Nightmare?

[mtvesuvius]

V vs NV at IMPs, you hold:

 

♠ x

♥ AQJTxxx

♦ KQxx

♣ A

 

(1♠) - Pass - (1NT*) - 4♥

(Pass) - Pass - (4♠) - ?

 

*Forcing

[cherdanno]

Double, of course it may go wrong but I don't think we have a choice now. I am feeling good about it actually.

[y66]

X. Pard can have a lot over there. Not too late to get him involved.

[rogerclee]

Strongly disagree with 4♥, I should've doubled 1NT.

[655321]

Agree with cherdanno, disagree with clee.

[quiddity]

pass.. it sounds like they have an opening bid and a 3-card limit raise, which doesn't leave a lot for partner.

[Phil]

Agree with 4♥. We are vul, so we are showing the goods here.

 

Follow up your good bidding with a double to show a strong 4♥ call with some defense.

[JLOL]

When you bid 4H you are committing yourself to doubling. If you don't feel comfortable with that, don't bid 4H.

[quiddity]

Why are we committed to doubling? It could be costly if partner has a bust, and meanwhile it doesn't seem to gain very much even if it's right.

[mich-b]

When you bid 4H you are committing yourself to doubling. If you don't feel comfortable with that, don't bid 4H.

 

Very well said - I agree completely.

 

Why are we committed to doubling? It could be costly if partner has a bust, and meanwhile it doesn't seem to gain very much even if it's right.

 

Because you (at this stage of the bidding) haven't shown the strength of your hand , and it's defensive potential. 4♥ even V Vs NV shows a hand with lots of shape , but not lots of HCP. If you want to somehow involve your partner (and this may be needed , because 4♥ could well have been making) he needs to know that your hand is different from

♠ x

♥ AQJTxxxx

♦ xxxx

♣ -

[whereagles]

yeah the lol man's got it

[quiddity]

This seems very backwards to me. Why do we want to try to involve partner at this point in the auction after making a unilateral jump to game on the previous round? The whole point of that bid (as I understand it) was to avoid a dialogue with partner in the hope that the opponents might make the wrong decision over 4H. In this case it looks like they got it right, but I don't see why that should force us to make a risky double.

 

If we had made an earlier attempt to involve partner, we likely would have arrived at the same decision: suspecting that 5H goes down, hoping that we can beat 4S one trick. Double is not correct there, so why should it be mandatory here?

[petergreat]

I would have doubled. 4♥ direct just doesn't show your defensive values. I would think double is too risky...after all the opponents are more likely to have the points than your side, and they most probably have heart shortness.

[whereagles]

This seems very backwards to me. Why do we want to try to involve partner at this point in the auction after making a unilateral jump to game on the previous round? The whole point of that bid (as I understand it) was to avoid a dialogue with partner in the hope that the opponents might make the wrong decision over 4H. In this case it looks like they got it right, but I don't see why that should force us to make a risky double.

 

If we had made an earlier attempt to involve partner, we likely would have arrived at the same decision: suspecting that 5H goes down, hoping that we can beat 4S one trick. Double is not correct there, so why should it be mandatory here?

That reasoning makes sense if opponents hadn't bid yet. Since they have, the priorities change. It's no longer clear the need to involve pard is greater than the need to create pressure.

 

Practice shows bid like the "unilateral" 4♥ often work well. And they work even better if you decide to take even more "unilateral" action afterwards.

 

Note that some pairs (incorrectly) dump support bids into the muddied-up forcing 1NT. Unless you preempt them as often as you can, you won't be capitalizing on their systems' weaknesses.

[y66]

Doubling here has nothing to do with involving partner. That comment was inane. Retracting that.

[Hanoi5]

4NT.

[skjaeran]

Double for sure.

 

Telling partner that I've got a very good offensive hand with good defensive values too (in context). I'm doubling to involve partner in the decision.

[JLOL]

Why are we committed to doubling?  It could be costly if partner has a bust, and meanwhile it doesn't seem to gain very much even if it's right.

Because you have a great hand which you haven't shown yet. This is how I view bidding:

 

4H: We may miss a slam, but it's more important to try to shut them out of either 4S or 5C if its profitable.

 

X: Darn, we lost our attempt to shut them out. Now we double to say we had the goods, we expected to make 4H, and we have good defense. We might not beat them, but we have to double. Partner will be able to bid 5H sometimes, but will usually pass.

 

If you like bidding 4H (I do), you cannot do it with the intent of passing! Your hand is awesome! They are probably down! 5H will make if partner bids it!

 

Really this is an every day situation that people get wrong all the time. Sometimes in bridge you only double with 3 trump tricks and an ace. But in situations like this where you have jammed them you must be doubling light, because they are bidding 4S light.

 

I mean really can you imagine the guy sitting with QJxxxxx x Axx Kx shrugging and bidding 4S, and LOLing when the dummy hits with nothing and he goes -150 into your game. This is way more likely than the guy being 74 in the blacks and wrapping it up.

 

Admittedly its different when RHO bids 4S but LHO can still have a yarb and you are probably still beating them.

 

Sorry if this is harsh but bidding 4H and passing is beyond terrible.

[quiddity]

I don't mind the harshness; thanks for the reply!

[Apollo81]

Why are we committed to doubling? It could be costly if partner has a bust, and meanwhile it doesn't seem to gain very much even if it's right.

Because partner otherwise can't tell the difference between when we were bidding it based on a hand that expects to make opposite a dummy with one or so helpful high card (like this one) or a hand that is a classic preempt, e.g. x KQJTxxx Kxxx x.

[quiddity]

I understand that partner can't tell whether we have a good hand or a bad hand. My mistake is in underestimating the chance that this information will be useful (and perhaps overestimating the chance that 4S-X will make). My assumption that RHO has a limit raise was probably incorrect, or perhaps the small chance of missing 5H outweighs the more frequent but less costly 4S-X= even if he does usually have a limit raise.

[JLOL]

I think you underestimate the chance we beat 4S, and overestimate the cost of them making 4SX.

[mikeh]

I understand that partner can't tell whether we have a good hand or a bad hand. My mistake is in underestimating the chance that this information will be useful (and perhaps overestimating the chance that 4S-X will make). My assumption that RHO has a limit raise was probably incorrect, or perhaps the small chance of missing 5H outweighs the more frequent but less costly 4S-X= even if he does usually have a limit raise.

Your assumption that RHO has a limit raise is probably correct... don't apologize for that.

 

But rho will have assumed that you have a different hand type... longer hearts, perhaps equivalent offence but far less defence... and he can hope that he will find his partner with some modest extras.

 

You hold far more defence than anyone else at the table can suspect... this tells you that RHO has probably guessed wrong.. as we are all wont to do under pressure. If you pass here, you are assuming that the opps went right... this is LOSING bridge.

 

When you bid 4♥, you were hoping that you would get to play it and that it would be a good contract OR that the opps would bid on and it would be a poor contract. Well, option 2 happened... stay with what got you here... double to be consistent. Frankly, with this hand, I am delighted to defend... I suspect that we are going to be very happy.

 

Imagine partner with Jxxx xx xxxx xxx... isn't this about what he rates to hold? A near yarb with (often) 4 trump? We are never making 4♥ and they are almost certainly failing in 4♠, sometimes by 2 tricks.

[cherdanno]

I understand that partner can't tell whether we have a good hand or a bad hand. My mistake is in underestimating the chance that this information will be useful (and perhaps overestimating the chance that 4S-X will make). My assumption that RHO has a limit raise was probably incorrect, or perhaps the small chance of missing 5H outweighs the more frequent but less costly 4S-X= even if he does usually have a limit raise.

Next time you make a 3-card limit raise, ask yourself if you would be surprised to go down at the 3-level when partner is minimum, and all suits (including trumps) are breaking badly. I think 300 or 500 is more likely than you think.

[mtvesuvius]

Partner had 9xxx x Jxxxx xxx. Oh well. -690.