Another "bid after the hitch"

[Phil]

K, K8xx JT, KQTxxx

 

All vul, Swiss

 

1♣ - (1♠) - pass - (2♦)

pass - (3♦) - dbl - (pass)

?

 

Time stood still as the red card hit the table.

 

And you?

[jjbrr]

looks like penalty to me

[wyman]

looks like penalty to me

me too

[rogerclee]

Partner has a good hand that was gonna pass 1Sx. The 3 level is pretty inconvenient, in that with something like KQTxx Axx xx Axx you can't really do anything except double, so to call this double "penalty" would not be telling the whole story.

[Jlall]

If partner hesitates that is not authorized information.

[bluecalm]

Imo it's trap in ♠ t/o in ♦.

I don't like my aceless hand with xx of diamonds thus I bid 4♣. 5♣ is an alternative.

[wyman]

Agree that he (no doubt) has spades. But I don't think this is t/o of diamonds. I don't think he's bringing hearts into the picture here. I think he has spades and a semi-balanced defensive hand, maybe 5=3=3=2.

[hrothgar]

3N

 

I don't think that it can be natural

(So I might as well arbitrarily decide that it obviously shows this hand)

[bluecalm]

Agree that he (no doubt) has spades. But I don't think this is t/o of diamonds. I don't think he's bringing hearts into the picture here. I think he has spades and a semi-balanced defensive hand, maybe 5=3=3=2.

 

I think doubling with this kind of hand is beyond awful unless your opponents are big time droolers.

[gordontd]

If partner hesitates that is not authorized information.

Time stood still as the red card hit the table.

Sounds like it was RHO who hesitated.

[Cascade]

I don't play this double as penalties after they bid and raise.

 

So I have an easy 3♥ and see what partner does next.

[gnasher]

If it was partner who hesitated, you can't take this out unless you explicitly play it as for takeout, ie suggesting shortage in diamonds. Does anyone really play that?

[wyman]

Agree that he (no doubt) has spades. But I don't think this is t/o of diamonds. I don't think he's bringing hearts into the picture here. I think he has spades and a semi-balanced defensive hand, maybe 5=3=3=2.

 

I think doubling with this kind of hand is beyond awful unless your opponents are big time droolers.

That may well be. What shapes do you think are possible for X'er? Are you thinking 5=4=1=3?

 

Is there an easy way to decide when to trap pass vs neg X with these hands? I wouldn't think my partner had this because he failed to X at his first call.

 

[And, you have the SK and the 1S overcall was vulnerable, so if suit quality is the criteria for distinguishing here, maybe the only reasonable hand for partner given this is like

AJxxx/Jxxx/x/Axx ?]

 

Hmm. I dunno. Would prefer not trapping with this hand, though, I think. I'd rather get hearts out there. Maybe I'm way off though.

[Dirk Kuijt]

I think doubling with this kind of hand is beyond awful unless your opponents are big time droolers.

 

OK, that is really ROFL.

[Phil]

I thought I remember reading on here that this double reveals a penalty in spades, but with something like Hxx of diamonds. He is truly fixed over 3♦.

 

This auction was new to this partnership. He held A8xxxx AQ xx Jxx, but I passed the x because of the tank (would you pull an in-tempo x? I was planning on it). 3Dx easily made. Dummy held QJ9xx xxx Kxxx x (wow). By the way, I'm not a fan with trapping with his hand - are you?

 

However, we actually gained 9 - our teammates also played 3D x'd played from the short side. Opening leader led the A♠ crashing, and tried to get trumps promoted - so they returned +1070.

[aguahombre]

funny story. Not convinced partner has anything in diamonds, though.

 

Also not a fan of the trap pass with that, because I know something will go wrong. Like a bullox (sp) I would try 2N. Not perfect, obviously; but......

 

P.s., screw the hitch. Of course there will be a problem. I assume partner took the time to make the proper call. What I do about it is bid 4C.

[Free]

This is a simple 3♥ imo. Partner now shows he had a trap pass in ♠, and he doesn't have enough to bid 3NT on his own. Since I don't have a stopper, I'll just bid my suit as low as possible... He can have a problem if he has ♦ as well obviously, but that will be too rare imo. Oh well, you can't win them all. :)

[hanp]

I think you had a clear pass Phil.

 

I also think that partner had a clear pass of 1S. The hand is really not good for playing NT.

 

Finally I think that partner had a pass of 3D. Partner will pass almost always, and you don't have much reason to think that 3D is going down.

[Fluffy]

double shows nothign about diamonds, and we don't really wanna play in that spot, althou ♠K stiff looks promising, I agree with phil that I'd pull without the UI. But the hand isn't clear enough to do so with an UI.

[bluecalm]

That may well be. What shapes do you think are possible for X'er? Are you thinking 5=4=1=3?

 

While this is possible I doubt we can ever convince partner we have 4♥ after passing 1♠. I am thinking more of 5-3-xx-3 or 5-2-xx-4 or even 5-3-1-4. Those hands may be good enough to want to compete but they lack good bid (despite x that is).

 

I thought I remember reading on here that this double reveals a penalty in spades, but with something like Hxx of diamonds. He is truly fixed over 3♦.

 

Yes but "fixed" is not a good word. Why would you want to bid anything with this kind of hand ? They bid your suits, be happy and pass. WTP ?

 

A8xxxx AQ xx Jxx

 

Normal double. If you play penalty as some people suggest here you would be "fixed" with this hand while 4♣ is perfect spot and it's easy to imagine 5♣ being right if your hand were a bit better.

 

This is a simple 3♥ imo. Partner now shows he had a trap pass in ♠, and he doesn't have enough to bid 3NT on his own. Since I don't have a stopper, I'll just bid my suit as low as possible...

 

If he doesn't have enough to bid 3NT on his own I don't see how our improve his chances. Why hide 6card ♣ suit ?

 

OK, that is really ROFL.

 

Why ? This is my honest opinion. If you play against semi reasonable players you won't collect much by doubling their 3♦ there but you will be "fixed" with hands like OP had or any kind of 5-3-1-4 when you make 11-12tricks in ♣ and they are allowed to play 3♦ making.

[whereagles]

I actually have rules as how to interpret this double, which is "take-out of diamonds, penalty of spades", so I would act accordingly, hitch or no hitch.

[OleBerg]

If it was partner who hesitated, you can't take this out unless you explicitly play it as for takeout, ie suggesting shortage in diamonds. Does anyone really play that?

Robson and Segal did when they wrote "Partnership bidding in bridge".

[ggwhiz]

If it was partner who hesitated, you can't take this out unless you explicitly play it as for takeout, ie suggesting shortage in diamonds. Does anyone really play that?

 

 

Robson and Segal did when they wrote "Partnership bidding in bridge".

 

True but I can't believe a slow double has any firm agreement.

 

A pair once pulled such a double 3 times in one session and got the same Director who finally walked around the table and told the non-offending side to "hit it and lead trumps".

[rogerclee]

I agree with Han that partner should have just passed 3D. No diamond stopper, intermediate hand, no fit, etc; people should just let these 10-11 counts with no fit and no stopper go.

[bluecalm]

I agree with Han that partner should have just passed 3D. No diamond stopper, intermediate hand, no fit, etc; people should just let these 10-11 counts with no fit and no stopper go.

 

How is this no fit ?

Partner on average has 1♠, max 4♥ more likely 2♦ than 3♦ which gives him 5-6-7♣ (most of the time 6). He can also have 15hcp or something.

 

I prefer 4♣ than passing with that.