Surprising High Level Competitive Decision

[jdeegan]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skj76haj9d74ckq93]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♣-P-1♠-Dbl

2♠-P-3♣-5♦

???[/hv]

:P The opponents are unknown, but presumably competent in the last round of a large Regional Swiss where we are both in contention.

Playing support doubles, 2♠ showed 4. I considered 3♠, but it seemed too pushy. 3♣ was a game try that I am eager to accept. 5♦ was, naturally, a surprise. You get to huddle for longer than usual, but beyond some point, a slow pass carries its customary baggage.

What do you bid? Any comments?

[pbleighton]

Anything could be right. I double (yeah, I know it's IMPs).

 

Peter

[ulven]

Double. I don't expect to make 5S with likely bad breaks in our suit(s) and I have two defensive tricks in H's. Partner should be good for at least one.

[awm]

I'd pass here. If partner has a singleton diamond we are very likely to make 5♠. After all, we have a maximum with great help in clubs and nothing wasted in diamonds. Partner is still there to balance with a double when diamonds are 2-2 or 3-2 in our hands.

 

My general rule in this sort of auction is that double shows some diamond values or a fairly bad hand in general (warning partner we don't have a pure hand and that it's usually wrong to bid on), pass shows a hand like this with "working cards" if partner wants to bid on but some diamond length, and bidding on directly guarantees a singleton or void in diamonds.

[jdonn]

I'd pass here. If partner has a singleton diamond we are very likely to make 5♠. After all, we have a maximum with great help in clubs and nothing wasted in diamonds. Partner is still there to balance with a double when diamonds are 2-2 or 3-2 in our hands.

 

My general rule in this sort of auction is that double shows some diamond values or a fairly bad hand in general (warning partner we don't have a pure hand and that it's usually wrong to bid on), pass shows a hand like this with "working cards" if partner wants to bid on but some diamond length, and bidding on directly guarantees a singleton or void in diamonds.

I agree if pass were forcing, but I see no reason it should be. So double is pretty much forced with a hand like this where I expect they are down.

[awm]

Regardless of whether pass is forcing, shouldn't double show a defensive-oriented hand? Of course we have opened and partner made a game try, so it seems odds-on that 5♦ will fail, but if we always double on any hand where we think 5♦ will fail doesn't that mean we almost always double and almost never do anything else?

 

This particular hand has nothing wasted in diamonds, and two kings in four-card holdings opposite partner's supposed length. It seems like a very offensive-oriented hand to me. If partner leaves 5♦ undoubled, he probably has some very lousy game try based on fit and not points (say AQxx xx xx JTxxx) and it's not beyond the realm of possibility that 5♦ makes (or down one at most).

[skjaeran]

Double. I don't expect to make 5S with likely bad breaks in our suit(s) and I have two defensive tricks in H's. Partner should be good for at least one.

Agree.

 

Move one ♦ to ♥'s, and it looks right to bid 5♠ (no I don't think the hand is worth 3♦/3♠ earlier, but it's close and I can understand a jump).

 

Take away the ♥J and ♣Q (if that's not an opening for you, add the ♣J), and a non-forcing pass looks best. There's no way to tell partner that you'd accept the game try but can't bid at the 5-level (if pass is non-forcing, which I agree is correct).

[jdonn]

Of course we have opened and partner made a game try, so it seems odds-on that 5♦ will fail, but if we always double on any hand where we think 5♦ will fail doesn't that mean we almost always double and almost never do anything else?

I don't just automatically double because I opened, in fact pass is probably my most common action. I double here because I have tricks. This hand is really good for both offense and defense.

 

However you are correct, the most likely result by far is 5♦X, next is 5♦, and rarest is 5♠. As it should be.

[Echognome]

I think this hand brings up an interesting point. If partner had made a sound raise of your suit (which he couldn't here), then we'd be in a forcing pass situation. However, he has bid 3♣, which should show at least invitational values. So I fail to see why this should not create a forcing pass. However, I'm sure someone will enlighten me. :D

[pbleighton]

I think this hand brings up an interesting point. If partner had made a sound raise of your suit (which he couldn't here), then we'd be in a forcing pass situation. However, he has bid 3♣, which should show at least invitational values. So I fail to see why this should not create a forcing pass. However, I'm sure someone will enlighten me.

 

Pass after an invitation from one side is a tricky area, because, after all, the game has not been *freely bid*, not has game even been agreed to.

 

I think you can play it either way.

 

Peter

[han]

I think this hand brings up an interesting point. If partner had made a sound raise of your suit (which he couldn't here), then we'd be in a forcing pass situation. However, he has bid 3♣, which should show at least invitational values. So I fail to see why this should not create a forcing pass. However, I'm sure someone will enlighten me. :rolleyes:

I don't play forcing passes after a sound raise, and I don't play a forcing pass here.

 

:rolleyes: back to you.

[pclayton]

I think this hand brings up an interesting point.  If partner had made a sound raise of your suit (which he couldn't here), then we'd be in a forcing pass situation.  However, he has bid 3♣, which should show at least invitational values.  So I fail to see why this should not create a forcing pass.  However, I'm sure someone will enlighten me.  :rolleyes:

Because we aren't in a GF situation.

 

A forcing pass means we double them or we play the 5 level. With a little extra, I don't mind doubling them, but theres plenty of hands where I'd want to play 5♦ undoubled.

 

After my double, I wouldn't mind if pard overrules me.

[SoTired]

What does East have? If East is sacing, wouldn't it make more sense for East to wait until we bid game? So my guess is that East has oodles of diam and hearts and is bidding to make. We are not going to get rich dbling this. Down 1 or down 2 at best. Against our vul game, -300 vs -100 is a 3 IMP gain. As a matter of fact, East may have something like A KQ10x AKQxxxx x. Partner may have something like Qxxxx xxx - AJxxx and both 5D and 5S makes. If we dbl, partner may assume that we have some diam values and pass.

 

And why should we dbl? Do we have something extraordinary that our 1C/2S bids did not show? What?! Two extra HCPs and dblton small diam! That's it? If partner can't dbl this or can't bid 5S, let them play undbled.

 

PASS.

[benlessard]

IMO anything else then pass is a gross mistake.

 

3♣ could be a game try so there is no forcing pass involved. You have a balanced 14 count with 1 ace. Partner know you have 4s. Passing is an almost perfect description of your hand. If partner has 2 small diamonds or 4 spades to the 9 you don't want to play 5♠.

 

Let partner decide he will make a good decision most of the time.

[SchTsch]

Pass.

 

I have what I bid, don't see the point of bidding again. If 5♦X is a good option partner will probably know it better than me.

[Free]

Double, pretty much forced...

[Echognome]

I don't play forcing passes after a sound raise, and I don't play a forcing pass here.

 

  ;) back to you.

Sorry. A bit late in replying. I usually play opener + sound raise = forcing pass, but overcall + sound raise = not forcing pass. Not sure what's right or best.

 

Back to you. <_<

 

Because we aren't in a GF situation.

 

I play a few forcing passes as non game forcing. For example: 1NT - (Dbl) - ReDbl I play as "forcing to fit", which is not necessarily GF. I think it's absolutely clear that if we are in a game forcing auction, then pass is forcing. What's not so clear is if we are not in a game forcing auction, whether there are situations where pass should be forcing. I define my rules above (in regards to this auction). However, I'm willing to listen to others if they think they are too loose.

[helene_t]

Not sure what dbl should mean here (assuming pass is not forcing which I think it isn't). If double is penalty, pass is clear. I double is "forward" I would double.

[Free]

I usually play opener + sound raise = forcing pass, but overcall + sound raise = not forcing pass. Not sure what's right or best.

Where did you get a sound raise?? :blink:

 

If responder wants to show a sound raise, he shouldn't go through a trial bid, he should bid 2NT. Now he's just trying for a distributional game => NO sound raise => NO forcing pass. :)

[Echognome]

I usually play opener + sound raise = forcing pass, but overcall + sound raise = not forcing pass.  Not sure what's right or best.

Where did you get a sound raise?? :blink:

 

If responder wants to show a sound raise, he shouldn't go through a trial bid, he should bid 2NT. Now he's just trying for a distributional game => NO sound raise => NO forcing pass. :)

But this is exactly my point. The question is what is 3♣ to you? Is it a "trial" in that it is invitational only? Or is it just a forcing bid that is invitational or better? To me it means the latter and that is why I believe it is equivalent to a sound raise, for what is a sound raise other than an invitational or better hand?

[cherdano]

Matt, I misunderstood all your posts above because I thought sound raise = constructive raise.

[han]

Ah, I also thought of sound raise as something like 1S-2S constructive, or 1S - (Dbl) - 2H = sound raise (as many play).

 

Now I think that it is far from universal to play opener + invitation or better = forcing pass, but that makes a lot more sense.

[pclayton]

Because we aren't in a GF situation.

 

I play a few forcing passes as non game forcing. For example: 1NT - (Dbl) - ReDbl I play as "forcing to fit", which is not necessarily GF. I think it's absolutely clear that if we are in a game forcing auction, then pass is forcing. What's not so clear is if we are not in a game forcing auction, whether there are situations where pass should be forcing. I define my rules above (in regards to this auction). However, I'm willing to listen to others if they think they are too loose.

This is a different type of forcing pass. There are no pass / pull connotations. Similar auctions develop when we double a weak NT or we redouble a TOx.

 

Another FP is when the partnership uses Bergen and an intervening bid occurs between the Bergen raise and 3 of the major.

[pclayton]

I usually play opener + sound raise = forcing pass, but overcall + sound raise = not forcing pass.  Not sure what's right or best.

Where did you get a sound raise?? :blink:

 

If responder wants to show a sound raise, he shouldn't go through a trial bid, he should bid 2NT. Now he's just trying for a distributional game => NO sound raise => NO forcing pass. :)

But this is exactly my point. The question is what is 3♣ to you? Is it a "trial" in that it is invitational only? Or is it just a forcing bid that is invitational or better? To me it means the latter and that is why I believe it is equivalent to a sound raise, for what is a sound raise other than an invitational or better hand?

I think we play it as a game try. Harvey and I play 3♣ as a slam try, which would definitely create a FP.

[jdonn]

I think we play it as a game try. Harvey and I play 3♣ as a slam try, which would definitely create a FP.

If 3♣ is a slam try (this seems a bit wasteful to me for such a low bid) then I wouldn't pass anyway, I would bid 5♥.