Phil Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 w/w IMPs T7xx xx J9xx AKQ p - (2♥) - dbl - (4♥); ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 i open 1d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoi5 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 4♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasetb Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Does partner really have AQJx or KQJx or better in Spades? I don't think so, so I will take the sure thing and Double if it's penalty / Pass otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Can't imagine anything here except double (um, not penalties, either!), thought it would be unanimous. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoi5 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 My first thoughts were of doubling and I even thought we might get rich in case we had a much better contract but then I realized they might have 8 tricks in trumps only. Then I thought 300 was too little. So I changed my answer to 4♠. Double might be better if partner were to take it out more often with 4 good spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 This is enough to double, especially at IMPs where both contracts down one is no big deal. I can imagine passing at matchpoints but wouldn't do it. Nothing else appeals at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Well my x here is for takeout, which is exactly what I would do. 4S is a close second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 4♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 4S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rduran1216 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 4S, wouldnt even think of doubling. Should partner pull with AQJx xx AQxx 10xx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_clown Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Very tough. Bad trumps and possible bad ♠ break make bidding 4♠ unattractive. I expect partner to always pass with a doubleton ♥, which should give us a good score. Of course we might end up in a wrong game when p bids 5m with 4144 or 4153. At the table I would probably X against aggressive preempters and bid 4♠ against a solid pair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 w/w IMPs T7xx xx J9xx AKQ p - (2♥) - dbl - (4♥); ?If Responder only raised to 3♥, then a DBL ( Responsive ) by Advancer would show the MINORS and deny a ♠ fit: p - (2♥) - DBL - (3♥)DBL Why would it be any different here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I would pass. Double seems likely to result in declaring 5m which isn't great. A 10-count with bad spades.. meh. Edit: oops, didn't notice that I'm a passed hand. That makes double more attractive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 This should be an automatic double for anybody who has ever read a post by Frances Hinden. Probably also for those who haven't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 4S, wouldnt even think of doubling. Should partner pull with AQJx xx AQxx 10xx? No, but how do you like your chances in 4♠?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I doubled. Partner pulled to 5♦ with QJxx x AQxxx Jxx. He said, "I thought double denied 4♠" (?!). The good news is that 4♥ makes (LHO has 1615) however, 5♦ was 500, so only lose 2. 4♠ is very cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I doubled. Partner pulled to 5♦ with QJxx x AQxxx Jxx. He said, "I thought double denied 4[sp]" (?!). The good news is that 4♥ makes (LHO has 1615) however, 5♦ was 500, so only lose 2. 4♠ is very cheap.Am I the only one who agrees with your partner ? ( my post # 14 ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Am I the only one who agrees with your partner ? ( my post # 14 ) Judging from the replies I would say no. However, for the 4♠ bidders, I will ask this question: - Forget about 'rules' like "double denies four spades" for a second. 1. Do you always want to be playing a 4-4 spade fit here? I think with many 4=2=(34) hands with bad spades and good cards in the minors you would rather defend. 2. When opener pulls the double to 4♠ does this really show a good hand with five spades? If the responsive double denies four spades, we cannot be fishing for a Moysian here, so what else can 4♠ be than a hand with four spades that does not want to defend 4♥. Accordingly, I would suggest that the responsive double does not deny four spades, although it should deny five. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_20686 Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I doubled. Partner pulled to 5♦ with QJxx x AQxxx Jxx. He said, "I thought double denied 4♠" (?!). So partner had QJxx in suit you were short in, very soft cards, and minimum values, and thought 11 tricks was on the radar opposite a passed hand? even if you are 3244 like Kxx xx Kxxx Axxx, you appear to have no play whatsoever. I would be defending 4Hx, and be unhappy lho was 65. 4S is too big a risk of running into rho with AQJx. Partner is allowed to make a t/o double with three spades. Who things a 4-3 spade fit here will be cheap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 So partner had QJxx in suit you were short in I had ♠T7xx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I double and second choice is pass since it's such a minimum for the double. I would never bid such a bad spade suit on a balanced hand here. Has your partner never made a takeout double with three spades before? Of course if partner pulls then it should be to 4♠ any time he has four of them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyman Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 I had ♠T7xx. "I thought double denied 4S" -- partner thought he had QJxx opposite your shortness, but still decided to try for 11 tricks (is the other Phil's point). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Besides Phil's arguments, a good reason for not bidding 4S is that in some circles sometimes some partners make takeout doubles with fewer than 4 spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.