mike777 Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 [hv=d=n&v=n&w=sq754hq3dkq85ckq6&e=sa8h9874dt742cat8]266|100|Scoring: MP(3H)=P=P=XP=P=P[/hv] (3H)=P=P=XP=P=P NORTH MADE 3HX. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDean Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I think West's double is close. I would pass, but I expect I am in the minority. I disagree with East's pass, I would have bid 4♦. Making is a bit unlucky, but I think +100 instead of +130/150 is reasonably likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 This is a completely routine auction for me... 1000 % agree with both actions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 west's action is a wtp to me, would act even with a king less. pass decision is right in my views althou a somehow closer still no alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 This is a completely routine auction for me... 1000 % agree with both actions this deal up made me wonder if top players such as yourself pull these auctions often or sit. ty for your response. I will do a fuller report after a few more responses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDean Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 west's action is a wtp to me, would act even with a king less. pass decision is right in my views althou a somehow closer still no alternative.You would really double with ♠ Q754 ♥ Q3 ♦ Q852 ♣ KQ6 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Really normal actions by both hands, I would also duplicate this auction at IMPs with less confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I think the actions are so close that it's hard to be objective knowing the result. I can definitely believe I would duplicate both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Double. Mike Lawrence recommends doubling 3H with QT87 3 A987 KJ42 in the balancing seat. He also recommends doubling 3S with 83 KQ87 942 AQJ5. 4D. I use Mel Colchamiro's Rule of 9 which says... Add # of cards in opponent's suitAdd # of honor cards (including ten) in opponent's suitAdd level of contract If 9 or more, passIf 8 or less, bid something So 4 + 0 + 3 = 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Double. Mike Lawrence recommends doubling 3H with QT87 3 A987 KJ42 in the balancing seat. He also recommends doubling 3S with 83 KQ87 942 AQJ5. 4D. I use Mel Colchamiro's Rule of 9 which says... Add # of cards in opponent's suitAdd # of honor cards (including ten) in opponent's suitAdd level of contract If 9 or more, passIf 8 or less, bid something So 4 + 0 + 3 = 7. interesting ty for post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I think the actions are so close that it's hard to be objective knowing the result. I can definitely believe I would duplicate both. What really? Did you see that it was matchpoints? I honestly can't imagine you doing anything else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Add # of cards in opponent's suitAdd # of honor cards (including ten) in opponent's suitAdd level of contract If 9 or more, passIf 8 or less, bid something I think this rule needs to be tempered with some judgement, Axx KJx xxx xxxx gives 3 + 2 + 3 = 8, but taking out the double would be strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Also I would double routinely in 4th seat on xxxx, x, xxxx, xxxx, you know partner has the world's biggest penalty double as he has a 16+ count and hasn't bid. It's more dangerous if you have a bit more and aren't sure he has a hand, but the shorter I am in the suit opened, the more I'm inclined to find the double, and have got good results many times finding this double on 8 or 9 counts with a stiff/void heart. I agree with both actions at the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 [hv=d=n&v=n&w=sq754hq3dkq85ckq6&e=sa8h9874dt742cat8]266|100|Scoring: MP(3H)=P=P=XP=P=P[/hv] (3H)=P=P=XP=P=P NORTH MADE 3HX. East or West, whoever forgot to make a timely alms payment to the BG :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I didn't see it was matchpoints. I was thinking I would pass the double as east at IMPs but I wouldn't double as west. At matchpoints I think 3HX is a fine spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
straube Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 Add # of cards in opponent's suitAdd # of honor cards (including ten) in opponent's suitAdd level of contract If 9 or more, passIf 8 or less, bid something I think this rule needs to be tempered with some judgement, Axx KJx xxx xxxx gives 3 + 2 + 3 = 8, but taking out the double would be strange. I agree with you about using your own judgment. I still think his rule is useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 I think the actions are so close that it's hard to be objective knowing the result. I can definitely believe I would duplicate both. What really? Did you see that it was matchpoints? I honestly can't imagine you doing anything else Actually no I didn't lol. This is probably minority to say btw, but I'm closer to passing with west than not-passing the double with east. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 This is probably minority to say btw, but I'm closer to passing with west than not-passing the double with east. I agree with that. West is aceless and balanced, and ♥Qx is bad for both offence and defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I join the loud chorus that x and pass are 1000% at mps. At imps I still had passed a double- but I had not doubled to begin with... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 Hi, I am not 100% sure, I would have made the reopening X with thewest hand, espesially given Qx in hearts, but I am 100% against it.If the X is combatible with your agreed partnership style, than I would say "***** happens". I think passing it out is more or less clear. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I think the actions are so close that it's hard to be objective knowing the result. I can definitely believe I would duplicate both. What really? Did you see that it was matchpoints? I honestly can't imagine you doing anything else Actually no I didn't lol. This is probably minority to say btw, but I'm closer to passing with west than not-passing the double with east. I would expect that to be completely mainstream heh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 west's action is a wtp to me, would act even with a king less. pass decision is right in my views althou a somehow closer still no alternative.You would really double with ♠ Q754 ♥ Q3 ♦ Q852 ♣ KQ6 ? Yes that's what I was saying, I like live seat acting to be sounder than mosts, I might pass some minimum opening strenght hands with a decent suit. The style pays when you have slams (bidding already shows a good hand), althou hurts on more common situations. 1 Month ago I would think ♥Qx and ♥xx were exactly the same, but reading the forums is maybe changing my way of thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 west's action is a wtp to me, would act even with a king less. pass decision is right in my views althou a somehow closer still no alternative.You would really double with ♠ Q754 ♥ Q3 ♦ Q852 ♣ KQ6 ? Yes that's what I was saying, I like live seat acting to be sounder than mosts, I might pass some minimum opening strenght hands with a decent suit. The style pays when you have slams (bidding already shows a good hand), althou hurts on more common situations. 1 Month ago I would think ♥Qx and ♥xx were exactly the same, but reading the forums is maybe changing my way of thinking. How can Qx and xx be the same? If partner is bidding 3N or passing the HQ is much better than xx. I agree with downgrading Qx obviously since it is worse than any other Q we can have, but giving it a value of 0 is really extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I was talking about ♠xxxx ♥Qx vs ♠Qxxx ♥xx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 I was talking about ♠xxxx ♥Qx vs ♠Qxxx ♥xx ah i understand now, sorry 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.