just need sanity check please

[Phil]

Sure, if we knew that partner was going to double 4S then we could pass first but we really don't know.

To me, this is the crux of the matter.

 

You can come up with constructions both ways, but (in my experience anyway), its negligible that we have a game if pard cannot reopen with a double.

 

I think the strongest argument for bidding is that you'll find a good sac. The strongest argument for passing is that you might be beating 4♠. How bad can a singleton heart be on defense when partner has shown some length?

 

I'd like to look at this one on a sim.

[jdonn]

Sure, if we knew that partner was going to double 4S then we could pass first but we really don't know.

To me, this is the crux of the matter.

 

You can come up with constructions both ways, but (in my experience anyway), its negligible that we have a game if pard cannot reopen with a double.

 

I think the strongest argument for bidding is that you'll find a good sac. The strongest argument for passing is that you might be beating 4♠. How bad can a singleton heart be on defense when partner has shown some length?

 

I'd like to look at this one on a sim.

You seem to be not factoring in that they may make the wrong decision. For example, if an absolutely perfect sim could show that bidding is 'right' 40% and 'wrong' 60%, I would think it's clear to bid.

[skjaeran]

Obvious 4NT to me.

 

Two days ago I held x xx KJxxx Jxxxx facing the same scenario. I bid 4NT, and got to 5♣, which was a good save; -500 vs 620.

 

However, the big upside was that the bidding continued (over 4NT):

p 5♣ 5♠ p

p x

and we went +200.

[Phil]

Sure, if we knew that partner was going to double 4S then we could pass first but we really don't know.

To me, this is the crux of the matter.

 

You can come up with constructions both ways, but (in my experience anyway), its negligible that we have a game if pard cannot reopen with a double.

 

I think the strongest argument for bidding is that you'll find a good sac. The strongest argument for passing is that you might be beating 4♠. How bad can a singleton heart be on defense when partner has shown some length?

 

I'd like to look at this one on a sim.

You seem to be not factoring in that they may make the wrong decision. For example, if an absolutely perfect sim could show that bidding is 'right' 40% and 'wrong' 60%, I would think it's clear to bid.

Agree the opponents may misjudge, however, partner isn't barred over 5♠ either. After all in these auctions, 'bidding one more' is often the right strategy.

 

Bear in mind this is something of a blind auction for partner. From his standpoint, he does not have a clue what the relative strength is between my hand and the 4♠ bidder. The 4♠ bidder might be bidding to make, or be a pure preempt, or something in-between. Similarly, our hand could be bidding to sac or make when we bid an immediate 4N as many are suggesting.

 

I think one of the strongest arguments for passing is letting partner in on our hand type. Partner will have a much better clue about how to proceed after a start of:

 

2♠ - dbl - 4♠ - pass

pass - dbl - pass - 4N

pass - 5x - 5♠ - pass

pass - ?

 

than:

 

2♠ - dbl - 4♠ - 4N

pass - 5x - 5♠ - pass

pass - ?

[Phil]

Obvious 4NT to me.

 

Two days ago I held x xx KJxxx Jxxxx facing the same scenario. I bid 4NT, and got to 5♣, which was a good save; -500 vs 620.

 

However, the big upside was that the bidding continued (over 4NT):

p 5♣ 5♠ p

p x

and we went +200.

Harald, I don't think -500 vs -620 at IMPS is a 'good save'. Was this a pairs event?

[hanp]

Sorry teammates, only would have won 3 IMPs if the opponents had judged correctly.