oh, and two more

[Phil]

1.R/w x AQTxxxx xx AT9.

 

1♥ - (dbl) - redbl - (2♠);

3♥ - (3♠) - 4♥ - (4♠);

Pass - (pass) - dbl - (pass);

?

 

2. A lead: JTx xx AQx 98xxx.

 

1H - 3S

3N - 4C

4H - 6H

 

3S was an unknown splinter. 4C showed club shortage.

[frank0]

1. I would pass on that hand because after 1H-X-XX your pass after 4S is forcing pass which shows some interest in keep bidding but partner still choose to defense so there is no reason to change partner's decision.

 

2. A small trump probably, it seems like they want to cross-ruff minors or two black suits.

[Phil]

Frank - I think if anything my 3♥ call cancels the forcing pass after the initial redouble. I've clearly showed a willingness not to defend after my 3♥. That in itself may be more of a reason to pass, but I wanted to bring up the nature of my pass. I also play less forcing passes than most and my view may not be standard.

[cherdano]

I don't understand the problem on the first.

3♥ says we have a minimal distributional hand. Partner's double says 4♠ is going down opposite such a hand. I have two aces, why shouldn't I believe him?

 

P.S.: My pass of 4♠ didn't say anything in particular. A hand that bids 3♥ will normally pass 4♠.

[gnasher]

On the first one, I think I made a forcing pass. We have an opening hand opposite a redouble, we bid game, and then we faced further competition from an opponent who had previously tried to stop at the two-level.

 

I'm happy with that - I might have bid 4♥ over 2♠, but having not done that I was worth a forcing pass over 4♠. Now I accept partner's decision, obviously.

 

On the second, I probably agree with the trump lead, but I'd like to know more about the opponents' bidding. Was LHO's splinter unlimited, and was RHO obliged to ask what the shortage was?

Edited April 17, 2011 by gnasher

[JLOGIC]

Hate my 3H bid on the first one, just bid 4H, it gets the nature of our hand off our chest (a 4H opener that was too strong to open 4H). It also preempts them a little, but the general point is for partner to be in better shape to bid over 4S. I don't think I've shown a strong 7 bagger yet, and my hand is definitely good enough to bid a game opposite a XX.

 

Of course I would pass the X, the decision on whether or not to do so was made when we passed (if we weren't going to, we'd have bid 5H right then). The 3H bid brought this on yourself.

 

Hand 2 I'd lead a trump but you feel stupid when they have no diamond control and have taken a gamble.

[Finch]

Hand 1 I have an obvious pass of 4Sx whether or not my previous pass was forcing.

 

Hand 2 is weird. LHO showed a club splinter, RHO signed off, and LHO bid slam, missing (at least) one key card without doing any further investigation. If my minors were swapped I would try and cash two clubs against this, it's a typical club-lead-averting auction. Would partner double 4C with the AK? If he wouldn't (why double a shortage bid and give them extra room?) then I'll still try and cash two clubs.

 

Obviously this depends on the opponents. You know your opponents, in particular if AKQxx AQJxx - xxx is a possible dummy

[JLOGIC]

Frances, RHO asked for shortness then signed off over club shortness. It is reasonable imo to assume they have club wastage, which means we are not cashing 2 clubs even if LHO has psyched his splinter.

 

For instance, you give AKQxx AQJxx -- xxx as a possible dummy. Well, we have the AQx of diamonds, so in that case we are dead (well not really, they probably missed 7!).

 

Even with reversed minors, RHO has club wastage which must include the CK. Maybe it's possible he has 2 small clubs and was looking for shortness in his side 4 card suit or something, but it's still very likely on this auction RHO has some club values imo.

 

I think LHO's bidding is consistent. He was interested in 7 so he showed his shortness hoping partner would show some sign of life. When partner didn't show any life, he just jumped to 6, maybe even gambling a little but not wanting to give away info.

[JLOGIC]

I think a spade might be the right lead now.

 

How about this: Dummy has AQxx AQxx KJxxx -- or something. RHO has the HKJ and AKJ of clubs. If we don't set up a spade trick, it goes away on the diamond.

 

Actually I have talked myself into it. This is such a likely scenario of all scenarios where we can beat them, since dummy likely has the DK and we are kind of desperate. Add to that that a spade is not really dangerous at all, it seems worth it over whatever potential gains the trump might give us.

 

I was thinking the DA might be right also, the opposite of Frances's example hand: AKQxx AQxxx xxx --- (turned off by failure to cooperate, chose to gamble on the lead rather than investigate).

 

But the DA is a much riskier proposition.

[Phil]

1. Hadn't considered 4♥ on the 1st, but I like it. Pards held Qxx KJ and some junk in the minors (I'm zonked after 128 maybe I will remember tomorrow lol).

 

2. I led the J♠. I talked myself into a construction like Justins. Dummy had AKQxx KQTxx Jxx void. These are opponents aren't cagey enough for the phony splinter routine. Naturally 2 diamonds cashed. We discussed splinter doubles later.

[whereagles]

1. Would have bid 4♥ the round before. Right now my feeling says 5♥, so I bid that.

 

2. Spade. Not by justin's reasoning that LHO's auction was partly a grand slam try (only valid for world-class opponents), but for something simpler: I don't think LHO would bid 6 with diamonds, a very likely lead on the bidding, wide open :P

[Phil]

To be clear, -690 was a push on the 1st board.

[Finch]

1. Hadn't considered 4♥ on the 1st, but I like it. Pards held Qxx KJ and some junk in the minors (I'm zonked after 128 maybe I will remember tomorrow lol).

 

2. I led the J♠. I talked myself into a construction like Justins. Dummy had AKQxx KQTxx Jxx void. These are opponents aren't cagey enough for the phony splinter routine. Naturally 2 diamonds cashed. We discussed splinter doubles later.

 

2. Oh well I had the right idea on the second. I take Justin's point that RHO has club wastage,