Are you an operator?

[Siegmund]

Regional open pairs game. You are a pro playing with a client, and you think you're having a nicely-above-average session though perhaps not good enough to win. Favorable vulnerability, 1NT (15-17) - pass - pass to you.

 

♠AK72

♥A53

♦QJ7

♣T73

 

Do you take any action? (Or, perhaps, I should say, what caliber of gun would have to be put to your head to make you take action)? Would your answer be the same in a normal partnership vs. a pro-client situation?

[gwnn]

I remember watching this MediCopter 117 episode where they found two people who fell from a cliff; one who was nearly dying and the other dude with minor wounds on his knees. They mixed up the injections and the minor wound guy almost died. Don't operate on healthy people!

 

It's hard for me to imagine being paid to play bridge with someone, but if I was, I'd try to treat my partner with respect. I'm sure I'd cater to his most common misbids but not to the point of thinking of acting with a 4333 over 1NT-p-p-?

[Phil]

I think taking action is silly. The vulnerability is good for extracting 100's if dummy comes down broke.

 

We have the better hand so we can assume that we (the PRO) will be making most of the critical decisions on defense. Partner's lead shouldn't scuttle the defense, and I expect to defend better than others.

 

Is our partner so lousy that we have to have them turning the dummy whenever its remotely attractive? I doubt it if we are in contention for a regional pairs win.

[Siegmund]

No, your partner is one of the better non-life-masters (and most diligent book readers) in the room; she did her part to help you get to the low 60s.

[robertb]

Absent some clear agreements, which you don't mention having, I would pass.

 

I don't think that bidding is totally bizarre; I want to bid on the hand; it's just that I don't think I want to do it without being certain that partner thinks I might have what I do have.

 

If I were playing that a double in balancing seat showed an equivalent hand, then I'd double. Partner can pass on her good hands, or bid a suit on her bad ones. There's merit in that agreement. But I don't think partner is going to be on the same page. If I double, I think partner is going to expect me to have a better hand.

 

Showing spades or the majors both seem to me like the sorts of bids that lose a little more often than they win, which presumably makes them unattractive when playing with a client when you're already having a decent game.

 

But maybe not. Did you bid?

[Apollo81]

If I do anything other than pass, odds are partner's going to become declarer - the one thing I don't want.

[Phil]

One more thing - clients who can fog a mirror might actually notice the fact that you are playing 2♠ on a 4-2 fit and not be pleased.

 

By the way if you are playing penalty doubles, that may be an option but I assumed from the title this isn't what you had in mind.

[bid_em_up]

At this vul., I'll risk a double.

[aguahombre]

You want to keep this client? Doubling is a judgement thing if it suggests what you hold. Anything else (operating) is not a good idea.

[mikeh]

I have only played pro as part of an partnership on a client-sponsored team, so I don't know how to play mps with a client.

 

I don't know any good players who use a penalty double in balancing seat after a strong notrump, but if we did, then I could toss the coin and go for a top/bottom outcome by doubling and praying.

 

Otherwise, any action other than pass seems to me to have a far higher expectation of turning an average-plus into a zero than it does of turning an average-plus into a top.

 

I assume average plus from defending because I assume that I am a better defender than the field, and I have enough hcp here that I will probably be able to play a role in directing the defence even after partner's lead.

 

Put another way, I like my chances as defender better than as dummy, and the notion of overcalling in my 4 card suit makes me ill.

 

I would pass in all my partnerships. No single event is enough to make me breach partnership discipline by the amount required to explain any other action (note: I don't play penalty doubles in this situation with anyone...and would never agree to)

[Hanoi5]

A penalty Double is the only logical option to Pass. If that is in my arsenal I might try it, though it could certainly backfire...

[whereagles]

Action seems risky and needless. Risky for the obvious reasons: no guarantee pard has cards + flat shape. Needless because any lead pard makes is good for us.

[Siegmund]

I think action is mighty strange here too.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=st63h9762dkt84cq8&w=sq5hjt4d532cj9542&e=sak72ha53dqj7ct73&s=sj984hkq8da96cak6]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

The pro (whom I had never met before) tried 2♠. I can see why he wouldn't double and risk letting partner become declarer; but even at favorable vulnerability I found it a mighty strange action. I was just curious if anyone might have an insight into his thought process...

 

I was the 1NT bidder, and unfortunately started with ♥K, but after that start we got the maximum possible (down 2). The funny part is that I consciously said to myself "this guy knows what he is doing, we can trust him to have 6 spades rather than be 5332" as I planned the defence.

 

He was unhappy with the dummy he bought, and unhappy to be off two against a partscore, but he got an 80% on the board for beating 120.

[gwnn]

I don't think balancing on 5332 (with a good suit) is bad, partner is going to lead something idiotic as always and we are going to get a bad score.

[Rodney26]

I think action is mighty strange here too.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=st63h9762dkt84cq8&w=sq5hjt4d532cj9542&e=sak72ha53dqj7ct73&s=sj984hkq8da96cak6]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

The pro (whom I had never met before) tried 2♠. I can see why he wouldn't double and risk letting partner become declarer; but even at favorable vulnerability I found it a mighty strange action. I was just curious if anyone might have an insight into his thought process...

 

I was the 1NT bidder, and unfortunately started with ♥K, but after that start we got the maximum possible (down 2). The funny part is that I consciously said to myself "this guy knows what he is doing, we can trust him to have 6 spades rather than be 5332" as I planned the defence.

 

He was unhappy with the dummy he bought, and unhappy to be off two against a partscore, but he got an 80% on the board for beating 120.

To me, everything about the pro's hand says pass. Late in a matchpoint game, he just might be trying for a swing. He might turn -120 into -110 if responder competes via Leb to a 5 card minor (and now partner makes the right lead).

 

The other thought is with a good hand lying here in a bad position (in front of the 1NT opener), he chalks up the idea of ever beating 1NT and getting his +100. With a very weak 4333, maybe +100 is available since partner figures to have well located strength. He knows on this one if his partner slips just one trick, 120 will be bad. So, he takes his shot at scrambling 6 tricks in spades and that you won't double such a skilled professional.

 

Personally, I never balance on any 4333 hands, but will admit I let a similar one go last night at all nil with my conservative partner that turned out to be a terrible board (the field was not passing his hand).