahead of the game: many tables will have silent opps and I would estimate that their bidding gives me about .333 of a trick (yes, this sounds like an ad for Mike777's recent thread about sound openings, but it isn't... I gain here only because of the auction: give LHO my partner's hand and I'd be in a world of hurt right now). As it is, I expect to be able to play this hand close to double dummy.

 

3. If they have a 4-4 fit, just what am I leading? The ♣ A will be a disaster if dummy hits with 4=5=3=1 and even if dummy is 4=4=3=2, what am I switching to, having perhaps given a tempo to opener's QJx?

 

If I were defending, I'd lead the trump A and continue, hoping to catch partner with Jxx or Kxx... we're dreaming if we think that he rates to hold 4 trump.

 

4. If we declare 3N, which is almost certainly the field spot, I expect to score between 65 and 90% of the mps. If we defend I expect to score either 100% or 10-20%.. with the lower score far more likely. I'll play for an expectation of 77.5% by bidding 3N, and let others try for 100 and collect 10.

[Guest Jlall]

Why is everyone assuming 3N will make, or that it's a normal contract? We have a minimum hand, partner could easily just have some kind of 7 or 8 count. Our clubs may not be a source of tricks. I also expect to crush this, partner chose to double and they dont appear to have any tricks.

[Winstonm]

Why is everyone assuming 3N will make, or that it's a normal contract? We have a minimum hand, partner could easily just have some kind of 7 or 8 count. Our clubs may not be a source of tricks. I also expect to crush this, partner chose to double and they dont appear to have any tricks.

Dittio - punish the slimy bastards.

[Echognome]

Pard may have a very good spade suit, or he may not. My personal agreement is that a subsequent double, after one makes a penalty double, is that it promises Hxx.

I personally don't see how this is playable. So your partner will have Hxx under the bidder. Yes it might be the case that opener is something like 3=2=4=4 and is just trying to find the best fit, but I don't see why you'd want to double on Hxx in general. Also with Hxx, it's much more likely that trumps are splitting for opponents. We want to defend when our trumps are 4-2 or, even better, 5-1.

 

3. If they have a 4-4 fit, just what am I leading? The ♣ A will be a disaster if dummy hits with 4=5=3=1 and even if dummy is 4=4=3=2, what am I switching to, having perhaps given a tempo to opener's QJx?

 

Again, why would they have a 4-4 fit? What is partner sitting on over there to suggest defending? Kxx? Maybe if you play Phil's methods. Jxx? I mean partner knows you didn't want to defend, so why would he suggest defending with those holdings? He sees the vulnerability just as well as we do. You suggested that dummy may be 4=5=3=1. Suppose partner is 4=5=3=1! And here we are trying to make 3NT without a source of tricks, in the meantime 2♠ is getting crushed.

[mikeh]

I wonder how many posters have clear agreements as to the degree to which our sequence demands/shows trump strength/high card strength? Phil clearly does, and his agreements about subsequent doubles echoes mine. I suspect that Justin does as well... his objection is, I take it, that partner could be as light as 7 or 8 hcp.. and I agree.

 

My own agreements are that:

 

1. My double of 1N established a force through 2♦ by them: they cannot play 2♣ or 2♦ undoubled...if we can't double, we must bid.

 

2. However, we are not forced beyond 2♦: this is an imp decision, based on a reluctance to have to double a partscore into game when we have no playable fit... maybe I shouldn't play this at mps, but I have never bothered to change my agreements.. probably because I rarely play matchpoints beyond the club level.

 

3. While my double of 2♣ seems clear (altho I usually play direct double as takeout, so would pass here in my methods), partner does not have to double 2♥. He will not double if his hand is weak with long ♥s.. he has to have some values.

 

The interesting question is whether our two doubles to date have established a force on our side.

 

My view is: no. Again, this is probably an imp approach: if neither of us can double or bid, it is unlikely that we are missing much.. on a poor judgement day we might go +100 when we could have been +300 or +110... but we will never be -470.

 

I am quite prepared to learn why the doubles should create a force.. maybe the double of 2♥ should require him to either double or bid 2N... or an unlikely 3♦ if, say, 4=5 in the reds.

 

4. Having said all of that, for me, my pass of 2♠ invites partner to double with Hxx. I am known to hold at least 2♠s and maybe 3.. but not 1 or 4. With 1, I'd never allow him to defend, with 4 I'd double.

 

He knows that we have their side suits controlled.. he'd expect me to lead a trump.. and for us to be able to lead trumps at least once more, and probably twice more, before they score any ruffs. So he SHOULD double with Hxx.

 

5. As far as I am concerned, if we need partner to hold 4 trump to double, we are going to be waiting a long, long time... especially if we need 4 ourselves!. We may well have them exactly in the hoped-for 4-3 fit and be unable to double because we are 3-3 in the suit!

 

6. The more compelling reason not to pull is that partner does not need 9+ hcp to double... as Justin observed, we may be too high. As against that, he may well have 9+, or this may be one of those hands where knowledge of the opps' hands allows us to generate 9 tricks on 23-24 hcp... the other day (for what little one hand can tell us) an overcall of my 1N caused my partner to opt for aggression rather that conservatism with his 8 count.. catching me with 15 and 4333 shape... making 10 tricks and I could have made 11, based on being able to play almost double-dummy after about trick 4.