Convert partners double to penalty?

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=s8ht2dak973c98752&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp1s2cppdp?]133|200[/hv]

 

(diagram fixed, thanks)

[MrAce]

In the diagram it shows you already converted it to penalty. But assuming that question mark was meant for south, then i think 2♦ is clear.

[Phil]

3♦. 2♦ is a nothing call and this is a pretty nice hand.

 

I don't think I'd pass without a trump trick.

[wyman]

I would bid 3D with this also; this hand is pretty good.

[billw55]

I love penalizing but I have my limits. These trumps aren't good enough and the ♦AK could easily not cash.

[ArtK78]

I hate going -180 when I am cold for slam.

 

But I only bid 2♦. Partner is still there.

[Foxx]

Usually when I make a penalty pass, I can win a trump trick.

[mikeh]

I think it is a heck of a lot closer than the posts so far suggest.

 

Yes, we'd all like to have a trump trick on defence, but partner could easily hold a card that makes ours grow up, and anyway we're probably hoping to beat this by ruffing major suit cards and cashing a diamond or two.

 

I would expect to beat this contract slightly more often than not....partner will very rarely be void in clubs...that is a terrible holding on which to reopen, and I think he should strain to avoid it unless 5=4=4=0, when he has little choice other than to guess.

 

Part of the issue is where we are planning to go.

 

If we assume that we will usually (even by only a slight margin) score 200 or 500 on defence, then it seems clear that 2♦ is hopeless. Yes, as Art says, partner is still there, but partner listened to the auction as well, and partner doesn't hold wonderful diamonds...it beggars the imagination to think that he will raise on many of the hands on which 5♦ is a good contract.....get real...he will pass and be happy he has a nice hand for you.

 

3♦ shows the values, and if we knew that partner always held 4 diamonds or a good hand with 3 diamonds, it would be a 'wtp' call.....combining safety when he can't move higher and the chance of reaching game or, on a very unlikely layout, slam.

 

But he may have a minimum 5=4=3=1 and a layout that handles poorly...admittedly on many of those hands, where 3♦ fails, we weren't beating 2♣ but wouldn't it be ironic to trade -180 for -200 at mps :D

 

Or he may have a hand on with some 6=4=2=1, intending to cater to the penalty pass, the possible heart fit (yes, I know there was no negative double) and pull 2♦ to 2♠.

 

What I am suggesting is that I don't think that bidding diamonds, at any level, is guaranteed to lead to a good result.

 

At mps, I think the pass is right, since we rate to score 200 or more most of the time, and this will beat any diamond (or other) partscore.

 

At imps, the decision is closer, since our game bonus is more important at imps than at mps. I think this is one of those decisions which I might make either way depending on mood at the time. Pulling is certainly the safer call to defend in the post-mortem.

[quiddity]

Passing at matchpoints does not appeal to me. Even if I expected "to beat the contract slightly more often than not" I wouldn't want to bet the board on it, not when I have an easy diamond bid.

[gszes]

I am a passed hand and I didn't bid 2d over 2c

this is important becasue my power is limited by

my previous lack of bidding.

 

I can now bid 3d because my hand will be limited

to around 8 hcp and some playing power. This not

only happens to be just what I have but none of

it is wasted in a club suit my p rates to be

extremely short in.

 

Passsing is a gamble (bad at MP but positively

gross at imps) that could easily go horribly

wrong. When p makes a tox they do not expect

you to convert it just because you have a

bunch of tram tickets in the opps suit. P

with as little as KQJxx KQJx xxxx void

has enough for us to luckily make 5d and the opps

might easily score 6/7 clubs and 2 aces ouch. While

that ex is a bit extreme p can be way more powerful

than my example and not a whole lot weaker.

 

As far as 2d goes I would save that for hands that

have less than the expected "seven" your p assumes

you have including distribution.

[phil_20686]

I think its close enough that rho's overcall style is a serious consideration.

 

If this is a local club where they think any 10 count with a five card suit is a 2/1 overcall, then I will pass. It could be a bloodbath on a diamond lead and spade switch.

 

If rho is an expert I would not leave it in. He probably has his bid.

[mikeh]

 

Passsing is a gamble (bad at MP but positively

gross at imps) that could easily go horribly

wrong.

 

We all have it drummed into us, early in our development as bridge players, that one of the worst sins in bridge is to double a making partscore at imps.

 

So much so that it means that we often forgo wonderful opportunities.

 

I am guilty of this as much as anyone, but not when they are vulnerable and when their making is -180 rather than, say, -670.

 

As I pointed out, on some of the hands on which they score 180, they might score 200 against 3♦!

 

As for being a 'bad' gamble at mps....is there anyone here who thinks that the opps are favourite to score 8 tricks? Yes, of course they MAY score 8 tricks, but when they don't we will usually have a top or near top board to compensate us for the less frequent bottoms. Since mps is a game in which frequency of result is the paramont consideration, I can see why you call it a gamble (I agree) and I can see why it is seen as close, but 'bad'? Hmm, and there I was thinking that my main weakness at mps is an unwillingness to go for the throat.

[Statto]

I don't understand 3♦. We have a poor fit for partner's 1st suit, and quite likely not a good fit for their 2nd suit if that is ♥, along with 5 fairly useless ♣ in offence. Partner's reopening double doesn't necessarily promise any extra strength (YMMV), and we don't seem to have a decent 6-card suit to justify jumping vulnerable (again YMMV).

 

Some comments seem to be assuming this is MPs, though the scoring doesn't seem to be given...

[the hog]

Clear 3D bid for me. We did not bid 2D on the previous round and so now we need to how our values. AK to 5 is a decent holding.

[Statto]

Clear 3D bid for me. We did not bid 2D on the previous round and so now we need to how our values. AK to 5 is a decent holding.

Presumably we did not bid 2♦ on the last round because we are not playing negative free bids?