Doubled at MP

[awm]

[hv=pc=n&s=sq987h54dkq6cajt2&n=sk4hkj2dt94c98754&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cd2c2h3cppd(short%20BIT)ppp]266|200[/hv]

 

LHO leads a 4th best heart and you play the jack, losing to RHO's ace. After some thought, RHO plays a small club. What's your plan for this hand? Perhaps most importantly, how are you playing the club suit?

[Alik1974]

Perhaps you can put in the J for now and postpone the decision after you have some more info, ie. who has the ♠A and ♦A etc.

[twoshy]

I think LHO is likely to be 4441 with a stiff club honour or 4432. With 4441 and no club honour I would expect him to raise to 3♥ regularly, even if his initial double was quite light -- in this case he would definitely not pass 3♣X. I think RHO intended his double as takeout or as showing a hand with unclear direction. The reason I am playing RHO to have made a mistake/done something murky is because of the marginal BIT and because they may have had a misunderstanding. LHO's not raising and not pulling with 4441 and no club honour would just be a basic bridge error IMO.

 

My plan is to win the club ace, play the heart king and take a ruff, play a spade to the king and play a spade to the 9. This endplay won't work if I play the club jack first, because I need to use three trumps in hand to draw trumps and the fourth to ruff a heart, so LHO will have a heart exit.

[steve2005]

for ♣ really need split honors or east to have KQx. so will play small ♣ just in case its KQx.

♠ situation doeasnt matter, will only get 1 trick unless defense fumbled and rises or leads ace.

wether you make or not depends on placement of A and J ♦. take a pick who has what.

[lesh]

[hv=pc=n&s=sq987h54dkq6cajt2&n=sk4hkj2dt94c98754&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cd2c2h3cppd(short%20BIT)ppp]266|200[/hv]

 

LHO leads a 4th best heart and you play the jack, losing to RHO's ace. After some thought, RHO plays a small club. What's your plan for this hand? Perhaps most importantly, how are you playing the club suit?

 

I will play the A♣. From what I understand X is not penalty and has the meaning to compete. Therefore, I doubt he would dbl with KQx♣ - more likely his pd has singleton honour♣ or 2nd.

 

After the A♣ I will play another ♣ and draw trumps if they turn to be 3-1. I will also carefully watch what LHO discards. If he parts with 2♥ then I will ruff a ♥ and play ♠ to the K♠ and ♠ just covering and now LHO will be endplayed. If he doesnt discard ♥ then I will play ♠ to the K and if it wins then I will play my KQ♦ to be good. I dont think RHO will DBl with A♥, ♣ honour and 2 Jacks. Therefore, I will play the X over 1♣ to be more aggressive.

 

If trumps turn up to be 2-2 then I will ruff ♥ and play ♠ to the K and ♠ back covering and end playing LHO.

 

In any case if my K♠ loses then I will finess J♦.

[awm]

The double is definitely penalty.

 

I'm surprised by the claim that west should always raise with 4441; shouldn't that be a real invite? It's different from a two level raise and east will often need to decide whether to bid game?

[CamHenry]

[hv=pc=n&s=sq987h54dkq6cajt2&n=sk4hkj2dt94c98754&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cd2c2h3cppd(short%20BIT)ppp]266|200[/hv]

 

LHO leads a 4th best heart and you play the jack, losing to RHO's ace. After some thought, RHO plays a small club. What's your plan for this hand? Perhaps most importantly, how are you playing the club suit?

 

I'm losing 3 aces, and at least one club. I therefore need to avoid the second diamond loser and avoid losing two clubs.

 

If I play the ♣A now, I'm giving up on RHO having underled KQx(x). That seems daft: if he leads an honour from that holding, he's still only taking one trick; if he's underled Hxx I just have to take the finesse next time. Sure, the club honours could be KQ with W, and E's double is on Axx/Axxx/AJxx/xx, but that's a dubious double at best.

 

I'm playing small, giving W an opportunity to find an exit. If he plays a heart, I win and ruff the last one; I then lead up in spades (starting with the 9, in case it picks up a small honour from W).

[karlson]

I would definitely play the ♣J. It costs righty basically nothing to underlead KQx, and even if I lose to stiff honor, I don't waste my dummy entry (run the 9 next time) and have excellent chances (e.g. no one mentioned ♠J/Txx with righty).

[mikeh]

Others have said this before me, but in my view it has to be right to withhold the A on this trick.

 

While we are taking inferences from BIT's in the bidding and in the play at our own risk, it seems foolish not to do so on this hand.

 

Dummy hardly screams: switch to a trump! The more common return would be a diamond. My inferential count on shape is that RHO is likely to be 3=5=2=3, and LHO 4=4=4=1.

 

RHO knows that we are going to play him for club cards, so he has reasoned that the best way to avoid getting picked off is to lead low himself (or to find his partner with stiff 10 or J). Relatively few players have ever led the x from KQx: all of our bridge lives have been spent leading the K. This means that our automatic instinct, when RHO leads x, is to place him with something like Hxx, a holding from which we have led and seen led an 'x' all of our bridge life. We are all creatures of habit. Look how many posters here played the A.

 

The fact that he had to think a short time before switching adds to the strength of the inference.

 

As for the inference that LHO must have something in clubs due to the failure to bid 3♥, I think that is flat out wrong. When he doubled he would assume that his partner would make competitive decisions based on the assumption that he showed a minimum opening hand with 4=4=4=1 shape. If that's what he has, and everything we've seen so far suggests that it is, he ought not to be bidding 3♥ over our 3♣. Doing so is hanging partner, who may have stretched to bid 2♥ in an effort to push us a level higher.

 

And as for his final pass, well, he presumably noticed the BIT and we've all been righteously indignant at opps who take advantage of such BIT's....it may well be that we've found an honest opp here. I trust that none of us would pull with say AJxx Qxxx Axxx x having seen partner break tempo before doubling.

[twoshy]

What have you been reading? The two of us who played the ♣A did so because of the murkiness of the double, not because of the thought that "Wow, no way RHO could have underled KQx after doubling, that's so strange! It's just so automatic to lead the K from KQx!" Never mind the fact that the opposition have shown a 5-4 fit. I don't know why a diamond is an automatic switch, either. What if our hand was Axxx, xx, Kxx, AJTx? Then if he switches from his diamond jack, he hands the contract to us on a platter. Maybe he thought for a while because he doesn't want his partner to be endplayed on the first round of clubs after declarer eliminates hearts.

 

I thought it was normal to raise here, I could well be wrong though. My rationale is that, sure, while double is often shapely when around the 10-12 range, there's no reason it can't also be 12-14 with a 4333 or a 4342. I would view this subset of hands as being more common due to the likelier shapes. Whether or not you double on this shape has been discussed to death on these forums. It is fair to say that it is common to double on those shapes, though. Also, the 2♥ bid covers a wide range. It could be a reasonable 1♥ response to the double, upgraded in order to get into the auction. It could be just shy of a 3♥ bid, with partner having chosen to bid 2♥ and double later rather than committing to 3♥ on a four card suit with sterile shape. That's why I don't play double as "definitely for penalties." That's why I think it is insane to repress an extra card of trump support, extra distribution and only two defensive tricks opposite a non-jump 2♥ advance, just to defend against what looks like a nine card fit at the three level. Doubled into game. Honesty has nothing to do with it, it's just logic. If my partner passed my double with AJxx Qxxx Axxx x I would find a new partner.

 

Please excuse the snarkiness but your post reads as being pretty damn belittling.

[mikeh]

What have you been reading? The two of us who played the ♣A did so because of the murkiness of the double, not because of the thought that "Wow, no way RHO could have underled KQx after doubling, that's so strange! It's just so automatic to lead the K from KQx!" Never mind the fact that the opposition have shown a 5-4 fit. I don't know why a diamond is an automatic switch, either. What if our hand was Axxx, xx, Kxx, AJTx? Then if he switches from his diamond jack, he hands the contract to us on a platter. Maybe he thought for a while because he doesn't want his partner to be endplayed on the first round of clubs after declarer eliminates hearts.

 

I thought it was normal to raise here, I could well be wrong though. My rationale is that, sure, while double is often shapely when around the 10-12 range, there's no reason it can't also be 12-14 with a 4333 or a 4342. I would view this subset of hands as being more common due to the likelier shapes. Whether or not you double on this shape has been discussed to death on these forums. It is fair to say that it is common to double on those shapes, though. Also, the 2♥ bid covers a wide range. It could be a reasonable 1♥ response to the double, upgraded in order to get into the auction. It could be just shy of a 3♥ bid, with partner having chosen to bid 2♥ and double later rather than committing to 3♥ on a four card suit with sterile shape. That's why I don't play double as "definitely for penalties." That's why I think it is insane to repress an extra card of trump support, extra distribution and only two defensive tricks opposite a non-jump 2♥ advance, just to defend against what looks like a nine card fit at the three level. Doubled into game. Honesty has nothing to do with it, it's just logic. If my partner passed my double with AJxx Qxxx Axxx x I would find a new partner.

 

Please excuse the snarkiness but your post reads as being pretty damn belittling.

Feel free to snark!

 

But may I suggest reading the thread before posting? Once you realize that the double of 3♣ was 'definitely penalty', you might want to rethink your assumption that LHO could be 4333 or even 4342.

 

At the risk of seeming to belittle you again, when trying to figure out what is going on you need to review the entire auction and think about both missing hands, not just one of them. The opps have a combined 21 count. We can assume that LHO is minimum: we may think that doubling for penalties with say xxx Axxx xxx KQx is nuts, but surely doing it with xxx Axxx Jxx Kxx is even more nuts? The stronger we make RHO, the weaker is LHO.

 

So: if LHO is minimum, he is likely to be 4=4=4=1. And he is unlikely to hold a stiff club honour: now he's doubling with what is effectively a 9 count or so. Not impossible, but unlikely.

 

Your point about LHO raising with minimum 4=4=4=1 hands, and thus allowing us to eliminate that holding, is invalid. You may personally think it good bridge to do so but you are in the minority. When trying to analyze action at the table, it is a mistake to assume that your style is also the opps' style. You've done that twice: once with respect to LHO not raising to 3♥ and again with your view of the double of 3♣ as takeout, even tho in the latter case we have been told by the person who posted the hand that it was penalty.

 

As for the suggestion that you may have been influenced to play the club A because of a lack of exposure to the notion of leading x from KQx, I apologize since it was presumptuous of me to make that suggestion. I do however maintain that most of us are influenced in our decision-making by an unconscious bias arising from prior experience. The fact that it is unconscious means, by definition, that we are unaware of it, so may vehemently deny that it played a role at all. Note, I am not suggesting this was the case with you! And my comment wasn't aimed directly or uniquely at you.

 

Finally, as to your last point: if you were my partner, and held AJxx Qxxx Axxx x and pulled my double we'd be discussing this afterwards. When my partner holds the values and shape that he has indicated and I make a penalty double, my partners sit for it and we score up a plus. Obviously, I can't construct a hand on which I, as East, would double 3♣ given the N-S hands...unless West is 4=4=5=0.

 

If west is 4=4=5=0, then he can and should pull, no matter how fast or slow was my double. But if he is 4=4=4=1 or so, then he'd better pass.

 

If he pulled my in tempo double, I'd tell him not to do so in the future since I was playing him for that hand and still doubled...don't second guess me. If he pulled my slow double, I might just decide not to continue the partnership, especially if pulling worked out. I don't knowingly play with unethical players.

[PhilKing]

If I play the ♣J and it loses to an honour, I still have many ways of making the contract. There are a few variants, but one biggie is pinning ♠Jxx or ♠Txx with East.

 

The ♣A just seems like way too big a position to take.

[awm]

At the table I played the jack and lost to the king. Opponents then continued a small diamond to east's ace and a diamond to me. I went to dummy with a heart and lead a club, east following small. Finesse?

 

The ace of clubs players clearly will not face this problem, although they might end up having to guess diamonds on their own.

[mikeh]

At the table I played the jack and lost to the king. Opponents then continued a small diamond to east's ace and a diamond to me. I went to dummy with a heart and lead a club, east following small. Finesse?

 

The ace of clubs players clearly will not face this problem, although they might end up having to guess diamonds on their own.

Wow.

 

LHO doubled on AJxx Qxxx Jxxx K?

 

or AJxx Qxxx Jxx KQ, or some equivalent 4=3=4=2.

 

And if the latter, rho doubled for penalties on the equivalent of xxx Axxx Axxx xx?

 

These guys are too tough, tho I suspect we'd have the better of them in the long run.

 

We have not only the question of which one made the more bizzare double but also of restricted choice. I'm hooking but with the sinking feeling that this is a hand like those in BridgeMaster, where you've made the wrong play early (not that I think I did) and now the critical card changes places depending on your play: rise, and LHO shows out, hook and LHO wins. Some days one should just stay in bed (and off of BBO).

[wyman]

I'm hooking too. Per mike's earlier point, it would be even weirder to see RHO lead low from xx than to see him lead low from KQx.

 

Also it makes me happy that other people have that BridgeMaster feeling, haha.

[gnasher]

At the table I played the jack and lost to the king. Opponents then continued a small diamond to east's ace and a diamond to me.

What diamonds did they play on these tricks? And what heart was led at trick one?

 

Everyone seems to be asssuming that hearts are 4-4 (except for the people who think they're 4-5 :) ), but isn't the lead also consistent with Qxx-Axxxx ?