awm Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 [hv=d=n&v=b&s=sak94hkt643d5cj76]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You're playing in a KO match with a world-class partner. Opponents are decent but unspectacular. Partner is in first seat and passes. RHO opens with bidding with 1♦. You choose to double (feel free to disagree), LHO passes and partner bids 2♠. Now RHO ups the ante with 3♦. What now? The auction so far: Pass - 1♦ - X - Pass2♠ - 3♦ - ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 3S - IMO, this should be competitive and not show extras. I agree with the original double. Although minimal in HCP, the hand is strong in controls and shape and in these situations the hand with shortness in opps suit needs to take the action - in reality, I am closer to bidding 4S than passing - if partner has a weak 5 or 6 card spade suit 4S problably makes, but I can't force him to hold perfect cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 I HATE tennis. Well, I like tennis, but play it on the tennis court, not the bridge table. Lemme see. You have 2 heart losers, 1 diamond loser, 3 club losers. Your partner should have 3 covers (both round queens are covers, which is a bonus). 4 spades. If 3 spades means something other than "I dunno. Whadda you wanna do?" then I apologize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 Well, we're back to an old discussion again. For me, 2♠ showed a hand with five spades and a belief that we will probably make 2♠ opposite my expected average of three cards and a ruffing value. In other words, partner has about a nine-loser hand with five spades, up to a bad/questionable eight-loser hand with five spades. Three reasons for me to bid 3♠: 1. I have four trumps. The LOTT still has some merit. 2. I have that one extra card or one extra ruffing value needed for 3♠ to possibly make, in this instance an extra ruffing value. 3. Because I have A-K in spades, partner is likely on the high side. Something like ♠Qxxxx ♥Qxx ♦xxx ♣Ax would make sense -- a hesitant 8-loser approximation. Opposite that hand, I expect to lose a diamond and a club and a heart no matter what. If spades cooperate 2-2 and the Ax in hearts is with Opener, this will make 4♠. However, that seems to be asking a lot. If partner's hesitant 8-loser was quite timid, like adding in a major Jack or two, he'll bite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 I think I voted 3♠ but in that case I changed my mind, at least partly. I think 3♠ should be forward-going. Partner might double 3♦ in which case I bid 3♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 4S - this hands a playa. Sorry partner if wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 3S, I find the X ok, would have done thesame, 3S now should be compeitive, showing the fit, if partner has something to add, he will bid 4S, he knows we arered and playing IMP's. 3H is out, and I would say the hand is to weakto bid 4S, after all partner is a passed hand. Pass is out as well, we have a fit (most likelya 9 card fit), but if I pass, partner may give meonly a 3 carder (and a weak NT type hand), and3H should show a stronger hand and denying a spade fit. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 4S - this hands a playa. Sorry partner if wrong. Agree. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 7, 2007 Report Share Posted July 7, 2007 4s game try.thought that was clear until I read the other posts. 1) I got an opening hand and a stiff.2) Partner has something3) partner is playing the hand.4) imps....game try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I like my initial X, I would bid 3S now. There are certainly hands that make game but I think that bidding 4 will result in going down too often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 4S at imps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I'd bid 3♠ without much thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted July 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Here's partner's hand: [hv=s=sxxxxhxxdajxckqtx]133|100|[/hv] Spades are 4-1, but the ♥A is on and 3♠ still rolls home on careful play (losing two spades, one heart, one club). I chose to pass, and 3♦ also made. No swing, since our opponents bid michaels instead of double on the original hand, ending up in 4♠ one down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 After Advnacer's hand is known, the stylistic differences come out. I'd never jump to 2♠ with four little spades and AJx in diamonds. I'd either bid a simple 1♠, expecting partner to raise when it matters, or would cue 2♦, or would bid 1NT (nice diamond spots). On this deal, the auction might well have proceeded: 1♦-X-P-1♠3♦-P-P-XP-3♥-P-3♠-P-P-P. Advancer's double being "do something intelligent."Overcaller's 3♥ catering to 4441 (short club). Had Advancer been aggressive, the alternative: 1♦-X-P-2♦3♦-P-P-3♠P-P/4♠-P(-P-P) The aggressive bidding by South might cause problems, obviously. Had advancer decided to "be practical," the auction: 1♦-X-P-1NT2♦-P-P-2♠P/3♦-3♠-P-P-P or 1♦-X-P-1NT-3♦-P-P-X-P-P/3♥-P(-3♠-P-P-P) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 very interesting hand. We have the choice of double or one heart, partner has at least 3 choices, one spade, two spades or 1nt. I hope people will comment more on this deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I voted for 3S, I would have bid 2S with partner's hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I came here too late to post without knowing the hand. Howevfer, I made up my mind before the actual cards were shown, and that decision was, I thought, a relatively straightforward 3♠. The hand feels as if the double, which was acceptable but not clear, has become fully justified... but to bid 4♠ is hanging partner. 3♠ is an in-between bid: it is not a strong invitation to game, but, in my view, it is not completely sign-off. It shows the 4th spade, which partner will appreciate since he may hold 4 or a poor 5 card suit, and it confirms more than a minimum double.... with which we would pass it around to partner, expecting him to pass with 4 spades and take a call with a decent, in context, hand with 5 spades. My hand has become better than a minimum, so I tell him about it. He knows the vulnerability and the game bonus... if he passes 3♠, I wouldn't expect to miss a good(ish) game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I came here too late to post without knowing the hand. Howevfer, I made up my mind before the actual cards were shown, and that decision was, I thought, a relatively straightforward 3♠. The hand feels as if the double, which was acceptable but not clear, has become fully justified... but to bid 4♠ is hanging partner. 3♠ is an in-between bid: it is not a strong invitation to game, but, in my view, it is not completely sign-off. It shows the 4th spade, which partner will appreciate since he may hold 4 or a poor 5 card suit, and it confirms more than a minimum double.... with which we would pass it around to partner, expecting him to pass with 4 spades and take a call with a decent, in context, hand with 5 spades. My hand has become better than a minimum, so I tell him about it. He knows the vulnerability and the game bonus... if he passes 3♠, I wouldn't expect to miss a good(ish) game. So does that mean you think partner's 2s is clear as opposed to one spade or 1nt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I came here too late to post without knowing the hand. Howevfer, I made up my mind before the actual cards were shown, and that decision was, I thought, a relatively straightforward 3♠. The hand feels as if the double, which was acceptable but not clear, has become fully justified... but to bid 4♠ is hanging partner. 3♠ is an in-between bid: it is not a strong invitation to game, but, in my view, it is not completely sign-off. It shows the 4th spade, which partner will appreciate since he may hold 4 or a poor 5 card suit, and it confirms more than a minimum double.... with which we would pass it around to partner, expecting him to pass with 4 spades and take a call with a decent, in context, hand with 5 spades. My hand has become better than a minimum, so I tell him about it. He knows the vulnerability and the game bonus... if he passes 3♠, I wouldn't expect to miss a good(ish) game. So does that mean you think partner's 2s is clear as opposed to one spade or 1nt?2♠ seems right to me, and clearly right, at that. 1♠ is silly. 10 hcp, a good 10... and I am bidding 1♠? Only if on really good drugs (or is that..really bad drugs?) 1N shows the hcp and the stopper(s): I am at the top of the range, but there's no law against that. However, in my experience, one can often get out of spades and into notrump, when right, far easier than one can get out of notrump and into spades. Give partner AKJx Axx Kx Jxxx and he will simply put us in 3N... now, we rate to make it, but maybe opener holds xx KQJx Q10xx Axx and 3N fails.... yes, it is possible to go down in 4♠ also, but I know which game I'd rather be in (please, I did not try to do a deep analysis of the hands, so no quibbling please <_< ). I recognize that this belief (easier to get to nt from a suit than vice versa) is not always applicable, and this hand is close to an exception.. but I am a simple man, and I generally live by this type of rule unless the hand is clearly exceptional... give me xxxx Jxx AJ10 KJxx and I think I'd try 1N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 give me xxxx Jxx AJ10 KJxx and I think I'd try 1N. I'd like to quibble! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 give me xxxx Jxx AJ10 KJxx and I think I'd try 1N. I'd like to quibble!I did say that it would be an exceptional hand on which I'd bid 1N rather than 2♠, and 14 cards is exceptional :) But I didn't really mean it...too many clubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 I think 2♠ is a must, and when partner then bids 3♠, pass... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bid_em_up Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 I find these posts amazing..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhall Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 I believe that your WC partner assumed that your double showed 4 spades. I agree with any of the other choices that Ken described. Truth is, third-hand doubles vary so much more than second-hand doubles that it is hard to fault Pass, 3♠, or 4♠ by your hand after the jump to 2♠. If you are "known" to be a conservative doubler in this position, pass is good enough (but I still wouldn't do it), and 3♠ is invitational. If you are "known" to double aggressively here, then 4♠ at IMPs is a standout choice. If your style is unknown to partner, he will tend to act aggressively in order to solve your continuation problems. That seems to be the case here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshs Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 My opinion is:a. Competing to the 2 level does not show extras, it merely shows 4 trumps although I don't mind the style where you might pass with 4 trumps if your x was hopeless. The problem with not competing to 2S on an auction like 1H-x-P-1S-2H-? when you hold 4 trumps is that partner may elect to bid a minor next and then you have to play at the 3 level instead of the 2 level. If you know partner will rebid his 4 small spades on his 6 count, then you can pass on a min, but thats not the way most people bid.b. competing at the 3 level does show extras, and is INV to game. Of course you have to take some pressure off partner so can bid these Invites sightly lighter in comp than you would normally if you have a good fit, but it still should not be junk.c. Here partner has shown an INV hand, so you really don't need all that much extra to bid 3S.d. So the question is do you have any extras? You certainly don't have in high card points but the 4513 shape is promising, especially with the HK probably well placed. So having said that I think its close between pass and 3S. I would have passed, but thats because I don't x very agressively opposite a passed hand and I expect a passed hand to bid agressively when I do make noise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.