balancing with a minor

[matmat]

imps. r/w 4th chair

 

Qxx Kxx x AKQJxx

 

3♦ - p - (p) - ?

[rogerclee]

easiest double ever

[han]

That's what I was going to say. On a good day partner bids 3NT. Or passes.

[effervesce]

X.

[Free]

easiest double ever

agree

[neilkaz]

Double

[cherdano]

That's what I was going to say. On a good day partner bids 3NT. Or passes.

Or jumps to 4M.

[Tcyk]

I guess I'm weird but I like to show my suits. Double might miss 6C and partner isn't barred from bidding after I bid 4C

[awm]

I don't think double is as wonderful as people make it out to be. Some reasons:

 

(1) You could easily get partner to bid a weak four-card major and you could play in the moysian with a bad break when clubs is much better. This can potentially happen even at the four level.

 

(2) What do you expect partner to do with a hand like xx xxx KQxx xxxx? I'd pass. How do you rate your chances of setting 3♦? Even if partner has a third trump trick the 3♦ contract might make. The club holding is very offensive with as much length as you have, and reduces defensive prospects.

 

(3) Sometimes partner will bid a three-card major. In a previous poll the plurality preferred to advance 3M on a three-card suit rather than 4♣ on a four-card suit. How well do you expect that to play?

 

(4) You could miss a club game or slam. Say partner has x AQxx Axxx xxxx. You are cold for 6♣, but partner will probably bid 4♥ (maybe 3NT). These games might even go down (consider a spade lead vs. 3NT, or 4♥ on a 5-1 trump break).

 

I rather like 4♣ here. On the hands where partner has a five-card major and the values to jump to game in that major over a takeout double, we should play in 4M in any case (partner also good enough to bid 4M over 4♣). On the hands where we play in a partial, I suspect that 4♣ will frequently do as well as 3M (probably better on the hands where 3M was a 4-3, maybe worse on the hands where it was a 5-3). I will miss a few penalties on hands where we should defend, but I will also miss some 3♦X making results. I will find a few games/slams in clubs that I'd miss over double. If partner was bidding 3NT I might miss out, but then, 4NT should be natural over 4♣ and there are surely a high percentage of hands where 4NT makes also, or where 5♣ is actually a better game than 3NT and we bid that.

[655321]

easiest double ever

Agree with Roger

[jdonn]

If you don't double on this, then I think you don't understand how the bridge scoring table works.

[awm]

If you don't double on this, then I think you don't understand how the bridge scoring table works.

Last I checked: plus scores are better than minus scores, making games are better than failing games, defending 3♦X making is not a good score, and bidding slams is really good.

 

My apologies if any of these have changed. :)

[jdonn]

I should mention, my comment wasn't meant to be snide toward you. It was merely an expression of my true feelings. But you are reeeeally missing the boat on this one.

[han]

I dealt 100 hands with specifications that seemed reasonable to me for the auction 3D - p - p - Dbl - all pass. I went through the first ten hands and I would have this auction for those 10 hands.

 

Double dummy 3D made 5 times (never with overtricks) and went down 3 or more tricks 48 times.

[awm]

I dealt 100 hands with specifications that seemed reasonable to me for the auction 3D - p - p - Dbl - all pass. I went through the first ten hands and I would have this auction for those 10 hands.

 

Double dummy 3D made 5 times (never with overtricks) and went down 3 or more tricks 48 times.

One thing that may be worth noting is that the hands where 3♦X goes down the most are often hands where partner has a singleton club. But usually this gives partner a five card major (or 4441) and I don't think passing the double is all that likely with these patterns unless partner's diamond holding is quite strong. I also suspect that you are doing something wrong here (or your specifications don't match what mine would be) if your 3♦ openings are going three or more down 48/100 times. I ran a similar simulation and while 3♦ was often failing it was rarely down more than a couple tricks. My specifications were opener with 4-9 hcp and either 7♦ or (6♦ to two of the top three honors). I would note that partner's most common club holding was three small which means our hand is unlikely to take more than one club trick on defense.

[matmat]

I should mention, my comment wasn't meant to be snide toward you. It was merely an expression of my true feelings. But you are reeeeally missing the boat on this one.

my usual state of affairs.

 

anyway. i screwed this one up, obviously. tried 3nt.

 

 

p showed up with something like Txxx xx KQxx Txx

(opposite my Q8x Kxx x AKQJ9x)

 

i managed to go down only one, but obviously defending 3♦X would have been the winning action, likely down 2.

[jdonn]

I dealt 100 hands with specifications that seemed reasonable to me for the auction 3D - p - p - Dbl - all pass. I went through the first ten hands and I would have this auction for those 10 hands.

 

Double dummy 3D made 5 times (never with overtricks) and went down 3 or more tricks 48 times.

One thing that may be worth noting is that the hands where 3♦X goes down the most are often hands where partner has a singleton club. But usually this gives partner a five card major (or 4441) and I don't think passing the double is all that likely with these patterns unless partner's diamond holding is quite strong. I also suspect that you are doing something wrong here (or your specifications don't match what mine would be) if your 3♦ openings are going three or more down 48/100 times. I ran a similar simulation and while 3♦ was often failing it was rarely down more than a couple tricks. My specifications were opener with 4-9 hcp and either 7♦ or (6♦ to two of the top three honors). I would note that partner's most common club holding was three small which means our hand is unlikely to take more than one club trick on defense.

What were your specifications for the pass? And what were the overall frequencies of the results? And han, what were all your specifications and frequencies?

[pclayton]

Double. Not the easiest call ever, since sometimes pard will pass when we are cold for 3N.

 

I hate 4♣. It bypasses a likely game.

 

I'm just not sick enough for 3N.

[ASkolnick]

I am one of those people who hate doubling on misshaped hands, but the problem is your most likely game is 3N. Over 3M, I would bid 4 Clubs. Sure, it indicates a slightly stronger hand, but it gives you the chance to play in 4C,4M, or 5C when right.

 

As for 3N, I usually have a stopper.

[han]

My partner never had a 5-card major or a 6-card club suit, had 0-15 points with 4+ diamonds headed by 2+ honors including the 10.

 

Opener had 4-10 points with 6 or 7 diamonds. If 7 he would not have a 4-card side suit. If 6 he would not be 6322 and would have at least 3+ honors including the 10.

 

3D made 5 times, it went down one 25 times, it went down two 22 and down 3 or more 48 times.

 

It is of course possible that I made a mistake, I'll rerun.

[han]

Over 400 hands:

 

One overtrick: 1 (0.25%)

making exactly: 18 (4.5%)

Down one: 58 (14.5%)

Down two: 100 (25%)

Down three or more: 223 (54.75%)

 

Average number of tricks: 6.415

[awm]

Han is running a different simulation than I assumed (i.e. he was assuming partner has a sound penalty pass). Yes, in these cases 3♦X often goes down. But it might be worth considering how often 3NT and 4NT are making opposite these hands as well. Even down three is a minus position if you can make a game or slam, and his point range (0-15) includes plenty of hands that can make a game or slam.

 

I'd expect that the hands where the penalty pass has those two diamond tricks and that's it, you get a lot of 3♦X making or 3♦X down one. On these hands you may be better off playing 4♣-1.

 

On the hands where the penalty pass has a lot of additional cards on the side, sure you are beating 3♦ by several tricks, but you pretty often had a making game too (and it might pay more).

[cherdano]

Han is running a different simulation than I assumed (i.e. he was assuming partner has a sound penalty pass). Yes, in these cases 3♦X often goes down. But it might be worth considering how often 3NT and 4NT are making opposite these hands as well. Even down three is a minus position if you can make a game or slam, and his point range (0-15) includes plenty of hands that can make a game or slam.

 

I'd expect that the hands where the penalty pass has those two diamond tricks and that's it, you get a lot of 3♦X making or 3♦X down one. On these hands you may be better off playing 4♣-1.

 

On the hands where the penalty pass has a lot of additional cards on the side, sure you are beating 3♦ by several tricks, but you pretty often had a making game too (and it might pay more).

Are you suggesting to bid 3N instead? How else does making 3N come into play?

[awm]

Over 400 hands:

 

One overtrick: 1 (0.25%)

making exactly: 18 (4.5%)

Down one: 58 (14.5%)

Down two: 100 (25%)

Down three or more: 223 (54.75%)

 

Average number of tricks: 6.415

Okay, I am convinced that if partner has four diamonds to at least two honors, 3♦X will usually go down and will go -3 almost half the time.

 

How exactly is this meaningful?

 

Are you implying that:

 

(1) Partner will only pass for penalties holding four diamonds to two honors?

(2) On most of these hands we could not make a game somewhere?

(3) Penalty pass hands are sufficiently frequent that the call which works best opposite a penalty pass is highly likely to be the best call?

 

All three of these seem dubious to me.

[mikeh]

Han is running a different simulation than I assumed (i.e. he was assuming partner has a sound penalty pass). Yes, in these cases 3♦X often goes down. But it might be worth considering how often 3NT and 4NT are making opposite these hands as well. Even down three is a minus position if you can make a game or slam, and his point range (0-15) includes plenty of hands that can make a game or slam.

 

I'd expect that the hands where the penalty pass has those two diamond tricks and that's it, you get a lot of 3♦X making or 3♦X down one. On these hands you may be better off playing 4♣-1.

 

On the hands where the penalty pass has a lot of additional cards on the side, sure you are beating 3♦ by several tricks, but you pretty often had a making game too (and it might pay more).

Are you suggesting to bid 3N instead? How else does making 3N come into play?

I assume that he is thinking that partner will, on occasion, consider bidding a red v white game.. indeed, with a diamond holding such as KQx or AQx (and extras in the other suits), where he has two stoppers, but the opps rate to take 5 diamond tricks, it is easy to see why he might elect to try for 600 rather than 500 or 800.. plus, if a slam is available, he may get there by a value-showing 3N while passing leaves him with at best an 800 into his 1430/1440.

 

To balance 3N is sick... it may work, of course, but I don't think that Adam was suggesting that route to game.

 

BTW, I would be interested in knowing how many of Han's sample of 100 hands would/could have warranted a 3N bid rather than a pass. One of the problems with simulating this type of auction is accounting, if even possible, for the subjective element.. and it is almost impossible to do this objectively when the simulator knows the actual hand.