LA with a 20-count

[Poky]

IMP, all love

 

3♥ Dbl 4♥ 4♠*

pass ??

 

* slow

 

♠Axx

♥x

♦AKQxx

♣AKxx

[Cyberyeti]

You have no way of knowing if this is a pass/4♠ decision) or a hand thinking of doing more than just bidding 4♠ so I would have thought that nothing is particularly suggested by the hesitation, so LAs are irrelevant.

[Trinidad]

If partner has ♠KJxxxx ♥xx ♦xx ♣xxx, the slam is odds on. And if he has ♠QJxxx ♥xxx ♦xx ♣xxx, we are still reasonably safe at the five level.

 

Since partner is supposed to have something better than the second hand, Pass is no LA.

 

Rik

[jvage]

I am not sure Pass is a LA (KQJxx, xxx, xx, xxx is enough to make slam almost laydown, it got some play with less), but it seems like a more relevant question may have been what the hesitation suggests. In my opinion it suggests a (sub)minimum, since with all these points and both opponents bidding it seems much less likely that partner considered a stronger action. This is looking a bit like "if it hesitates, shoot it", where the player moved on after a slow 4♠. If the player had succesfully passed one may have argued that bidding on would be an LA and that passing would not be allowed, since this was indicated by the hesitation.

[bluejak]

Why should the 4♠ bid not be on four cards? Whether it is an LA or not depends on your thoughts opposite a quite probable four card suit.

 

A more interesting poll would have been to ask people what they would bid themselves without a hesitation. That is a better method of deciding an LA.

[andy_h]

Even without a hesitation a freebid of 4♠? Must be joking if pass has to be an LA with this 20!

[Trinidad]

Why should the 4♠ bid not be on four cards?  Whether it is an LA or not depends on your thoughts opposite a quite probable four card suit.

"Quite probable" is quite a statement. I think "not impossible" is closer to the truth. Partner bid 4♠ voluntarily.

 

Of course, on a rare occasion 4♠ can be bid on a four card suit. But you still need to have a good reason to bid 4♠ voluntarily. With only a four card suit partner's hand needs to be a lot stronger than if he has five or six.

 

If partner has this strong a hand and only four spades, he had the option to double 4♥ and for some reason didn't choose it. So we can rule out the very balanced hands or hands with lots of heart values. Then we should be able to take 12 tricks. We just don't know yet in what denomination. But partner will tell us with his next bid. (Unless we pass of course, which would be really silly if 4♠ goes down on the 5-1 split, with a cold 6♣/♦ (or even NT) available.)

 

Rik

[bluejak]

What do you do with KQxx xxx JTxx Qx?

[jdonn]

What do you do with KQxx xxx JTxx Qx?

Hope that my partner doesn't pass on the original hand so we don't miss 6♦?

 

I would say pass is not an LA, and I am frequently laughed at for how conservative I am in situations like this. Trying to find one hand on which it's right (which is not your example) wouldn't disprove that anyway, any more than if I was going to find a hand for partner that doesn't make game if he opens a 15-17 1NT and I have Qx xxx xxx AKQJx.

[Cyberyeti]

What do you do with KQxx xxx JTxx Qx?

Make a responsive double normally.

[axman]

IMP, all love

 

3♥ Dbl 4♥ 4♠*

pass ??

 

* slow

 

♠Axx

♥x

♦AKQxx

♣AKxx

when taking a poll it is important to not presume that the agreements in place are the same agreements used by your favorite partnership.

 

The context of all previous action is imperative as well as what agreement exists with respect to possible actions that are available.

 

Of particular interest in this case are the thresholds for 3H and X, for instance.

 

As for other matters, we are not told the duration of slow [compared to normal], nor any mannerisms accompanying the slowness.

[nigel_k]

It's not obvious to me that the 4♠ bidder would make a responsive double with only four spades. They might play that you bid spades with four and double suggests less than four spades and probably both minors. The director would need to ask about that.

 

However it would be hard to persuade me that pass is a logical alternative.

 

On the issue of whether pass is suggested by hesitation, I still have no idea what is the correct approach in a situation where a hesitation may suggest either a minimum or maximum or possibly something else. This thread and the other similar one have not made it any clearer.

 

My instinct is to not adjust in these situations. It's fairly common that people choose actions I consider unusual, especially in competitive bidding situations, when there is clearly no UI. So I'd be reluctant to conclude that UI must have been a factor if the given hand chose a pass here. If they chose to bid, I can't imagine adjusting back to 4S.

[gnasher]

And if he has ♠QJxxx ♥xxx ♦xx ♣xxx, we are still reasonably safe at the five level.

How do you plan to play 5♠ after two rounds of hearts?

[bluejak]

What do you do with KQxx xxx JTxx Qx?

Hope that my partner doesn't pass on the original hand so we don't miss 6♦?

 

I would say pass is not an LA, and I am frequently laughed at for how conservative I am in situations like this. Trying to find one hand on which it's right (which is not your example) wouldn't disprove that anyway, any more than if I was going to find a hand for partner that doesn't make game if he opens a 15-17 1NT and I have Qx xxx xxx AKQJx.

Please explain? Are you trying to tell me that it is macho to go off in 6♠ with 6♦ cold?

 

My hand is nothing to do with whether pass is an LA, which it is not. I did not say so, I did not mean it. I just think that the presumptions of several posters that 4♠ shows five cards will lead to a lot of unnecessary minus scores.

[Jlall]

Please explain? Are you trying to tell me that it is macho to go off in 6♠ with 6♦ cold?

Umm no, he will bid 5N and partner will bid 6D. Just bidding 6S with this hand would be truly silly, but still probably have a higher expectation than passing though.

[Trinidad]

Removed

 

Rik

[bluejak]

And if he plays 5NT as the Grand Slam Force?

 

I think the problem with this hand is simple: people are saying "How would I bid this hand playing with my favourite partner and using our favourite methods?"

 

For the average player, after hearts is doubled for takeout, the expectation of spades is very high indeed, and a majority of people would bid spades on a four card suit. Furthermore, I would expect that for the average player, at least 50% would play the second double as penalties, and of those who play it as responsive, quite a few would deny four spades.

 

So while I do not suggest nor did I suggest passing was an LA, with a strange partner it would actually be a better bet than people think: while no doubt it is a good hand for slam, the danger of getting a negative through a misunderstanding is reasonable.

 

Of course, when ruling we ask questions. Probably when the hand occurred this hand did go on, and it would be interesting to know what he bid, and what his partnership understandings were. But the replies that are based on partner automatically having five spades for his 4♠ are, in my view, either overly optimistic, naive, or based too much on the pollees own ideas of how to play this sequence.

[jdonn]

And if he plays 5NT as the Grand Slam Force?

lol?

 

Anyway I believe you if you say you never tried to claim passing in an LA, you would just have to pardon some for thinking you did when you posed an example hand that seemed designed to show you could reach 6♠ going down if you didn't pass.

 

Personally I believe very strongly that blasting either 6♦ or 6♠ right now, if that's what you feel you have to do since you have no agreements and can't trust partner, has a much higher expectation than passing. After all, I think strange partners, beginners, and people who would think 5NT is grand slam force here are also not as aggressive to bid 4♠. (Bidding very aggressively in the situation partner was in is very much an 'expert' thing to do.)

[ahydra]

I would play 3♥-X-4♥-X as penalties, and would expect at least 5 spades for the 4♠ bid. There can't be many points left in the pack for partner to have (so the hesitation seems to suggest a debate between pass and 4♠), but there's no indication of which of the three hands is strongest. Given the singleton in hearts and every possibility partner holds the ♣Q, I'd probably bid 4NT and would never pass.

 

If 4♠ could be four cards then it's slightly less clear what to do but I still don't think pass is a viable option. With all that heart bidding, the odds are strongly in favour of 5+ spades with partner.

 

Just my 2p.

 

ahydra

[bluejak]

I would play 3♥-X-4♥-X as penalties, and would expect at least 5 spades for the 4♠ bid.

Ok.

 

You hold

 

QJxx

x

Kxxx

KJxx

 

(3♥) dbl (4♥)

 

Your call?

[ahydra]

Ok.

 

You hold

 

QJxx

x

Kxxx

KJxx

 

(3♥) dbl (4♥)

 

Your call?

 

Wow you really insist on this "doubling is going to be a 4-card suit" thing :)

 

Having given this a lot of thought I'd bid 4♠. However...

 

Doubling will probably net 300 and could result in down 3 when partner holds a bit more than a minimum eg Axxx A QJxxx Axx (playing opener for no more than 7 hearts). If the ♠A/K is missing it's likely to be offside here, and as a result if partner has a dodgy minimum hand then 4♠ may well go down. If partner has a huge hand with a suit he probably planned to remove it anyway.

 

By "expect 5 spades" I mean that I would play partner for 5 spades as it's highly likely on the auction. If partner bid 4♠ on the above I certainly wouldn't complain.

 

ahydra