Another trap pass!

[PhantomSac]

Qxx KQ9x T9xxx A

 

r/r imps.

 

You open 1D precision style, 1S on left, 2C from pard (F1), 2S on right, p p X p ?

 

You know your RHO is fairly sound, and your LHO is fairly unsound. First board of a swiss match.

[jjbrr]

I'm a chicken. 3♦

[Fluffy]

I'm a dog and also bid 3♦

[gnasher]

It's tempting to pass, but I'm too scared of partner leading a diamond away from an honour. That could well give declarer his eighth trick.

 

I bid 2NT, scrambling. Partner is allowed to have four hearts, so there's no harm in admitting to four myself. Also, if partner is about to drive game it makes sure of rightsiding it.

[OleBerg]

Pass wouldn't occur to me.

 

Gnashers 2NT seems right.

[PhantomSac]

I'm usually down with 2N scrambling, but would have assumed it to be natural here.

[pooltuna]

It's tempting to pass, but I'm too scared of partner leading a diamond away from an honour. That could well give declarer his eighth trick.

 

I bid 2NT, scrambling. Partner is allowed to have four hearts, so there's no harm in admitting to four myself. Also, if partner is about to drive game it makes sure of rightsiding it.

Why is partner allowed to have 4♥ IIRC didn't the auction proceed 1♦ (1♠) 2♣? If he made no negative X with 4♥ then he damn well better be ready and strong enough to bid them at the 3 level

[whereagles]

I'm no chicken. Pass.

 

This can be a misfit and honors seem to be badly placed. Pard is likely to have something like 2335 or 3325 and some extras (pard isn't going to bid 2♣ with hearts unless he's like 14 hcp or so).

 

Obviously we're gonna lose the match if this happens to make, but you're also not gonna win matches by being afraid to do what you think it's right.

 

DISCLAIMER: what I think it's right might not be what in fact IS right :)

[jdonn]

I like the 2NT scrambling suggestion, and am not really sure why it should be natural on this auction in particular.

[kfay]

Maybe I'm crazy but pass didn't even occur to me. I bid 3♦.

[Fluffy]

Maybe I'm crazy but pass didn't even occur to me. I bid 3♦.

neither to me, but hey, its in the thread title ;)

[Rodney26]

I'm usually down with 2N scrambling, but would have assumed it to be natural here.

I guess that as a working rule I'd presume 2NT is scrambling anytime partner could have passed a double and chose to bid 2NT instead. Not that 2NT can't be right, but it has to be a small subset of hands where it is. I'd be curious to hear why you think this specific situation would fall into that subset. Do you think 2NT last round would have been takeout where pass was neutral and maybe a balanced minimum with a spade stopper and nothing else to say?

 

Not a Precision player, but a couple things concern me. The first is whether partner is going to be more inclined to bid 2♣ rather than a value bid of 2NT the first time, since you might have a club fit far more frequently than when you open 1♦ in standard (this also might imply partner's 2NT over 2♠ would have been natural(?)). The other is partner's style; does partner prefer to handle x Jxxx KQ KQT8xx by starting with x or by first bidding where he lives via 2♣ and then competing? I'd really like to be in hearts opposite that, and I don't think partner can pull 3♦.

 

Clubs might be our best strain when partner has good diamonds and shortness in spades. I want to go back and open 1♥ if I have to open these weak suckers, but that's probably Precision anathema. I don't play the system so I'm in no position to judge whether you can open a 4 bagger every so often and survive the consequences (hopefully thrive :) ).

[655321]

Another 3♦ without considering pass here.

[rogerclee]

I wouldn't even pass if I opened a standard (usually 4+) 1D. Passing after a precision 1D is sickkkk.

[Rodney26]

Also, do you have a agreement what x is over 2s by opener? 4 hearts is probably most sensible playing Precision where you're limited. That helps clarify partner's double.

 

(It also bars him from doing so now that I think about it.)

[Free]

I'm usually down with 2N scrambling, but would have assumed it to be natural here.

Why would you assume natural in this situation? Because overcaller is on your left? (just wondering - sounds very direct)

 

I'd consider 2NT scrambling, nicely showing my hand. I also think it's more frequent, so probably better use.

[mikegill]

I think pass has more merit than people are giving it credit for. Partner should not be doubling with much extra shape since, hey, we might pass. He certainly shouldn't have 7 clubs, we know he has <4 hearts. 4 diamonds is likely out (even over precision ♦, I would think he would have to bid with that), and honestly I might not double with 1336 shape either, since we are very likely to have an 8+ fit in a minor. Those together means they are unlikely to have 9 spades. 2236, 2326, 2335 all seem normal for partner. If so, we could easily have no game our way (spades insufficiently stopped for NT) and even no plus score our way, since we have no guarantee of finding a good fit. Even if they do have 9 spades, we still might not have a game our way, and we still might beat 2♠ with top tricks and maybe a club ruff or two.

 

All that being said, I doubt I would have worked any of this out ATT and I would bid a scrambling 2N (or 3♦ if 2N didn't occur to me).

[dake50]

Did partner's double ask me to consider a penalty bonanza: 500 vs. partial here?

I'll try that.

[gnasher]

I think pass has more merit than people are giving it credit for. Partner should not be doubling with much extra shape since, hey, we might pass. He certainly shouldn't have 7 clubs, we know he has <4 hearts. 4 diamonds is likely out (even over precision ♦, I would think he would have to bid with that), and honestly I might not double with 1336 shape either, since we are very likely to have an 8+ fit in a minor. Those together means they are unlikely to have 9 spades. 2236, 2326, 2335 all seem normal for partner. If so, we could easily have no game our way (spades insufficiently stopped for NT) and even no plus score our way, since we have no guarantee of finding a good fit. Even if they do have 9 spades, we still might not have a game our way, and we still might beat 2♠ with top tricks and maybe a club ruff or two.

I started thinking on those lines, but changed my mind when I constructed some hands.

 

If partner is minimum, he's likely to be 2335. With six clubs and a non-game force, he'd usually bid 3♣.

 

The first hand I thought of was xx Axx Qxx KQxxx. That gives declarer an easy 7 tricks, with lots of chances for an eighth - a doubleton diamond in dummy, ♦HJx in dummy, a diamond lead from the queen, a top club lead causing our honours to crash, and possibly even a long card in clubs or hearts.

[jdonn]

Why can't partner have 4 hearts? He could definitely bid this way with 4 hearts, a negative double becomes less automatic the better your hand becomes, and our heart holding also leaves the possibility that if he has 4 hearts they are bad so he would be more likely to start 2♣ with longer clubs.

[Echognome]

Another vote for 2NT scrambling. It's a clear meaning in one of my partnerships and would probably get a puzzled look in my other one where we play a lot more natural bidding. 2NT natural isn't the worst thing in the world here either though.

[aguahombre]

Why can't partner have 4 hearts? He could definitely bid this way with 4 hearts, a negative double becomes less automatic the better your hand becomes, and our heart holding also leaves the possibility that if he has 4 hearts they are bad so he would be more likely to start 2♣ with longer clubs.

I really got confused by this. Am I missing a clue from the Precision context?

 

Partner with 4 hearts, longer clubs and merely f1 strength would neg double.

With 4 hearts, longer clubs and more strength, she would bid clubs, then hearts --suit quality not particularly a factor.

 

Therefore Partner does not have 4 hearts and we are back to the suggested 2 3 3 5, which leads to a 3D bid now. 2NT would be a scramble, but this hand -- in light of the double, does not want to use it. Here, the 2NT scramble should be content to play 2NT if partner elects to pass it.

[gnasher]

I don't think partner has to bid 3♥ now with every 2425 game-force. It's reasonable to double, planning to bid 3♥ on the next round (which is, to me, obviously forcing).

 

That has two advantages: he can find out more about our hand, and it allows us to pass the double if that's what we want to do.

[whereagles]

If pard bids 2♣ with 4 side hearts, he'd better have in mind what to do if it comes round to him in 3 or 4♠.........

[jdonn]

Yes if partner is 3415 or 2425 he might start 2♣ then double on the next round. In fact with those shapes if I didn't start with double I would definitely double on the next round.