ATB

[Fluffy]

[hv=pc=n&w=s6ht852dt742c7543&e=skqjha93daj65caj6&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1d1sp2sdp3d3sdp4dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

4♦ went -300

[CSGibson]

East. yes, it looks like 3♠ is going down, but his initial sequence showed diamonds and a take-out double of spades. His next double doesn't change the take-out nature of his hand and transform magically into a penalty double just because that's what he wants it to be. He's got his plus vs no making game, and if he acts, he risks partner doing exactly what he did.

 

W made the last decision, which proved to be wrong. E gave him the permission and information that led him to that decision, though.

[cherdano]

I would suggest to make an agreement that double of 2♠ is takeout.

[ggwhiz]

I would suggest to make an agreement that double of 2♠ is takeout.

 

Yes. And East should open 2nt or bid 2nt at their 2nd turn and then a penalty double will be left in.

 

Also as a matter of style my partnership opens 1♣ with that shape so that 1♦ openers have at least a little shape to them.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Not that it would matter here, but why 3D instead of 3H ?

[CSGibson]

Not that it would matter here, but why 3D instead of 3H ?

 

 

Actually, since they aren't playing lebensohl here, why not a two-places-to-play 2N?

[Trinidad]

Not that it would matter here, but why 3D instead of 3H ?

Because for a takeout double after a 1♦ opening, East's diamonds are supposed to be/will often be longer than his hearts?

 

Rik

[mcphee]

It looks to me like N get all the blame for failing to dble, or could it be S?

 

The next portion of the blame (the other 100%) goes the our opening bidder who was silly enough to take a bid over 2S. I am not sure if the player missed and A and K and then attempted to catch up, but it seems silly to keep on bidding facing a hand not even good enough to make a neg double. With both opps bidding the good news is I opened a D rather than 2N and got saved, why in the world am I bidding now over 2S?

[mfa1010]

East 105%

West -5% for not bidding hearts.

[whereagles]

East, for not having opened 2NT :)

[gszes]

the x of 3s is wrong given the bidding and obvious

lack of partnership agreements. With this bidding

sequence the second x should look more like

xxx AQJ AJxx AKJ. Note that opposite this hand

4d might actually have a chance even opposite the

dreck partner has. The 2nd x using the bidding given

is a stronger t/o not penalty.

 

IMO a much stronger bidding sequence would be to use

the impossible 2n from w (could not bid 1n and cannot

possibly have a 2n bid now) as leb (my choice) or a

2 places to play (see csgibson). This would have allowed

west a 2n bid over 2sx letting p know they have a real dog

(imo this should mean less than a king) and if east now x

3s the x by e is now penalty since there is almost no case

where any semi balanced hand will make much at the 4 level

when it was not opened some form of game forcing bid. West

the has no problem with passing the x since they promised

nothing and they are delivering on their promise.

 

I would add that over 3s 3n by east should be asking w to

pick their suit. (I know that will not be overly popular but

the bidding to this point pretty much precludes any hand

where east can want to play 3n).

[the hog]

East. yes, it looks like 3♠ is going down, but his initial sequence showed diamonds and a take-out double of spades. His next double doesn't change the take-out nature of his hand and transform magically into a penalty double just because that's what he wants it to be. He's got his plus vs no making game, and if he acts, he risks partner doing exactly what he did.

 

W made the last decision, which proved to be wrong. E gave him the permission and information that led him to that decision, though.

 

This is a good post and I agree with the comments. Was a 2NT opening outside of your range?

 

With this bidding

sequence the second x should look more like "xxx AQJ AJxx AKJx.:

 

No, it should not. This hand is no a takeout of 2S, which is what the second double shows.

[rmnka447]

ATB -- 100% East.

 

East's second double can never be interpreted by West as a penalty double. East's first double shows extras and a willingness to compete. It tends to deny cards in the ♠ suit because East had the option to bid 2 NT to show them with extras. Therefore, West will take the second double as showing distribution as well as extras -- something like 4-4-4-1 or 5-4-4. So West will never sit for 3 ♠ Dbld.

 

East should know West can't have much because South made a vulnerable overcall missing 3 ♠ honors and North raised. Give them something like 10 HCP and 5 HCP respectively and West has maybe 5 HCP at most and often will have less.

 

Playing 20-21 HCP opening 2 NTs, that's how I'd open the 4-3-3-3 East hand. If that isn't your system, then bid a suit and plan to rebid in NT. If that's the way you go, then I think a 2 NT rebid is right rather than the double.

 

Finally, after the opponent's reach 3 ♠, East should realize that West might not be able to sit for a Dbl because West's hand is so poor -- even if the Dbl is presumably a penalty double. At that point, it's just better to take your pretty sure positive by passing rather than giving partner the chance to bid again by Dbling.

[PhilKing]

East opened 1♦ because he felt he was not strong enough for 2NT. I agree - it's difficult to imagine missing game by opening 1♦, and 2NT will routinely get you to game opposite five points or a good four, and you rate to go off almost always.

 

But he should have passed on the next round. As it happens, doubling pushed them one higher, but then he got greedy. 3♠ one down would have been a huge result, but even defending 2♠ making would have been good, with 2NT destined to go two down.

[MrAce]

East opened 1♦ because he felt he was not strong enough for 2NT. I agree - it's difficult to imagine missing game by opening 1♦, and 2NT will routinely get you to game opposite five points or a good four, and you rate to go off almost always.

 

But he should have passed on the next round. As it happens, doubling pushed them one higher, but then he got greedy. 3♠ one down would have been a huge result, but even defending 2♠ making would have been good, with 2NT destined to go two down.

 

 

If indeed E opened 1♦ because 20 hcp balanced hand was a 2 NT in their system but he downgraded it to 1 ♦ i could not disagree with you more. If 2 NT showing a balanced hand 20-21 was not available in their system, then disregard my comments i am about to make.

 

-2 NT means balanced hand, we have a 4333 hand - Check

-2 NT means 20-21 hcp - We have 20 - Check

 

You do not really need more "checks" to open a very well defined 2 NT. In my humble observation in BBF, people are giving too much credit to their own hand evaluation skills, in an attempt to fix the glitches or bugs in their system. Ironically it is often the people who betrays system much more than system is falling short.

 

Before it comes to our "Tailor cut precision" hand evaluation skills, there are much more factors which are way more prior imo. If it was as simple as Phil showed it, and even if we agreed %100 with him, for the sake of argument, that what he all said about getting to games that fails and this hand doesn't worth 2 NT and all, it is still wrong not to open 2 NT imo.

 

-You are trying to predict the final contracts, with a balanced 20 hcp, even before you opened the hand, and making pre adjustments. With a hand which is very well defined in your system. It is often the best thing to tell a very good description of your hand with 1 bid if this is available

-It is very naive to think that, by not opening 2NT we will often be able to show our balanced strong hand 1 grade less than 2 NT. (18-19) Unfortunately this often is not the case.

-NT hands are the hands that describes themselves much better than any other bids, even with the existence of worst flaws that comes to my mind.

 

For the sake of god, tell me which one you prefer ?

 

A- To open 2 NT with a 4333 20 hcp and accept its flaws even if we agreed that it is flawed. Which in the worst case will put you in same position with the majority of field or other table. Balanced and perfectly normal 20 hcp hand.

NT hands are the hands that you do not want to put your hand evaluation skills on contest very often. Again, especially when you are holding a textbook 2 NT hand.

 

B- To start with 1 ♦ and take responsibility of getting out of system because you believe your tailor cut precision of hand evaluation is more important than all other factors, opening a whole new can of worms in the bidding. Worrying about the hands that our systemic 2 NT will fail.

Well..you know what they say " watch what you are asking for". You got it ! Now that you are in a position of making more hand evaluations + decisions after 2♠. You may pass, double or bid 2 NT. Sometimes you hit it sometimes you don't.

But i would take a flawed 2 NT on any given day against trying to come out on top by opening 1 ♦ , putting myself through so many hand evaluations and decisions, even if we agreed that 2 NT is flawed, which is very debatable in its own case imho.

 

If i saw my pd's hand, i would not want to open 2 NT either. So pd has a hand that is very unsuitable vs a 2 NT opening. And opening 1 ♦ landed us on a 4-4 fit, but we still are not in anywhere better than what we would be after a 2 NT opening. Of course i see you could be winning had we passed 2♠ on this hand, peacefully with 20 hcp, but in another hand that could be the losing decision.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would pass the 2nd double.

 

Hence I go with West.

 

The 2nd double may be greedy, but West already said,

that he has no interest in defending, that he has 4

diamonds, and he knowes, that East knowes, that he will

be broke. He has no reason to bid 4D.

 

After reading the comments, I did make a recount

of the HCP, and came to 20, instead of 19, so this

should be a 2NT opening bid.

So if 2NT would be 20-21HCP, I have to give East some

portion of the blame, let's make this 25% for East, 75%

for West.

East can always say, that 3Sx would have been successful.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[DJNeill]

East 48%, West 51.4%, poster 0.6%

 

East because why rock the boat with a 2nd double and I would have opened 2N if that is 20-21.

 

West because East clearly doesn't have an offensive hand - else East would have pushed on himself to 4D having heard what West's suit really is, and the auction is developing in a way that means 4 of anything would often be doubled.

 

Poster because they didn't say what the opening 2N range was when 20-21 is pretty standard, assuming this is standard. If 2N is 21-22, we have a small consideration of how to show 20 but it probably doesn't matter since there seem to be no agreements anyways.

 

It would be different if I thought that 3S was making and 4D was not getting doubled, but this is not that case.

 

Thanks,

Dan

[Lord Molyb]

west 110%, east -10% for not opening 2NT