Two balancing problems

[paulg]

Two problems, similar in that they are at unfavourable vulnerability playing against international opposition.

 

Too dangerous to bid or too dangerous to pass?

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sakxhakxdkqjct8xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1NT) Pass (2♥) Pass

(2♠) Pass (Pass) ?

 

1NT=14-16. Unfortunately an initial double would have shown hearts.

[/hv]

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sakxhakxdkqjct8xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1NT) Pass (2♥) Pass

(2♠) Pass (Pass) ?

 

1NT=14-16. Unfortunately an initial double would have shown hearts.

[/hv]

[JLOGIC]

Definitely pass on the first one.

 

Definitely balance on the second one... I'm not sure if X or 3H is right, but I'd go with 3H.

[Free]

Pass on the first is pretty obvious imo, what do we want to accomplish by bidding?

 

The second one is more difficult imo, I could Dbl because I have 2 tricks, but perhaps 3♥ is better. Pass is pretty lame, but could work better than the alternatives...

[hanp]

I could Dbl because I have 4 spades and 3 clubs, but perhaps 3♥ is better.

FYP

[Free]

I could Dbl because I have 4 spades and 3 clubs, but perhaps 3♥ is better.

FYP

<_< perhaps you can put that in your signature :P

[hanp]

You know that FYP stands for Fixed Your Post right?

 

By the way, I like my current signature very much.

[Free]

You know that FYP stands for Fixed Your Post right?

 

By the way, I like my current signature very much.

I always thought FYP means "For Your Pleasure", which was quite strange in the context...

 

Ok, back to topic I guess.

[dake50]

1st. Add a or 16+ case with Dbl showing hearts.

2nd. Immediate Dbl (over 2N) asks M-pick (prefer H if equal); 3C if no M.

Delayed Dbl (over 3D) asks pick Major --no inference to length/strength.

 

Of course a bid indicates my hand improves with a fit. Got fit, partner?

[Fluffy]

I'd double on first hand, this is a powerhouse where we don't care at all of the strenght behind

[Phil]

1. Pass on the first.

 

2. This is a nice dummy for spades and we do have two defensive tricks if pard converts. I'll x.

[MickyB]

Text hidden below for those who have already decided their answer to problem 2.

 

 

I was given this hand with opener rebidding 3C [dislikes diamonds] and responder passing this. What action do you take on this auction?

 

[paulg]

On the first hand you have a lucky game, as partner has six hearts and 3=6=2=2 distribution. I passed after considerable thought.

 

The second hand was strange. If you balance with 3♥, partner might bid four and you might make it (two out of four in the top division made the game). If you double, then partner will pass with his six diamonds and you'll take +800!

 

As Mickyb implies with his hidden comment, they have made a poor decision by showing support with ♦AJ - certainly poor when diamonds are 6-0 at least. I eventually passed on the hand and gained two imps for +200 against -140.

 

If they respond 3♣, denying a diamond fit, then I guess you are less likely to balance when it is passed round to you.

[JLOGIC]

I forgot I had responded and was thinking I'd double then changed my mind at the last second to 3H lol. At least I'm consistent.

 

It's a tough problem but them having only a 5-2 diamond fit is a freak occurrence. Almost always RHO will have 6+ diamonds, and LHO is very likely to have 3+ diamonds to like it. That decreases the amount of times you have a penalty by quite a bit (though not impossible, partner can have 4 good diamonds obv), and reduces the upside of double. Of course double is better for getting to a black suit when it's right, but I think overall 3H gets us to the right spot more often, and that the chance of getting them in 3D is not big enough (for reasons stated) to risk jeopardizing that in hopes of a big payoff.

 

That said, I think double and 3H are both fine, but passing is just very poor. I think you are underestimating the power of your hand with 3 first round controls, a 6 card suit, etc. RHO has shown nothing, and would often bid game aggressively over 3D "I like" so it is safe to assume we have about half the deck (and possibly significantly more). Given that, and their apparant good diamond fit, we have a game very often imo. Hopefully the cards will be well placed too if partner has some queens for finesses, or AQ or KT of hearts or whatever. We can't afford to miss a game, especially when we might even beat 3D! But not just that, surely we have a partscore somewhere, and this hand could easily be a double partscore swing, and that alone is 5 or 6 imps.

 

I do not even view it as that dangerous to bid. LHO cannot double you, and its hard to believe RHO with a 6 card suit and not many points is going to emerge with a crack. It is extremely dangerous to pass though and risk missing a game/a double partscore swing.

 

And it's not dangerous in the sense that partner will play you for more, you passed 2N already.

 

True, whichever of X or 3H you choose, you will not always find the best strain, and that is a downside, but it's still hugely worth it to bid imo. Heck, if I doubled and partner bid 3H I would bid 4.

[JLOGIC]

Text hidden below for those who have already decided their answer to problem 2.

 

 

I was given this hand with opener rebidding 3C [dislikes diamonds] and responder passing this. What action do you take on this auction?

This one is very weird, we know RHO is 5-5 in the minors and that partner has 5 or 6 diamonds (presumably with 4 diamonds LHO would say he likes). We still might make something if he has a stiff club to go with that, but our offensive chances have really plummeted with that information. I would pass hoping to beat them on the bad breaks plus my 2 aces.

 

Compared to the problem as given in OP, we are very likely now to be in a situation where neither partscore makes rather than having a double partscore. If LHO has 4423 or so, it looks like a very bad time to be declaring. And imagine if hes 4432..then we should be doubling them for penalty!

 

Even if partner has 4351 and we end in hearts, we will have to ruff clubs with his good trumps and lose trump tricks to LHO. Or maybe LHO will just lead AK and a heart or whatever. Not a great situation, I pass. Yes if he has 5 spades or 4 hearts I probably missed a game though, it's just not that likely :(

[paulg]

I forgot I had responded and was thinking I'd double then changed my mind at the last second to 3H lol. At least I'm consistent.

 

It's a tough problem but them having only a 5-2 diamond fit is a freak occurrence. Almost always RHO will have 6+ diamonds, and LHO is very likely to have 3+ diamonds to like it. That decreases the amount of times you have a penalty by quite a bit (though not impossible, partner can have 4 good diamonds obv), and reduces the upside of double. Of course double is better for getting to a black suit when it's right, but I think overall 3H gets us to the right spot more often, and that the chance of getting them in 3D is not big enough (for reasons stated) to risk jeopardizing that in hopes of a big payoff.

 

That said, I think double and 3H are both fine, but passing is just very poor. I think you are underestimating the power of your hand with 3 first round controls, a 6 card suit, etc. RHO has shown nothing, and would often bid game aggressively over 3D "I like" so it is safe to assume we have about half the deck (and possibly significantly more). Given that, and their apparant good diamond fit, we have a game very often imo. Hopefully the cards will be well placed too if partner has some queens for finesses, or AQ or KT of hearts or whatever. We can't afford to miss a game, especially when we might even beat 3D! But not just that, surely we have a partscore somewhere, and this hand could easily be a double partscore swing, and that alone is 5 or 6 imps.

 

I do not even view it as that dangerous to bid. LHO cannot double you, and its hard to believe RHO with a 6 card suit and not many points is going to emerge with a crack. It is extremely dangerous to pass though and risk missing a game/a double partscore swing.

 

And it's not dangerous in the sense that partner will play you for more, you passed 2N already.

 

True, whichever of X or 3H you choose, you will not always find the best strain, and that is a downside, but it's still hugely worth it to bid imo. Heck, if I doubled and partner bid 3H I would bid 4.

Thanks, that's an excellent summary of what I should have done.

 

I really did not like passing but was eventually put off by the vulnerability as it could be a partscore hand and I may not find the right spot. However I was lucky as game was only so-so, but if they had had their bids then I would probably have lost a game swing.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[jdonn]

I would definitely double on the first. All we want partner to have really is a 5+ card suit, or maybe 4 clubs, and then what bad will happen to us?

[hanp]

My opponents doubled 2S on a hand very similar to the first hand. They bid 3C, my partner competed to 3S with a very weak 6-4 and I went down 2 in 3S. I could have been down 1 if I had played RHO to have the strong spades instead of LHO.

[JLOGIC]

I would definitely double on the first. All we want partner to have really is a 5+ card suit, or maybe 4 clubs, and then what bad will happen to us?

Why is declaring 3 whatever better than defending 2 spades is partner has a 5 card red suit? According to THE LAW, even if they are in an 8 card fit, we do better to defend, I mean is it more likely that this is a hand with 16 total trumps and 17 total tricks, or 16 total trumps and 15 total tricks? Given our honors in our short suits, heavy spade values, and lack of shape (we are unlikely to be able to ruff anything in the short hand), I would definitely guess it's more likely to be 15 tricks. Basically, our hand is really defensive (duh).

 

Yes if he has 5 clubs or a 6 card suit we certainly want to bid, but we have to weigh that against the very real chance that he has 3 spades (why couldn't he), and the chance that he has no fit in which case bidding is potentially a disaster (yes, I would consider -200 vs a +50 a disaster on this type of hand, and it could be worse).

 

And since you're never getting to game (partner is literally never going to bid one, and neither are you), the fact that you might have a game is a non factor, it's just a question of whether Xing leads to you converting a minus into a plus more often than a plus into a minus (accounting for the fact that you could go for a large minus undoubled). I don't think that's even close, given that we often have 6 defensive tricks in our own hand and no shape and it's not a guaranteed fit auction.

[lamford]

I don't think that's even close, given that we often have 6 defensive tricks in our own hand and no shape and it's not a guaranteed fit auction.

I dont think it is close either. Like the dog that did not bark in the night, we failed to bid 2S last time around, and yet partner knows from the bidding that we have a good hand. Surely double now is strong balanced, and partner will float it most of the time, and bid when he is distributional. If double of 2H had been penalties of 1NT you would now double again; what's the difference?

 

I agree with your 3H on the second hand. Double is a bit too dangerous, and sometimes gets to the wrong major.

[jdonn]

I think doubling converts a minus into a plus very often by pushing them higher, like if opener has 3 or responder has 6 either might bid one more and find they only had an 8 card fit. Or they might have 3 and 6 and neither bids one more, since as you say it's not a guaranteed fit auction they are guessing too. If opener has 4 he is almost always bidding more. I never balance as you know but I think passing on this is chicken. It's probably our hand not theirs!

 

Also call me picky but you seem to really be exagerating when you call converting +50 into -200 a disaster but seem to brush off something like converting +50 into +130 or +140 or +170 as not even worth considering. In imps that is approximately half of a disaster.

[gnasher]

I dont think it is close either. Like the dog that did not bark in the night, we failed to bid 2S last time around, and yet partner knows from the bidding that we have a good hand. Surely double now is strong balanced, and partner will float it most of the time, and bid when he is distributional. If double of 2H had been penalties of 1NT you would now double again; what's the difference?

I think that most poeple play an immediate 2♠ either as a two-suiter or as a strong three-suited takeout. Therefore pass followed by double just shows a normal takeout double.

[lamford]

I dont think it is close either. Like the dog that did not bark in the night, we failed to bid 2S last time around, and yet partner knows from the bidding that we have a good hand. Surely double now is strong balanced, and partner will float it most of the time, and bid when he is distributional. If double of 2H had been penalties of 1NT you would now double again; what's the difference?

I think that most poeple play an immediate 2♠ either as a two-suiter or as a strong three-suited takeout. Therefore pass followed by double just shows a normal takeout double.

Why strong? And surely 2NT instead, or now, would be a two-suiter; or do people play that as natural these days? Presumably 4m is leaping Michaels instead, so there are plenty of bids available.

[JLOGIC]

I think doubling converts a minus into a plus very often by pushing them higher, like if opener has 3 or responder has 6 either might bid one more and find they only had an 8 card fit. Or they might have 3 and 6 and neither bids one more, since as you say it's not a guaranteed fit auction they are guessing too. If opener has 4 he is almost always bidding more. I never balance as you know but I think passing on this is chicken. It's probably our hand not theirs!

 

Also call me picky but you seem to really be exagerating when you call converting +50 into -200 a disaster but seem to brush off something like converting +50 into +130 or +140 or +170 as not even worth considering. In imps that is approximately half of a disaster.

I think you are really underestimating the times that neither side makes anything, I guess you think I'm underestimating the times that both sides make though!

 

I also think you are really overestimating the times that they will bid 3S. I don't see how LHO can ever bid 3S with only 3 when his partner has shown possibly 0 points and 5 spades, and then didn't do anything. It's not up to the 1N opener to compete to the 3 level on an 8 card fit, it's up to partner to double or do something if he has values and shortness in the opps suit.

 

If responder has 6 spades or opener has 4 spades I agree we will push them sometimes, and in general when they have 9 spades it will be right for us to compete anyways (surely 3x or 2S can make).

 

I don't dispute that if they or we have a 9 card fit it is usually right for us to bid, I just think it's far more common that we both have at most an 8 card fit where it is usually wrong to bid, and it's not infrequent that one of us has a 7 card fit where it is almost certainly wrong to bid.

 

You are right I have ignored the 2-3 imps possible when they are down.

 

If hanp would be willing to, a simulation might be a useful thing to do on this hand, to see which one of us is closer to right, and to at least to get some base point for how often certain things make etc. Remember to exclude super accepts from openers hand.

[hanp]

Why strong?

Presumably because people do not want to force to the three level, red against white, on weaker 3-suited hands when the opponents are unlimited and they may not have a fit yet.

 

Showing your takeout double shape immediately has the additional risk that the opponents will declare 4S and your bidding tells declarer how to play the trumps (and the rest of the hand). We have had many discussions on these forums about this topic. I believe I am repeating parts of the arguments by Fred who claimed that 2S was better used as 2-suited than as a takeout double. Not to say that Fred knows everything, but he sure made a good case for it.

 

And surely 2NT instead, or now, would be a two-suiter; or do people play that as natural these days? Presumably 4m is leaping Michaels instead, so there are plenty of bids available.

 

Yes, 2NT now would be a 2-suiter, but that doesn't mean that we can't have a takeout double. Of course partner knows that we have a good hand, but we (or at least I) would pass and double with a 1444 18-count, and partner probably has no way to tell which that we do not have that this time.

 

Maybe your partner will pass 2SX with his expected 2443 3-count or so, I hope that mine won't.

[lamford]

we (or at least I) would pass and double with a 1444 18-count, and partner probably has no way to tell which that we do not have that this time.

If one would start with 2S on the 1-4-4-4 18 count (gnasher's belief), partner, knowing we have about an 18 count, will now know we are balanced. If 2S would have been two-suited, then partner can indeed not tell.