Pass, double, bid?

[jillybean]

Dealer: North Vul: EW Scoring: IMP ♠ 95 ♥ 7 ♦ AQ76 ♣ AT8754

 

West North East South

 

 -     1♥    2♠    3♣

 3♠    4♥    4♠    ?  

 

How do I evaluate this, what do i do?

[Echognome]

I personally think that 3♣ was an overbid as I would play it as game forcing. I would have started with a negative double. Having evaluated the hand as a GF, I guess to pass now and accept whatever partner decides to do, but admit it's a guess.

 

Suppose the auction had started with a 1♠ overcall, where I agree we would have a 2♣ bid and would not be in a forcing pass situation. Suppose the rest of the auction had remained the same, then I would pass now as I don't mind if partner bids on, doubles, or passes.

 

Finally, suppose I had started with a negative double, then I would also pass now, with the same reasoning as above. I don't mind if partner passes, doubles, or bids on, as I have already shown my strength with my negative double. The problem I have in the actual auction is that I'm light for my 3♣ call. Partner will make a decision based on me having more values than I actually have.

[jdonn]

I have a minimum with defensive tricks, shortness in partner's suit, and a doubleton in their suit. I strongly favor double.

[karlson]

I would think pass is forcing (assuming 3c was gf), and then double is completely obvious with aces and a singleton in partner's suit. If it was not forcing, I think I would double anyway, but it's not as clear (partner might play me for more values than I have).

 

I agree that 3c was a slight overbid, but it's easy to see a negative double working rather poorly as well.

[Echognome]

I would think pass is forcing (assuming 3c was gf), and then double is completely obvious with aces and a singleton in partner's suit. If it was not forcing, I think I would double anyway, but it's not as clear (partner might play me for more values than I have).

 

I agree that 3c was a slight overbid, but it's easy to see a negative double working rather poorly as well.

I pretty much agree with you. I actually feel it's close between pass and double given I think our pass is forcing. I just hate doubling with xx in trumps, but agree that our singleton ♥ is a nice feature on defense.

 

Supposing our pass was not forcing, would we still want to double?

[jdonn]

Supposing our pass was not forcing, would we still want to double?

Yes because of the aces. KQxxxx of clubs might pass in that case though.

[benlessard]

Here its highly relevant if you play namyats or not.

[jillybean]

Here its highly relevant if you play namyats or not.

not

[cherdano]

I would think pass is forcing (assuming 3c was gf), and then double is completely obvious with aces and a singleton in partner's suit. If it was not forcing, I think I would double anyway, but it's not as clear (partner might play me for more values than I have).

 

I agree that 3c was a slight overbid, but it's easy to see a negative double working rather poorly as well.

I pretty much agree with you. I actually feel it's close between pass and double given I think our pass is forcing. I just hate doubling with xx in trumps, but agree that our singleton ♥ is a nice feature on defense.

 

Supposing our pass was not forcing, would we still want to double?

With a singleton in partner's suit, two aces, another possible quick trick and empty suits I think double is 120% clear when pass is forcing. I would puke if partner goes to the 5-level after I invited him to do.

If pass wasn't forcing, I would still double.

 

I also would have bid 3♣. I don't like double with a singleton heart and a 6-card suit that I probably can show now or never.

[Echognome]

I would think pass is forcing (assuming 3c was gf), and then double is completely obvious with aces and a singleton in partner's suit. If it was not forcing, I think I would double anyway, but it's not as clear (partner might play me for more values than I have).

 

I agree that 3c was a slight overbid, but it's easy to see a negative double working rather poorly as well.

I pretty much agree with you. I actually feel it's close between pass and double given I think our pass is forcing. I just hate doubling with xx in trumps, but agree that our singleton ♥ is a nice feature on defense.

 

Supposing our pass was not forcing, would we still want to double?

With a singleton in partner's suit, two aces, another possible quick trick and empty suits I think double is 120% clear when pass is forcing. I would puke if partner goes to the 5-level after I invited him to do.

If pass wasn't forcing, I would still double.

 

I also would have bid 3♣. I don't like double with a singleton heart and a 6-card suit that I probably can show now or never.

Well, I'm pretty sure it's ok that I respectfully disagree.

 

I mean I know we are discussing on several fronts, so let me separate them.

 

If pass is forcing, and we are looking at no wasted values in their suit, then why wouldn't I want to encourage partner to bid to the 5-level? Partner has bid 4♥ without any guarantee of support. He's probably looking at a great suit or a good club fit with us and a reasonable amount of hearts. We have no wastage in their suit! Since partner has already bid 4♥, is he going to show his hand again if we pass? He will make a decision based on his own holdings now and the most likely action he will take is double. I will obviously have no problem sitting for it. If partner does go on over 4♠ are we really that unhappy? You may puke, but apparently I have a tougher stomach. Really the only reason I might try to double is because of the vulnerability, so sorry if it's not 120% clear to me.

 

If pass is not forcing, then again it comes down to whether we want partner bidding again with the appropriate hands. Really, you and I both should consider what hands partner will bid on with and what hands he will pass or double with (or in the case of a FP, the hands he will double with). That is the judgment required of us. I find that partner will rarely bid hearts a 3rd time here. We have a flexible hand on both offense and defense, and I do find the decision close. On the plus side, you can feel good that the decision is crystal clear to you.

[Lobowolf]

I have a minimum with defensive tricks, shortness in partner's suit, and a doubleton in their suit. I strongly favor double.

I agree.

[P_Marlowe]

X.

 

Will it go down?

Certainly, you control the minors, partner the hearts.

Do you want to hear partner bid again? No.

Can you make game, unclear.

 

Go for the sure thing, and prevent partner form bidding

on, unless he has a real reason to bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: A neg. X instead of 3C is certainly better, assuming

a standard opening style, you are not strong enough to

force the partnership to game, ... but that was, what

you did with the 3C bid.

[655321]

I have a minimum with defensive tricks, shortness in partner's suit, and a doubleton in their suit. I strongly favor double.

Agree with this, also agree with 3♣.

[the hog]

Disagree with 3C if 3C is gf. You don't have a gf. Sputnik x is far more descriptive.

I would X now. That is not even close.

[neilkaz]

3♣ is GF for me and seems pushy here so I'd make a neg X.

 

The opps are vul, but it does seem to be a good shot to X 4♠. Declarer make a WJO and now has bid again. That doesn't mean that they won't make it and perhaps your PD is bidding on a long string of ♥ and not much defence, but more likely and noting your short ♥ is that the opps are down 2 or perhaps 3 on a good day. I don't think this is a super obvious X, but I do feel it is one that should be made with 2 bullets and short ♥.

[Codo]

Yes 3 ♣ was close, but I still had bid it.

Now X not close.

[paulg]

As neilkaz says, the vulnerability is green (UK)/white-on-red (US?), and to me this means that pass is non-forcing here.

 

However I think that double is best, although I would be happier if I had doubled the first time as well.

 

Paul

[han]

We made a gameforcing bid (which I wouldn't have made btw), how can pass be non-forcing? It also seems clear to double now.

[neilkaz]

We made a gameforcing bid (which I wouldn't have made btw), how can pass be non-forcing? It also seems clear to double now.

Pass is foricng to me in this sequence after a GF 3♣ but whether a B/I PD will realize that is doubtful, but I"d double regardless.

[jillybean]

This is one of my problem hands where I make an aggressive bid and don’t follow through with it. I passed hoping I could get out of it and did puke when partner bid 5♥. Forcing pass isnt applicable here, still I should have doubled, perhaps on the first, definitely on the second round.

 

Why must 3♣ be gf, we have double or 3♠ to create a gf?

[cherdano]

This is one of my problem hands where I make an aggressive bid and don’t follow through with it. I passed hoping I could get out of it and did puke when partner bid 5♥. Forcing pass isnt applicable here still, I should have doubled, perhaps on the first, definitely on the second round.

 

Why must 3♣ be gf, we have double or 3♠ to create a gf?

When you make a forcing bid in a new suit at the 3-level, that is GF. Think about it - if you don't find a fit, you are forced to play in 3N. Why should you stop short of game when you don't find a fit (when it is even easier to take many tricks).

 

Double is not GF.

[jillybean]

This is one of my problem hands where I make an aggressive bid and don’t follow through with it. I passed hoping I could get out of it and did puke when partner bid 5♥.  Forcing pass isnt applicable here still, I should have doubled, perhaps on the first, definitely on the second round.

 

Why must 3♣ be gf, we have double or 3♠ to create a gf?

When you make a forcing bid in a new suit at the 3-level, that is GF. Think about it - if you don't find a fit, you are forced to play in 3N. Why should you stop short of game when you don't find a fit (when it is even easier to take many tricks).

 

Double is not GF.

Why should 3♣ be treated the same in both a competitive and non-competitive auction?

[awm]

Why should 3♣ be treated the same in both a competitive and non-competitive auction?

The point is just basic logic here. If you make a forcing bid at the three-level or above, it is very difficult to stop short of game. Partner can't bid notrump below 3NT (which is game). If you don't think there is any chance of making 3NT when partner is bidding it, then why are you making a (forcing) call that encouraged partner to bid it?

 

If you do think that you will often make 3NT when partner bids it, then aren't you likely to do even better when partner actually has a fit for your suit? Partner raising you to the four-level is good news. It's weird to say: "if we have no fit, I want to play in game, but if we have a fit I would rather just play a partial."

 

So the reasoning is that a forcing three-level bid is forcing to game. This applies regardless of whether there's competition.

 

However, it's certainly true that in a competitive auction we often have fewer calls available. It may be necessary to "stretch" a bit and force to game on a hand where ordinarily we would prefer not to. This is because a lot of our temporizing calls that might let us out below game have been taken away by the opponents' bidding.

 

In any case, bidding 3♣ here may have been pushy. We are forcing game with only 10 hcp and no known fit. You get a mix of opinions as to whether this pushy bid was the right call (it is not like we can show a "club invite" any more after the opponents bid 2♠). But in any case, once you made this call the auction is forcing to game from which it follows that pass of 4♠ is forcing.

[P_Marlowe]

This is one of my problem hands where I make an aggressive bid and don’t follow through with it. I passed hoping I could get out of it and did puke when partner bid 5♥.  Forcing pass isnt applicable here still, I should have doubled, perhaps on the first, definitely on the second round.

 

Why must 3♣ be gf, we have double or 3♠ to create a gf?

When you make a forcing bid in a new suit at the 3-level, that is GF. Think about it - if you don't find a fit, you are forced to play in 3N. Why should you stop short of game when you don't find a fit (when it is even easier to take many tricks).

 

Double is not GF.

Why should 3♣ be treated the same in both a competitive and non-competitive auction?

It is playable to play 3C as nonforcing.

 

But I guess you play 2C in the seq.

 

1H - (1S) - 2C - ...

 

as forcing, now you can of course play, that

bidding a new suit on the 2 level is forcing,

and bidding a new suit on the 3 level as non-

forcing, but for me this would be too much

memory burden.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[cherdano]

This is one of my problem hands where I make an aggressive bid and don’t follow through with it. I passed hoping I could get out of it and did puke when partner bid 5♥.  Forcing pass isnt applicable here still, I should have doubled, perhaps on the first, definitely on the second round.

 

Why must 3♣ be gf, we have double or 3♠ to create a gf?

When you make a forcing bid in a new suit at the 3-level, that is GF. Think about it - if you don't find a fit, you are forced to play in 3N. Why should you stop short of game when you don't find a fit (when it is even easier to take many tricks).

 

Double is not GF.

Why should 3♣ be treated the same in both a competitive and non-competitive auction?

It's not necessary - there is a minority who plays 3♣ in competition here as NF. But if you do play it as forcing (which I would strongly recommend since that is standard in NA), you should play it as game-forcing.