Baby psyche defence

[ajax90]

This auction occurred recently at my club.

 

1♦-1♥-X-1♠

 

The double was negative and promised 4♠. Opener had 4♠. We missed our fit

as we had no agreed system in this area. In fact we missed our spade game as the 1♠

overcaller had psyched on QXX.

 

My question is what do you think is the best rebid that opener can make when holding 4 card spade support ?

 

Thanks in advance.

[mgoetze]

My question is what do you think is the best rebid that opener can make when holding 4 card spade support ?

 

Double and collect 800.

[shintaro]

Double and collect 800.

 

 

B-) sounds reasonable solution :P

[BunnyGo]

This auction is very much related to a similar question recently posted here.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/forum/5-beginner-and-intermediate-bridge-discussion/

 

You'll note I even advocated the psych when you suspect that your opponents are unprepared for it.

[glen]

Generally the best defence to baby psyches is that pass forces double, on hands that will either pass the double or show extras.

All immediate bids show what they usually do but if they show or can have extras these are based more on shape.

Double is a balanced hand without a stopper in the suit that might be a psyche, or a hand with no other good bid with 2 or 3 cards in the suit doubled.

 

Key to all of this is that it makes runouts harder.

 

Let's continue to use 1♦-1♥-X-1♠ as the example.

 

Compare first to when X is penalty:

1♦-1♥-X-1♠-X-P-P-?

Now the 1♠ bidder can redouble, or bid 1NT, or a suit, all which expose the psyche, or at the very least prevent ♠s from being a possible strain.

 

Instead after 1♦-1♥-X-1♠-P-P-X-?

Now the 1♠ bidder does not know if opener is about to pass the double, and any runout can hit the chainsaw. In addition it puts the partner of the 1♠ bidder in a bind if there is a runout that is doubled.

 

1♦-1♥-X-1♠-P-P-X-2♣-X-?. Does the 1♠ bidder have the blacks, and a preference should be made, or was the 1♠ a psyche?

 

Here are a few more details:

 

1♦-1♥-X-1♠-?

Pass: forces double

Double: a hand that would rebid 1NT or 2NT, but does not have a spade stopper, or a hand with no other good bid (such as having ♦s and ♥s unbalanced with 2-3♠s).

1NT: natural, no extras, spade stopper

2NT: natural, spade stopper, values for 2NT based partly 5/6♦s.

2♣/♦: natural, if non-minimum will be shapely

2♥: cuebid, shapely hand, both minors

2♠: 4♠s, minimum and shapely hand

etc.

 

and after 1♦-1♥-X-1♠-P-P-X-P-?

Pass: to play

1NT: natural, extras, spade stopper

2NT: natural, spade stopper, values for 2NT based on HCP

2♣/♦: natural, extras based on HCP

2♥: cuebid, both minors, game force based on HCP

2♠: cuebid, asking for stopper, game force based on HCP

etc.

[awm]

Glen seems to be assuming the auction will continue with overcaller passing. In fact this is very unlikely! Overcaller will very often rebid his hearts or bid a side minor (or even raise spades if the psych was on shortage). Making an immediate bid which is unclear as to the nature of opener's hand (pass showing "no suitable call") may not work out so well after for example:

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 2♥ - PA - 3♥

??

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 3♦ - PA - PA

??

 

 

Sure, you might be making 3♠ but wouldn't it be nice to involve partner in the decision? If you had doubled (or bid 2♠) right off, partner would know what you have. Plus bidding 2♠ would prevent overcaller from rebidding and might let you buy the contract for 2♠ in some situations.

[Vampyr]

Making an immediate bid which is unclear as to the nature of opener's hand (pass showing "no suitable call") may not work out so well ...

 

Yes, this system seems to give up too much just to gain when the opponents have psyched and can't find a better place to play.

[glen]

Glen seems to be assuming the auction will continue with overcaller passing. In fact this is very unlikely! Overcaller will very often rebid his hearts or bid a side minor (or even raise spades if the psych was on shortage). Making an immediate bid which is unclear as to the nature of opener's hand (pass showing "no suitable call") may not work out so well after for example:

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 2♥ - PA - 3♥

??

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 3♦ - PA - PA

??

 

Sure, you might be making 3♠ but wouldn't it be nice to involve partner in the decision? If you had doubled (or bid 2♠) right off, partner would know what you have. Plus bidding 2♠ would prevent overcaller from rebidding and might let you buy the contract for 2♠ in some situations.

However when overcaller bids immediately over the forcing pass, responder can get involved since opener will either have a spade fit and/or extra values based on HCP. With your examples:

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 2♥ - X

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 3♦ - X

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 2♥ - 3♣

 

1♣ - 1♥ - X - 1♠

PA - 3♦ - 3♥

 

Opener's forcing pass does not show "no suitable call" (double does that), it shows a spade fit and/or extra values based on HCP, not shape.

[aguahombre]

Adam's thoughts about simply raising with 4 spades and using the double and the pass for tools on hands which don't fit into comfortable rebids or want to penalize.....is a good approach.

 

I am ready to play our 4-4 fit with a 5-0 break if it wasn't a psyche.

[ggwhiz]

I play fewer forcing passes than almost anyone. Makes me think of "always" and "never" words that don't belong in bridge.

 

When I pass here, I've got a 12 count, non-descript. If they try to play 2♥ or if pard shows values with another bid I'll show my ♠ then having limited my strength first. The 1♠ bidder may not have psyched and if they did, the 1♥ bidder may still be loaded.

 

I want to get my range out of the way now but I won't sell out to 2♥ on my next turn. Double shows extras in the context of a game invite opposite most decent 8 counts or so. We'll find a strain or penalty later and partner is in on the how high.

[gnasher]

May I suggest:

Pass = happy not to have to bid

Dbl = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

over a pass

1NT = A hand that would have bid 1NT over a pass

2

♣

= A hand that would have bid 2

♣

over a pass

etc

[mgoetze]

May I suggest:

Pass = happy not to have to bid

Dbl = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

over a pass

1NT = A hand that would have bid 1NT over a pass

2

♣

= A hand that would have bid 2

♣

over a pass

etc

 

While this scheme has obvious technical merits, I'm not sure it is worth the added memory strain... ;)

[aguahombre]

May I suggest:

Pass = happy not to have to bid

Dbl = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

over a pass

Of course a hand with 4 spades would have bid 2S, as if partner had responded 1S, so the double indeed shows only 3 spades?

[gnasher]

Of course a hand with 4 spades would have bid 2S, as if partner had responded 1S, so the double indeed shows only 3 spades?

Yes. With four spades I'd just make my normal raise.

[JLOGIC]

May I suggest:

Pass = happy not to have to bid

Dbl = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

over a pass

1NT = A hand that would have bid 1NT over a pass

2

♣

= A hand that would have bid 2

♣

over a pass

etc

 

Do not like. Why should we be forced to bid 1N over a bid by RHO? We are off the hook. Similarly, over 1C p 1H 1S ? I would not bid 1N on many hands that I would have over a pass from RHO because I am no longer forced to bid.

 

Likewise, doubling to show 3 spades does not seem very useful at all unless partners double showed 4+ spades rather than just 4. I just don't get the point, we know we don't have a fit there and RHO has bid the suit naturally. Even if it's not going to go all pass (maybe they play 1S as forcing), maybe RHO has 6 spades and would rebid 2S over his partners next bid if we don't voluntarily tell him that his partner doesn't have any spades. Maybe he would even bid 3 spades.

 

Of course if X could be 4+ spades then I like playing a support X here as we might have a fit.

[ggwhiz]

Even if it's not going to go all pass (maybe they play 1S as forcing

 

New suit by an unpassed hand, is this not alertable if non-forcing?

 

I know many don't nor 2h - p - 2s as non-forcing but I think an alert is required.

[aguahombre]

New suit by an unpassed hand, is this not alertable if non-forcing?

 

I know many don't nor 2h - p - 2s as non-forcing but I think an alert is required.

two different situations. Certainly your 2nd is forcing, unless alerted. But 1S in the given situation is not...rather (unless a psyche) constructive only and not alertable in my world.

[aguahombre]

Do not like. Why should we be forced to bid 1N over a bid by RHO? We are off the hook. Similarly, over 1C p 1H 1S ? I would not bid 1N on many hands that I would have over a pass from RHO because I am no longer forced to bid.

 

Likewise, doubling to show 3 spades does not seem very useful at all unless partners double showed 4+ spades rather than just 4. I just don't get the point, we know we don't have a fit there and RHO has bid the suit naturally. Even if it's not going to go all pass (maybe they play 1S as forcing), maybe RHO has 6 spades and would rebid 2S over his partners next bid if we don't voluntarily tell him that his partner doesn't have any spades. Maybe he would even bid 3 spades.

 

Of course if X could be 4+ spades then I like playing a support X here as we might have a fit.

Naurally, Justin's reasoning is right on. But, the pass and the double must mean something, since we have been given the two options. If we concede that we would just bid 2S with mini's containing 4-card spade support, then how about some alternatives to the double which would be useful? Pass is easy, saying we don't want to say anything. But the double should have a special use.

[the hog]

This auction occurred recently at my club.

 

1♦-1♥-X-1♠

 

The double was negative and promised 4♠. Opener had 4♠. We missed our fit

as we had no agreed system in this area. In fact we missed our spade game as the 1♠

overcaller had psyched on QXX.

 

My question is what do you think is the best rebid that opener can make when holding 4 card spade support ?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Bid 2S. Doubling is fatuous as the psycher will simply retreat to his partner's suit for which presumably he has support..

[JLOGIC]

New suit by an unpassed hand, is this not alertable if non-forcing?

 

I know many don't nor 2h - p - 2s as non-forcing but I think an alert is required.

 

These are 2 different auctions. New suit NF after an overcall is BWS standard. Of course that might not have been updated in 10 years or so, but that is the general "standard" when it comes to north american expert standard. That said I have found this to be largely regional, some people find it to be extremely strange. I know in Texas it was completely standard though when I lived there.

[gnasher]

Do not like. Why should we be forced to bid 1N over a bid by RHO?

 

You're not. In trying to simplify the description I may have lost some of the nuances of my suggested methods. Here's another go:

Pass = happy not to have to bid

Dbl = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

over a pass, and wants to bid, and doesn't want to bid 1NT

1NT = A hand that would have bid 1

♠

or 1NT over a pass, and wants to bid, and doesn't want to double

2

♣

= A hand that would have bid 2

♣

over a pass, and wants to bid

etc

[mgoetze]

New suit by an unpassed hand, is this not alertable if non-forcing?

 

(1) Why on earth are you suddenly bringing alerts into this?

 

(2) Do you realise that this is an international forum and alert regulations differ around the world?

[ggwhiz]

(1) Why on earth are you suddenly bringing alerts into this?

 

(2) Do you realise that this is an international forum and alert regulations differ around the world?

 

1. Because it's safe to trap pass if you choose should this be so.

 

2. There is a reason for the (?). I don't play around the world.

[whereagles]

What's so complicated about this? If you have spades, just bid 2♠

[ajax90]

Thanks for all your replies.

 

Digesting all your comments I suspect it's best to support with support at the required level immediately. Otherwise surely the 'psycher' is going to barrage in their fit or escape suit at some uncomfortable level and further bidding could get muddled. That leaves 'pass' as showing a very minimum opening and 'double' to show some sort of NT hand without a stop in their suit.