Welcome to Hell - Take a number

[peachy]

What kind of hand do you expect for the double?

I expect ability to play in a non-spade contract as well as defensive values. The Dbl is often left in with balanced hands that have a trick potential, not in trumps necessarily.

[gnasher]

Phil, you're not really telling us that you passed the double, are you?

 

Usually in this auction we have some awkward semibalanced 9-count and no idea whether we should be pulling. On this occasion we have an eight-card suit headed by three honours, and a singleton in the opponents suit. If this isn't enough to take out the double, what is?

[gnasher]

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

I'm absolutely certain that it wouldn't have been adjusted to -590. -420 is possible, if they cancel partner's double. -590 would involve making me pass the double of 4♠, which is just inconceivable.

[Cascade]

What kind of hand do you expect for the double?

3 suited short in spades?!

You have read to many textbooks.

[jdonn]

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

This seems like one of those lucky times where there is no alternative regardless of the level of player involved. Seriously I don't even know whether you are advocating pass or 6♣ as the other logical alternative.

[JLOGIC]

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

This seems like one of those lucky times where there is no alternative regardless of the level of player involved. Seriously I don't even know whether you are advocating pass or 6♣ as the other logical alternative.

Huh? We have no UI, so we don't need logical alternatives. What am I missing? So far partner might have UI, and we have no UI. Parnter is the one who should have thought if there were logical alternatives to his bid.

[gnasher]

Maybe we have UI but Phil hasn't told us about it.

[jdonn]

Yes it made no sense to me either but Phil was the one who mentioned the issue of alternatives to 5♣ so I was just commenting on that.

[peachy]

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This can never happen. If the Dbl is cancelled, the reult will be whatever tricks they make in 4S undoubled. If the Dbl is not cancelled, there is no way the Dbl will be passed, it would be insane to pass it.

[Phil]

Phil, you're not really telling us that you passed the double, are you?

 

Usually in this auction we have some awkward semibalanced 9-count and no idea whether we should be pulling.  On this occasion we have an eight-card suit headed by three honours, and a singleton in the opponents suit.  If this isn't enough to take out the double, what is?

Yeah I did unfortunately. It was a stressful day, and I thought (especially looking at my hand) the double might have been more penalty-oriented (who really knows these things when playing with a new partner - when you don't have a good idea about their ability?). I also thought that 5♣ x'd would be an awful score, and even if it were TO we could nip 4♠ a trick (we can if you trade the ♦KJ for the ace - yes I know 5♣ makes as well).

 

Partner held Ax K5xx KJxx xxx (Kx was offside). If you guess diamonds you can hold 5♣ to -1. 4♠ was frigid by the way - Not unexpectedly, RHO held a very heavy KQJxxxx Ax ATxx void - I can't imagine him not xing. I have no idea the MPs scores on this.

 

Sometimes my decision making isn't the best in circumstances like this. I don't know if its because:

 

- I feel like I need to play 'beyond' myself

- Outhinking problems

- Masterminding when I don't have to

 

None of these are valid reasons; I'm just telling you that it happens. If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

[gnasher]

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

 

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

[rduran1216]

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

 

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

its an unreasonable dbl.

[cherdanno]

If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

I think it has never happened to me that I pass a takeout double with an 8-card suit including 3 honors. (And a singleton in their suit.)

Did 4SX= versus 4S= cost many matchpoints though? (Or do you think the TD was incompetent enough to allow partner's double in case it worked?)

[Phil]

If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

I think it has never happened to me that I pass a takeout double with an 8-card suit including 3 honors. (And a singleton in their suit.)

Did 4SX= versus 4S= cost many matchpoints though? (Or do you think the TD was incompetent enough to allow partner's double in case it worked?)

The TD wasn't called.

 

I'm not sure I've ever sat for a takeout double with AQJ94 in their suit either.

 

I think everyone has misinterpreted doubles before, although you can make a reasonable argument that this is still a 5♣ call even if partner's double is explicitly penalties at other colors and perhaps if pard had not passed previously.

 

There is a sizable sub-group of players that still plays a double of 4♠ and higher as penalties. While this is a poor, if not misinformed way to play, if pard's hand was something like KQTx, Ax, xxxxx, xx passing looks a lot better obviously.

[the hog]

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

 

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

I don't think he had UI at all. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether they play Namyats or not. I don't have to ask this after the auction.

I think the x was a bit wild, and I would certainly have bid 5C and appealed if the score had been rolled back.

[lmilne]

EIGHT clubs

 

edit: so yeah, what everyone else is saying. just pointing out, we do have eight.

[JLOGIC]

EIGHT clubs

 

edit: so yeah, what everyone else is saying. just pointing out, we do have eight.

Yup, AQJ94

[hanp]

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does.  I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

 

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

I don't think he had UI at all. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether they play Namyats or not. I don't have to ask this after the auction.

I think the x was a bit wild, and I would certainly have bid 5C and appealed if the score had been rolled back.

You are perfectly entitled to huddle as well.

[gnasher]

I don't think he had UI at all. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether they play Namyats or not.

Why should your right to ask mean that asking has no consequences? You're perfectly entitled to ask, but if you're more likely to ask with a good hand than with a bad hand, asking conveys UI.

[the hog]

I don't think he had UI at all. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether they play Namyats or not.

Why should your right to ask mean that asking has no consequences? You're perfectly entitled to ask, but if you're more likely to ask with a good hand than with a bad hand, asking conveys UI.

But that's the point, isn't it? Who says I am more likely to ask with a good hand?

[aguahombre]

But that's the point, isn't it? Who says I am more likely to ask with a good hand?

Me. It is not the same as asking about an alerted bid.

[gnasher]

But that's the point, isn't it? Who says I am more likely to ask with a good hand?

Do you routinely ask this question when you aren't thinking of bidding?

[Hanoi5]

But that's the point, isn't it? Who says I am more likely to ask with a good hand?

Do you routinely ask this question when you aren't thinking of bidding?

I would say it's equivalent to thinking before following a singleton, or is it?

[hanp]

No it's not, asking questions about an unalerted call is not something you do all the time, so when you do it partner can infer that you have something to think about. If Phil had pulled to 5C I think the score should have been corrected to 4S= as I think partner's double is outrageous after the questions. Note that I am not saying that Phil did anything unethical, not at all.

 

It's different when a call is alerted, then it is perfectly fine to make it a habit of asking what it means. This is especially true for opening bids (as opposed to late round constructive auctions, where it will be rare that you want to ask before the auction is over).

[Free]

I completely agree with Han.

 

What's the difference between asking about the 4♠ opening during the auction and after the auction before you have to lead, if you weren't going to bid anyway?