How far do you go to cater to a penalty pass?

[CSGibson]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxhjt98xxda9xcatx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(2♠)-P-(P)-?[/hv]

 

I see three options with this hand: Pass, X, and 3♥. Which would you choose (unless you have a 4th option, in which case I'd love for you to choose from my 3 options and also explain what you would prefer to do)

[Fluffy]

3♥, double its too penalty oriented

[dicklont]

3♥.

When partner has trap passed Dbl would be nice, but when he bids a correction to 3♥ would show a much stronger hand.

[whereagles]

Dbl or 3♥, depending on who pard and LHO are :P

[mike777]

I'll try x.

[ArtK78]

3♥ looks clear to me.

 

Suppose you double. Are you planning to pass 3 of a minor by partner? If you double and bid 3♥, you should have a much better hand than this.

 

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass. That is not a common occurrence.

[655321]

3♥ for me.

 

Even though I would like to double with this hand type, and I do approve of double in principle, the sad fact is that we have exactly 2 defensive tricks. So, if partner passes 2♠X with 4 tricks, we will punish the opponents to the tune of 100. This might be OK with nothing better (e.g. if we are 1444 with 2 Aces), but here we have many more tricks with hearts as trumps. And anyway, perhaps partner has fewer than 4 tricks in defense.

 

Pass is not an option.

[brianshark]

We're in the balancing seat - we only need 2 defensive tricks and we certainly have them. Partner is almost certainly marked with 4+ ♠s and a penalty pass of his is quite likely given responder's pass. Our heart suit is crap and even though partner could still have the death holding of KQx in support, we may still be able to establish the tap.

 

If partner bids 3m (via leb if you play that) then I'll be content enough to pass (I have 3 card support and a singleton and nice shape) even though I know hearts is likely to be a better part-score. But I think it's well worth the risk of catching opener for a nice penalty. People pre-empt on trash these days. You've got to catch them.

 

So mark me down as a doubler.

[Free]

Dbl: I can handle every suit my partner bids, and if he passes I have 2 tricks for him (he'll probably lead his singleton ♥, so I can give him 2 ruffs)

[Edmunte1]

My points of view:

-3♥ is an opthimistic call with 7 1/2 losers hand, and partner will take too often the wrong decision, throwing us over board;

-double may work well in many boards: partner has an average of 4+ spades and may be trapping, our aces and minors suits intermediattes will work well in defense, though partner maybe expects a little more. Even if partner will bid 3NT, opps frequently will have no comunication and our length in hearts will provide the necessary tricks if partner has some liaison in hearts. But of course sometimes it may work out badly.

-pass - nobody died from an small gain.

 

I think at table i would have bid pass.

[3for3]

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass. That is not a common occurrence.

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass. That is not a common occurrence.

 

Art, this is not correct. 3♥ does not have to be right; far from it. Partner is entitled to hold some ordinary 3145 or some such where playing in the minor was just as good or better.

 

Danny

[mikestar]

I voted 3♥ originally, but I am coming to think X would have been better at IMP. A nasty close decision--this hand could be a textbook example of why preempting pays.

 

I think 3♥ would still be the best of a bad lot vs. NV opps at MP, while X is a standout vs. V opps at MP.

[CSGibson]

3♥ looks clear to me.

 

Suppose you double. Are you planning to pass 3 of a minor by partner? If you double and bid 3♥, you should have a much better hand than this.

 

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass. That is not a common occurrence.

yes, if I double, then I'm expecting to pass 3 of a minor. Partner knows I might only have 3 for a take-out, so the suit requirements are met, if that's what's holding you back.

[han]

I wouldn't double, 3H for me as well. Must confess my first reaction was pass.

[han]

Partner knows I might only have 3 for a take-out, so the suit requirements are met, if that's what's holding you back.

"Well partner, too bad we went down 2 in our 4-3 fit while we could have made 3H in our 6-3 fit. But on the upside, at least our suit requirements were met!"

[CSGibson]

Partner knows I might only have 3 for a take-out, so the suit requirements are met, if that's what's holding you back.

"Well partner, too bad we went down 2 in our 4-3 fit while we could have made 3H in our 6-3 fit. But on the upside, at least our suit requirements were met!"

yeah, there's always that.

[foo]

West,None,IMP,

x_JT98xx_A9x_ATx

 

(2♠)-pa-(pa)-??

 

I see three options with this hand: Pass, X, and 3♥. Which would you choose (unless you have a 4th option, in which case I'd love for you to choose from my 3 options and also explain what you would prefer to do)

If 2S promises 5-10 HCP, call it 7-8 on average, and we have 9 HCP; pard rates to have (40- 16 or 17)/2= ~12 HCP

 

We do not rate to have a game or even enough HCP to belong at the 3 level.

 

This is IMPs, not MPs. Being pushy about partscores is not what IMPs is about.

 

In addition, our long suit has horrible suit quality, and 8/9 of our values are A's in our short suits.

 

Despite the 6 card H suit, this looks like a defensive hand in this auction.

 

Finally, our hand combined with the auction implies pard has S length.

 

Pass.

[cherdano]

foooooooooooooooo

 

3♥ sounds right.

[cherdano]

I wouldn't double, 3H for me as well. Must confess my first reaction was pass.

No worries it wouldn't be your reaction at the table.

[foo]

foooooooooooooooo

 

3♥ sounds right.

Yell all you want. That does not refute the logic I presented above.

 

If you disagree, then address the bridge issues I brought up.

[Finch]

foooooooooooooooo

 

3♥ sounds right.

Yell all you want. That does not refute the logic I presented above.

 

If you disagree, then address the bridge issues I brought up.

You didn't bring up 'bridge issues'. You talked about HCP and said that "We do not rate to have a game or even enough HCP to belong at the 3 level."

 

It's not about HCP.

 

Do a simulation. I bet you will discover that it is definitely wrong, looking just at your and partner's hand, to pass. The problem on the hand is nothing to do with us not having enough points. The problem is that the right contract might be

i) 2Sx (we should double)

ii) a minor suit game or partial (we should double)

iii) a heart game or partial (we should bid 3H)

 

I very much doubt that the right contract is 2S undoubled.

 

I don't believe the other passers disagree with this, they just believe that the chance of getting a worse score from selecting the wrong one of double/3H is greater than the expected result from getting it right. Nothing to do with whether we have 'enough HCP to belong at the 3-level'.

 

FWIW I'm a 3H bidder.

[ArtK78]

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass.  That is not a common occurrence.

The only time that double gains is when partner has a penalty pass. That is not a common occurrence.

 

Art, this is not correct. 3♥ does not have to be right; far from it. Partner is entitled to hold some ordinary 3145 or some such where playing in the minor was just as good or better.

 

Danny

Danny, I don't doubt that double could land us in 3 of a minor and that 3 of a minor could be right on some hands.

 

I just think that 3♥ will be the winning call far more often. My hand will produce a lot of tricks with hearts as trump opposite a minimal heart fit, but not so many tricks in three of a minor. And if there is a game (which is unlikely, but not impossible) it rates to be in hearts.

[TimG]

We do not rate to have a game or even enough HCP to belong at the 3 level.

I guess the opening poster should have just said: LHO opens 2S, which is passed to us, we have 9 HCP, what to do? No need to give the actual hand so that considerations beyond HCP can be made.

[foo]

Frances, Tim:

 

I only =started= my analysis on HCP grounds.

 

I also included the CoC, the ODR of the given hand, and the likely shape and value location implications of the auction so far in my analysis.

 

It's more than a bit unsporting to claim my only focus was on HCP.

 

There are problems doing objective sims of contested auctions that are realistic, but I'll see what can be done on that front.

 

FTR, I do not like passing. I just hate it less than either

=making such an off shape takeout X (unless you play X is Penalty here) or

=making a 3H invitational bid when We do not rate to have 3+ level safety. I certainly do not want to end up in 4H if Advancer has the expected flat boring 12 count with something like 4 ♠'s and 2 ♥'s.

 

It's not that I think pass in the best call. It's that I think pass is the least bad call.

 

But I'm willing to be convinced. Let's see some objective sample hands and the odds of them for Advancer that makes 3H better than pass.

 

EDIT: BTW, Frances- if in 2/3 of the scenarios you think you should X, you should want to X instead of bidding 3H?

[ArtK78]

FTR, I do not like passing.  I just hate it less than either

=making such an off shape takeout X (unless you play X is Penalty here) or

=making a 3H invitational bid when We do not rate to have 3+ level safety.  I certainly do not want to end up in 4H if Advancer has the expected flat boring 12 count with something like 4 ♠'s and 2 ♥'s.

A 3♥ invitational bid? Who said 3♥ was invitational? It is a balancing call. Sure, it shows some values, but partner knows that the 3♥ call is a balance, so it could be based on very minimal values - certainly far less than a 3♥ call in direct seat.

 

If partner raises to 4♥ on a flat, boring 12 count with 4 spades and 2 hearts, partner is not a bridge player.