Where went wrong?

[twcho]

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=sjt9xhaxdjt8xcaxx&s=sxxhxdaxxxckqjtxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP

W　N　E　S

　　　　1♥　2♣

2♥　X　3♥　Pass

4♥　X　All pass

[/hv]

The result is not particularly awful, club is 3-1 with EW so 4♥ makes comparatively easily. So just a loss of 170 points. If NS ends in 5♣X, it will either be -200 or -500 depends on whether declarer guess the ♦ position (West with ♦Q9).

 

But is the bidding by NS optimal? Can they do better or is this result just unlucky?

[jdonn]

I think everything was fine up until the final double, north didn't have that much extra. I don't like doubles strictly on high cards without more of a sure thing, especially given the club support. If they are down you just take your small gift.

[inquiry]

Nothing is wrong with 2♣, nor with the responsive double of 2♥. So, I think we have to look at the remainder of the auction. Can south's passes be wrong? No, his 2♣ bid described his hand. So if we are going to point fingers, I guess we can point to the double of 4♥ as the worse bid. Had not north described his hand with is responsive double? Did he have any extra? Seems like he bid his same values twice. That is the heart of the problem.

[Winstonm]

At unfavorable vulnerability, I prefer 3C with this hand, but I'm not going to quibble with 2C too much, either.

 

I don't like the responsive double with club support - Either 3C or 3H is superior IMO to the double. If a spade game is available, overcaller can bid 3S over either of these bids - but he can't know about the good club support over double.

 

50% of the blame to North for the first double - the other 90% of the blame goes to North for the second double. :rolleyes:

[karlson]

I think south has a pretty easy pull (presumably to 4N) of the second double, since his offense to defense is way higher than it might be. Even a double game swing is in the realm of possibility (something like Kxxx xx KQxxx Ax).

 

I think the decision over 3h is tougher, but I think I would bid 4c, which presumably also gets NS to 5c.

[Winstonm]

I believe North overvalued the hand in competition - I think 3C is sufficient the first time, and if E/W compete to 3H, either South or North could then bid 3S on the way to 4C if no spade fit is found.

 

I think the second double is an extension of South's choice to overcall 2C instead of bidding 3C - at unfavorable, you aren't being silly with a 3C bid but this way you can emphasize the length, good suit, and lack of defense - that ought to keep North from doubling the final contract. And 3C would stop North from hunting out a spade fit.

[helene_t]

If anything, I think S should have pulled the final double. But none of the calls were terrible.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

North failed to show the support,

so the answer is, no the auction was

not optimal.

I also think that the 2nd double is not

very wise, at least it shows a lot of trust

in the strength of 2 level overcalls.

 

Could the auction be improved? Sure / Maybe.

I prefer 3C instead of the neg. X, but

the neg. X is ok, and it may have worked.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

I like everything till the final double.

North had one trick for the defence (maybe a second one in club). Does he believe, that pd holds something like his actual hand and an additional ace of spades? And even then, he plays them for one down.

 

I think he must bid 5 Club, because he did not show his support yet, second choice pass.

[Hanoi5]

The final double was the worst bid.

[brianshark]

While N shows his 8 pts or so with the responsive double, two bullets is better defense than other lesser 6-10 counts might have been. so I can see why N might have felt he had something extra to say, especially opposite a partner who has overcalled at unfavourable.

 

But the double of 4♥ at imps with the opponents non-vul is just silly primarily because it is IMPs and the opps are non-vul.

 

Partner is expected to have 1-3 defensive tricks for his overcall. And no, I don't think south should pull. He has his defensive trick and maybe a second in clubs if partner is short like I would expect if I sat in south's seat.

 

Partner's double should be based on decent defense (which he has) and either trump quality or a misfit deal (which he has neither).

[helene_t]

The problem is, I think, that N has no constrictive raise available so he must start with a double. But he never gets the chance to show his support.

 

He would be better placed if he starts with a construtive 3♣ (under the agreement that 2N would be a weak clubs raise). Then S would have a clear pull of the final double.