Lots of bidding

[mr1303]

[hv=pc=n&s=saqj63hq6daq3caj3&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=p1hd2hp3d]133|200[/hv]

 

What do you say here?

 

Options are double again

3S

Pass?

[PhilKing]

I feel no love for this hand.

 

Pass looks good.

[ggwhiz]

Pass

 

3♦ is a game try for hearts in my neck of the woods. Why double and tell them to stop at three?

 

When they do stop back to me I'll let it go, partner is broke and unless they have 4 spades I might go for a number but if they step out in 4♥ I'll express my opinion.

[mikeh]

We have some clues.

 

RHO could be jerking us around, but that would be a dangerous game since his partner may not be in on the joke, and may take the game try seriously. So we can assume that RHO is non-minimum, altho some of that could be shape. It isn't great diamonds, tho!

 

The Q♥ is a big negative holding. It may be a defensive trick since declarer may well hook into us, but it is an offensive liability. It gives us no additional offensive power and is a card the opps don't have....yet they are trying for game so have compensating values elsewhere, which is bad for us.

 

We can expect partner to hold perhaps 0-3 hcp. There is a strong likelihood of his holding 3 hearts, so that the opps can tap us at trick 3. There is a strong likelihood that he has no fast entry for us to take a spade finesse. He may hold 4 or even 5 spades, but there is no reason that LHO doesn't hold, say, K10xx in spades and he'll lower the boom on us if we bid spades. Meanwhile, partner may have nowhere to go. Picture him with xxx xxx xxxx xxx. It's not that I expect that, but it is consistent with the auction. He'd need magic cards for us to fare well in spades and any number of more likely hands spell disaster of one sort or another.

 

All told, this is one of those rare hands on which holding half the deck isn't enough for us to contest the auction beyond our initial action. One of my favourite sayings, in close situations, is that it is too dangerous to pass. Here, however, it is (far) too dangerous to bid.

 

Pass seems clear.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

Partner is broke, and we dont have game / or a part score.

 

I will try to go for blood, if they bid 4H.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[lalldonn]

3♠. Why should I believe them? If partner is as broke as everyone believes he will pass anyway. If they are serious then it's based on extra shape so I am probably fine playing 3♠ instead of defending 3♥. The other nice thing is if they bid 4♥ I won't have to risk a double since my hand will be shown. Partner can double if he is short in spades, pass if he is completely broke in which case I was not getting rich or they could even be making, etc.

 

I think if you double planning on bidding again, you should go out of your way to do so if at all possible.

[JLOGIC]

I would also never pass.

[WellSpyder]

I would also never pass.

OP describes himself as an admirer of Walter the Walrus, so I think we can take it as given that he will also not be looking to pass on this hand.

[PhilKing]

OP describes himself as an admirer of Walter the Walrus, so I think we can take it as given that he will also not be looking to pass on this hand.

 

"But I had 20 ..." explained the Walrus as he entered -1100 above the line.

[gnasher]

There is a strong likelihood of his holding 3 hearts

RHO has made a game-try on a hand that is rather lacking in aces, critical queens, and overall strength. Isn't it quite likely that he has six hearts?

[mikeh]

RHO has made a game-try on a hand that is rather lacking in aces, critical queens, and overall strength. Isn't it quite likely that he has six hearts?

Ok, 'strong' likelihood was an over/misbid. 'Significant possibility' is more apt. And does it matter a great deal? If rho has 6 hearts, one assumes he has at least 4 diamonds, so for every extra spade that might give partner, it might instead give one (as near as can be) to LHO, increasing the prospects of only learning how horrific 3♠ will be when they double and dummy is tabled.

 

I still pass, well aware that two of the best players on this forum advocate bidding.

 

I'd like to run a simulation, but I don't know what constraints to program since so much depends on opener's propensities. Even if I generated a host of hands, deciding which ones were plausible would be far too subjective an exercise not to mention evaluating the frequency of doubles, etc and then there's always the play :P

[billw55]

Could this be a situation where west might raise with psuedo-shapely junk? Something like x Jxxx xxx QTxxx ?

[mikeh]

Could this be a situation where west might raise with psuedo-shapely junk? Something like x Jxxx xxx QTxxx ?

Most would, I think, preempt with that....certainly I would. In addition, if that's a typical hand, then partner probably has enough to venture 2♠ given that RHO appears to have a red 2-suiter.

 

However, xxx Jxxx xx Q10xx would be maybe a junky raise, too flat to risk preempting and too many hearts to risk passing.

 

So while I disagree with your example, I accept your concern. My point remains: is the gamble of bidding worth the cost of his holding, say, K10xx Jxx xx K10xx, with which he'd still presumably bid 2♥ and you rate to go for 800 against a partscore?

[MrAce]

I have a question

 

What is the difference between bidding 3♠ now and passing and then bidding 3♠ over 3♥. 3♦ will not be passed out. If LHO bids 4♥ we know that pd is the broke one at the table. And we definetely dont wanna play 4♠ with this shape even if pd has 4 spades, which i would auto raise with 4 card support and nothing else, i maybe too agressive or insane but some other pds would raise with a little more than just 4 card spades and imo 4♠ will still not be fun to play. We know we aint gonna win anything from the lead and our communication with dummy will be VERY limited.

 

Ohh and of course there are those times in which he may not have 4 card spades...or not even 3 card spades. (I confess that they will not dbl us with the lack of aces in partscore, or even in game, unless one of them has 2-3 trump tricks)

 

Did i sound too pessimistic this time ? :P

[lalldonn]

The first time, ever, that Mr Ace was a wimp :)

[benlessard]

Doubling 3D show a hand that would double 3H except that its safer, passing and doubling 3H would show a stronger hand (direct weakest philosphy). I play the same way for passing & 3S.

 

So here doubling 3D make sense since my hand is not that good, I really hate bidding a 5 card suit at the 3 level.

 

 

probably better is

 

Pass and X penalty,

X and X strong takeout

X good takeout. But our agreement are not that sharp.

[PhilKing]

So here doubling 3D make sense since my hand is not that good, I really hate bidding a 5 card suit at the 3 level.

 

 

Whereas partner will love bidding 4♣ on five small.

[PhilKing]

.

[SteveMoe]

benlessard - I like your agreement. Not one I have with any of my partners, so doubling 3♦ might induce some instability giving partner to much to think about: Am I Black suit heavy? Do I want a ♦ led (eventually), Do I have extras and insist on takeout?

 

Passing then doubling might imply extras, but opposite a nonresponsive (and known weak) partner pass then double ought to be penalty (I want to double them at their final level, not before).

 

LHO's raise over the first double is very weak. (Would be good to know if they play BROMAD or something similar). Opener probably has perhaps 17 HCP + Distribution. We ought to be happy if partner has as much as 2 Jacks. I will pass then double, depending on partner to interpret his/her own weakness as a sign that it's penalty time. When I raise the stakes I don't want partner to run. (December 2012 Bridge World p32 by Jeff Rubens).

[PhilKing]

I'm not entirely sure you two (BenL and SteveM) are actually in agreement, but I am sure that a double of 3♦ should be for penalties.

 

Were I in possession of a very strong 4135 or similar, I would pass and then double 3♥ for take-out. Now on this particular hand, I expect 3♥ to go off, but I do not long for a method geared towards doubling them into game and beating them a trick.

[rmnka447]

Pass.

 

I'd really like to bid. But there's a pretty big chance that if we win the contract, it will have to be played entirely out of the strong hand.

 

Defending against ♥s might not be a picnic either. It seems like opener must have a very distributional hand to make a game try without a really big hand which would negate some of the high cards in this hand. And, of course, this hand looks pretty ripe for an endplay.

 

If opener's psyching a game try, it's working against me this time. That would make it more likely that there are honors adversely placed in responder's hand.

[benlessard]

I'm not entirely sure you two (BenL and SteveM) are actually in agreement, but I am sure that a double of 3♦ should be for penalties.

 

Double with diamonds or a hand that is strong enough to hope for 3Hx ?

 

To play that X show diamond lenght doesnt make a lot of sense for me, not only we are on lead but I had the chance to overcall 2D and didnt. Flexible hands looking for 3S/4C/4D are going to be more frequent than aiming at 4D

 

Whereas partner will love bidding 4♣ on five small.

That why its fun to play that the double is takeout and not diamonds if he bid 4C its because hes not forced to bid, hes going to have shapely crap with shape that was afraid to bid freely.

 

Its the same for (1H)--P--(3m) bergen -- ??

 

I like to play that X is a takeout of H, its much safer than passing and doubling, it also allow to pass and double to show a stronger hand (X and X could be for a monster or penalty I guess).

 

W vs red I like to play that X is natural inviting a sacrifice. IMO both these methods are way better than lead directing.

 

Still over bergen a direct 3S is weaker than passing+3S since it stop opener from making a game try.

 

We also use the same weak direct and strong delayed over Bromad like

 

(1H)--X--(2C) (raise)--??

 

2S direct is pre balancing since its stop opener from making a 2D gametry while passing and bidding show foward going values.

 

Its not perfect but I dont regret playing those agreements.

-------------------

I remember a hand like

 

(1H)--1S--(2H)--2S

(3D)--??

 

And me and my old partner where basically on the same wavelenght

 

X = D values interest in 3Hx (doubling only for D is pointless) (maybe a hand that isnt sure about competing is a better way)

3H = game try

3S invite to sac

passing and 3S competing but no interest in sacrificing

passing and X = no idea what it could mean.

[rhm]

If you should not and dare not bid 3♠ now, the initial DBL looks to me like a mistake.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilKing]

Double with diamonds or a hand that is strong enough to hope for 3Hx ?

 

To play that X show diamond lenght doesnt make a lot of sense for me, not only we are on lead but I had the chance to overcall 2D and didnt. Flexible hands looking for 3S/4C/4D are going to be more frequent than aiming at 4D

 

That why its fun to play that the double is takeout and not diamonds if he bid 4C its because hes not forced to bid, hes going to have shapely crap with shape that was afraid to bid freely.

 

 

But you are not making a free double. If the next hand passes, partner needs to know if you can beat 3♦, otherwise he is screwed. How does he know whether we have a 4225 20 count or something else?

 

I'm not saying the double shows long diamonds - just that we have 3♦ beat for sure and that we have a very good hand opposite which partner can pass if broke but compete with any reasonable hand, including in diamonds! Partner should be able to play me for a good 1444 or similar and not go far wrong.

[JLOGIC]

Why is it so unlikely we make 4s here? I guess I'm a walrus but it looks like I'll win my diamond finesse, I'm likely to catch a good spade fit, and unless partner has zero points I might make a game. Getting scared because lho raised to 2h after a to double which could be light or weak or because rho seems to have a shapely red 2 suited (and I think a 5-5 11 count like akxxx kjtxx is much more likely than any other hand type given how many HCP we have...its not like he has a 5422 16 count very often) hand is just bad imo. I see my opps do stuff like double and pass with 20 points sometimes because we have bid on shape and I can't help but laugh. And before you tell me that not everyone psyches or bids aggressively on shapes and fits, I will again submit that when you hold 20 points that is very likely to be happening. it is hard to get dealt 0 points I will never play partner for that.