gnasher Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=saqhxxxdqxxxckjxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♦pass 1♠ pass 2♠[/hv]You are South, sitting over the opener. Would you act? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 eww no :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Out of respect for the skills of gnasher I won't lol this, other than the un-subtle suggestion I just made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louisg Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 If this is from the deal that I think it is, the hand in question held ♥Qxx. Edit: It might also be worth mentioning that the partnership in question uses a 2NT response to double here as "two places to play". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I'd need to be on drugs to consider bidding here... The opps are in an unlimited auction. We have no known or even inferred fit. We have some defence...most of our cards are in their suits. I know that this is a bidder's game, and maybe we are being robbed blind here. But there have to be limits to our willingness to risk -2000 against a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I pass, I don't like our chances of making much of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I know that this is a bidder's game, and maybe we are being robbed blind here. But there have to be limits to our willingness to risk -2000 against a game. And I thought I was pessimistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted July 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Blx. LouisG is quite right. The hand was actually AQ,Qxx,Qxxx,KJxx. Does that make a difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Blx. LouisG is quite right. The hand was actually AQ,Qxx,Qxxx,KJxx. Does that make a difference? Even more offensive power!No it doesn't make a difference to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Blx. LouisG is quite right. The hand was actually AQ,Qxx,Qxxx,KJxx. Does that make a difference? Sure it makes doubling a little less bad. But I still think it's bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Ok, now it's 1700 against their partial... no, still not very attractive :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 The HQ definitely increases our game potential, but that potential still seems quite low. I would say that doubling is trying to find a double partial swing, which is fine, but with such defensive values and 4 of the suit they opened, I think even that is not very likely. Given the obvious risk of coming in (going for a number), or the less obvious risk (turning a plus on defense into a minus), I can't see bidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louisg Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 As long as I'm helping to set the record straight here, it might also be relevant that the 1♦ opening was in 3rd seat. Not sure if that makes bidding more attractive (since both opps are at least somewhat limited), but it seems worth mentioning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 I have a perfect pre-balancing bid for this type of hand. In direct seat, right after a bid that might be the last bid by the opponents, I pass with hands like this. That shows interest in partner making an intelligent call if he has one. It is sort of like an optional/cooperative double, blended with a "forcing pass." It is a "optional/cooperative pass." Or, an "O.C.P." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 You are South, sitting over the opener. Would you act? Yes. I'd act bored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 As long as I'm helping to set the record straight here, it might also be relevant that the 1♦ opening was in 3rd seat. Not sure if that makes bidding more attractive (since both opps are at least somewhat limited), but it seems worth mentioning.It does make a difference... the opps are no longer unlimited, as appeared from the OP conditions of contest. Now, there is really no risk of going for a huge number, but 800 is still possible, and game virtually impossible our way, given that partner is also a passed hand. I would still pass, and think it entirely normal. But the change in dealer identity makes me see a bid as fractionally better than the god-awful call I had earlier seen it as being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 Easy pass for me. Seen the corrections (♥Q and dealer). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 If this is from the deal that I think it is, the hand in question held ♥Qxx. Edit: It might also be worth mentioning that the partnership in question uses a 2NT response to double here as "two places to play". Just out of curiosity. Are the two places to play "The Twilight Zone" and a mental institution? Really, this is a clear pass. If something else would have worked, that is the way it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 My pass suggests one place to play. Even devout LAW advocates might picture some subtractors here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Even with the 14count, I can't find a good reason to act - it has too many downsides. I'm a passer too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
louisg Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 If this is from the deal that I think it is, the hand in question held ♥Qxx. Edit: It might also be worth mentioning that the partnership in question uses a 2NT response to double here as "two places to play". Just out of curiosity. Are the two places to play "The Twilight Zone" and a mental institution? Really, this is a clear pass. If something else would have worked, that is the way it goes.Why the sarcasm Art? Whatever you may think of the merits of doubling with the particular hand in question, it is undoubtably true that doubling in this auction with 2=3=4=4 distribution is more attractive when you know that you can find your longest combined fit when partner has 4 hearts and a 4 card minor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFA Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 With the corrections (♥Q + 3rd hand opening), this is a gruesome problem. I admire double, but I just can't do it. Just about any improvement, and I'm there. Don't understand the semi-LOLs in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.