Penalize?

[rogerclee]

Matchpoints, All White, First Seat

 

♠Qxx ♥9xx ♦KQx ♣xxxx

 

P - (3♦) - Dbl - (P)

?

[mike777]

Pass

 

I am going to guess partner is 4=4=1=4 and if we can make 3nt we can beat 3d two tricks for plus 300 and if we can only make 8 tricks we are plus 100.

[ArtK78]

I would bid 3♠, but that or pass, 3♥ or 4♣ could be the winning action.

 

This is really a problem without a clear cut right answer.

 

Even 3NT could be the right action - give partner AKx AT98 x AKQJx. You have 9 cold winners, the defense cannot take 5 tricks, and you probably won't beat 3♦ more than 2 tricks (give opener a classic 7222 hand with the ♦A, and one heart entry to dummy to play a diamond through your KQ).

[jdonn]

Even 3NT could be the right action - give partner AKx AT98 x AKQJx. You have 9 cold winners, the defense cannot take 5 tricks, and you probably won't beat 3♦ more than 2 tricks (give opener a classic 7222 hand with the ♦A, and one heart entry to dummy to play a diamond through your KQ).

And you expect partner to pass 3NT?

[han]

I would pass.

[pclayton]

I'm pulling to 3S. I think this will usually be a damage control situation and I think this will be our safest harbor.

[gnasher]

I think this an obvious pass at matchpoints. Going a few down in 3♠ is hardly going to score well.

 

I'd prefer not to face this problem at IMPs.

[Guest Jlall]

It wouldn't shock me if pass was percentage at imps but because of brainwashing I would definitely be unable to bring myself to do it.

[ArtK78]

Even 3NT could be the right action - give partner AKx AT98 x AKQJx.  You have 9 cold winners, the defense cannot take 5 tricks, and you probably won't beat 3♦ more than 2 tricks (give opener a classic 7222 hand with the ♦A, and one heart entry to dummy to play a diamond through your KQ).

And you expect partner to pass 3NT?

That is an interesting point.

 

But if I don't bid 3NT, then it cannot be bid. And if partner cannot pass 3NT, then we can never play in 3NT when it is right.

 

Of course, all I was pointing out was that 3NT could be the winning action. I did not consider that if it was the winning action, partner could not sit for it.

 

Quite a conundrum, isn't it?

[han]

It's not a conumdrun, it's a pass.

[xcurt]

Pass. If partner has a marginal takeout double (here's a random layout off the top of my head) we are probably going for 500 against 470 or 800 against 470 or 570.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=satxxhat8xd8ckqxx&w=sxxhqjxdajtxxxxcx&e=skj9xhkxxdxxcajtx&s=sqxxh9xxdkqxcxxxx]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(Edit -- fixed the hand diagram, and gave everyone 13 cards)

[Winstonm]

Pass

 

Which shows a good point about not getting to out-of-line with your 3-level t.o. doubles - partner may have this hand and have this decision.

[nige1]

Matchpoints, All White, First Seat

♠Qxx ♥9xx ♦KQx ♣xxxx

P - (3♦) - Dbl - (P)

?

IMO _P = 10, 3N = 4, 3♠ = 3, 4♣ = 2.

 

Granny says "Takeout doubles are for taking out" :P and the views of Jlall, PClayton et al give me additional pause for thought B) but I would masochistically pass at IMPS, too :)

[benlessard]

At MP and with today preempt its a clear pass.

[rogerclee]

I passed for a very ugly -470; partner had ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AKQJ, and we could only take one club, two spades, and a diamond. Meanwhile, we are single-dummy cold for 3NT.

 

I thought pass was clear at the table and this was ordinary bad luck; glad to see the forums agree.

[Apollo81]

I think the fact that, at the time of the double, we are a PH and RHO is not makes this an easier pass than it would otherwise be, not that it's particularly difficult in the first place.

[pclayton]

I think the fact that, at the time of the double, we are a PH and RHO is not makes this an easier pass than it would otherwise be, not that it's particularly difficult in the first place.

Really? I was thinking the opposite. With RHO having a good hand their chances of 470 + are enhanced. We have about 1.25 defensive tricks in our hand.

 

We haven't been doubled yet in 3x either.

[TimG]

partner had ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AKQJ,

What do people think of 3♠ vs DBL with this hand?

[han]

Good question, both are reasonable I think. I like double followed by 3S over 3H. I do play that 4D over the double is two places to play which makes it less likely that partner jumps to 4H on a 4-card suit.

[TimG]

So, it's a matter of having the values to bid 3♠ over 3♥?

 

What about ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AQJx

 

or ♠JTx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣AKQJ?

[ArtK78]

Pass.  If partner has a marginal takeout double (here's a random layout off the top of my head) we are probably going for 500 against 470 or 800 against 470 or 570.

 

Dealer: South Vul: None Scoring: MP

♠ ATxx ♥ AT8x ♦ 8 ♣ KQxx ♠ xx ♥ QJx ♦ AJTxxxx ♣ x ♠ KJ9x ♥ Kxx ♦ xx ♣ AJTx ♠ Qxx ♥ 9xx ♦ KQx ♣ xxxx

 

(Edit -- fixed the hand diagram, and gave everyone 13 cards)

Opposite a non-vul 3♦ opening bid, do you seriously believe that the East hand is a penalty double of 3♠? How many defensive tricks is this hand likely to take if partner has something like x xx KQJTxxx xxx?

[ArtK78]

I passed for a very ugly -470; partner had ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AKQJ, and we could only take one club, two spades, and a diamond. Meanwhile, we are single-dummy cold for 3NT.

 

I thought pass was clear at the table and this was ordinary bad luck; glad to see the forums agree.

You may need two dummies at the table - one on your left, the other on your right - for 3NT to be "single-dummy cold." Unless the hearts are blocked, you have 4 heart losers and the ♦A to lose in 3NT.

[jdonn]

So, it's a matter of having the values to bid 3♠ over 3♥?

 

What about ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AQJx

 

or ♠JTx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣AKQJ?

First one 3♠, sure it's easy to see how double could work but I think it gets us to the wrong suit too often, or 3NT when 4♠ is better.

 

Second one is a classic double then 4♥ if partner bids 3♠ hand.

[ArtK78]

So, it's a matter of having the values to bid 3♠ over 3♥?

 

What about  ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AQJx

 

or  ♠JTx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣AKQJ?

First one 3♠, sure it's easy to see how double could work but I think it gets us to the wrong suit too often, or 3NT when 4♠ is better.

 

Second one is a classic double then 4♥ if partner bids 3♠ hand.

Second one is a classic double followed by 4♥?

 

What about KQx AKQJxxx x Ax? Isn't that a more classic double followed by 4♥? A hand too good to merely overcall 4♥ but which can handle a jump response to 4♠?

 

AKxxx of hearts for double followed by 4♥? What part of bidding over preempts have I missed?

[rogerclee]

I passed for a very ugly -470; partner had ♠AKxxx ♥JTx ♦x ♣AKQJ, and we could only take one club, two spades, and a diamond. Meanwhile, we are single-dummy cold for 3NT.

 

I thought pass was clear at the table and this was ordinary bad luck; glad to see the forums agree.

You may need two dummies at the table - one on your left, the other on your right - for 3NT to be "single-dummy cold." Unless the hearts are blocked, you have 4 heart losers and the ♦A to lose in 3NT.

♠xx ♥KQx ♦AJ9xxxx ♣x, lead the ♥K against 3NT? ♦A then switch to the ♥K?

 

I don't understand your desire to make a post like this.