ATB - Two aggressive Xes

[Jinksy]

Local teams, against weak opponents. We did not cover ourselves in glory on this hand, when there was nothing we could do but watch 4Sx make +2. A successful stripe-tailed ape double maybe, but no-one in the room was bidding slam.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sq643hakdt4caj973&w=sa87hj64dkj965ct4&n=skjt95h732dacq862&e=s2hqt985dq8732ck5&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=pp1n(12-14)p2hdr(Not%20alerted%20at%20the%20time%2C%20but%20declarer%20stated%20at%20the%20end%20it%20was%20agreeing%20Ss%20%5BN%20didn%27t%20know%20what%20it%20meant%20when%20quizzed%5D)p3cp4sdppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Over to the public executioners - AtB.

 

(Edited to add)

Let’s assume that the X showed Hs. There was some confusion in the discussion, both about the bid, but W thought that even if it was lead directing, that since S’s XX seemed to deny Ss, E’s hand should be stronger to merit the X

 

So the ATB is three-way – E, W or the opps’ system breakdown.

[Cyberyeti]

What's your agreement on the double of 2♥ ? we play it as, "lead a heart against NT" and little more than that so we'd never double 4♠ with the other hand.

[ahydra]

X of 2H is fine. X of 4S... wtf? West can't even realistically double 6S!

 

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

X of 2H is fine. X of 4S... wtf? West can't even realistically double 6S!

 

ahydra

 

Depends if W is used to the style where the X of 2♥ shows a real hand.

[Jinksy]

Edited in a clarification of 2H X to the OP.

[Cyberyeti]

At what point was the explanation of the XX given ? You might have had the possibility of a director call (I only get part of the explanation when I click on the bid, it's too long to see it all).

[ArtK78]

X of 2H is fine. X of 4S... wtf? West can't even realistically double 6S!

 

ahydra

+1

[billw55]

X of 2H is fine. X of 4S... wtf? West can't even realistically double 6S!

Depends if W is used to the style where the X of 2♥ shows a real hand.

heheh, nice combo there guys. Blame to both. Perhaps a little more for west.

[rhm]

Depends if W is used to the style where the X of 2♥ shows a real hand.

I think you are missing the point.

This is a common theme which many experienced players get wrong for no good reason.

In a contested auction you get a wealth of information and sometimes that information might look contradictory. (It rarely is)

Too many players indiscriminately trust their partner's bidding and ignore their opponents bidding and think this is the right attitude.

This is just plain stupid. You might misunderstand your partner or your partner may have misbid.

 

Let us look at this bidding.

 

1) It is clear that North cannot be broke when being vulnerable raised the bidding level to show a second suit. After the 1NT opening North must have a very good picture of their combined assets.

2) South accepts and bids 4♠. Whatever his redouble meant he now believes his hand has improved and 4♠ has reasonable chances with his balanced hand.

 

I can not see what in West hand suggests that North South misjudged their potential. I do not care what the first DBL of 2♥ meant.

Taking dubious actions motivated by hybris is the best way to lose against a weaker team.

Against weaker teams you should play solid Bridge. Aggressive actions are sensible when you are the weaker team, but I would never double 4♠, which is just poor judgment.

100% to West

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

I think you are missing the point.

This is a common theme which many experienced players get wrong for no good reason.

In a contested auction you get a wealth of information and sometimes that information might look contradictory. (It rarely is)

Too many players indiscriminately trust their partner's bidding and ignore their opponents bidding and think this is the right attitude.

This is just plain stupid. You might misunderstand your partner or your partner may have misbid.

 

Let us look at this bidding.

 

1) It is clear that North cannot be broke when being vulnerable raised the bidding level to show a second suit. After the 1NT opening North must have a very good picture of their combined assets.

2) South accepts and bids 4♠. Whatever his redouble meant he now believes his hand has improved and 4♠ has reasonable chances with his balanced hand.

 

I can not see what in West hand suggests that North South misjudged their potential. I do not care what the first DBL of 2♥ meant.

Taking dubious actions motivated by hybris is the best way to lose against a weaker team.

100% to West

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

Depends if you think 4♠= is going to be a bucket out anyway, little damage done by a double in that case, but the signs are there that X is going to work out badly. In abstract this can be going off opposite the right 4 count (♦ Ax and a trump) but the signs are that partner has quite a few diamonds. Opps clearly have a spade fit, it also looks like they may well have a club fit for the 4♠ bid. The doubler also has too many hearts. If E does have a real hand, N will have something like 6 spades and 5 clubs to justify bidding at that level, in which case you might well be better off bidding on rather than doubling, as it is, 5♦x is cheaper than the table result.

[Jinksy]

I'm starting to regret setting this as an ATB. I was E, and W agrees he shouldn't have Xed, so the only question is whether my first X was defensible. I'll start a separate thread for that.

[dake50]

Must every 2-suiter with hearts start with double?

Looks as if a H+D takeout gets to a cheap 5-red sac vs 4S.

5Rx-3 as CK is under CA.

[Cyberyeti]

Must every 2-suiter with hearts start with double?

Looks as if a H+D takeout gets to a cheap 5-red sac vs 4S.

5Rx-3 as CK is under CA.

-4 on best defence, can always ruff the other red suit but may get out for -3.

[Jinksy]

According to DF, 5D is -3 by E, -4 by W.

[Cyberyeti]

According to DF, 5D is -3 by E, -4 by W.

 

True, you can't both take the heart ruff and get a club through one way assuming you guess to play low on a small club through.

[the hog]

X of 2H is fine. X of 4S... wtf? West can't even realistically double 6S!

 

ahydra

 

The x of 2H is not fine. It is an absolutely appalling bid that a beginner would not make. In a fair world south would have the card's to xx. It is this sort of bid that really makes me shudder. Why do it? Are your Hs that good?

By the way, x by an unpassed hand shows a willingness to compete and not Hs the way that I play.

[Cyberyeti]

The x of 2H is not fine. It is an absolutely appalling bid that a beginner would not make. In a fair world south would have the card's to xx. It is this sort of bid that really makes me shudder. Why do it? Are your Hs that good?

By the way, x by an unpassed hand shows a willingness to compete and not Hs the way that I play.

 

The ♥ suit is not in itself a problem, it's the rest of the hand. While a heart lead can cost with this holding, it often won't, and may be essential, but you don't have any great reason to prefer hearts to diamonds here (if partner has ♥xx, ♦KJxx you want a diamond not a heart). To double on this hand I would want more spades so it's more likely they'll play NT which is where I want the heart lead rather than against a spade contract, and less diamonds so it's less likely to deflect partner from the normal winning lead.

[the hog]

You appear to have a strange attitude to those doubles. The x by an unpassed hand shos a willingness to compete. By a passed hand it requests a lead of that suit. How on earth do you know that hs are worth leading? You dont if the opener xxs you may well be in deep poo. The spade holding has nothing at all to do with anything.

[RSClyde]

Whether or not one should double 2♥, doubling 4♠ is a complete nonsequitur. "Partner wants a heart lead? He must have a huge hand!"

It's like one player opening a 15-17 1nt with 14, and their partner bidding game on a 3 count and asking who's to blame. While either player could have technically avoided it, one player used judgment, rightly or wrongly, the other left their judgment in their car.

[Cyberyeti]

You appear to have a strange attitude to those doubles. The x by an unpassed hand shos a willingness to compete. By a passed hand it requests a lead of that suit. How on earth do you know that hs are worth leading? You dont if the opener xxs you may well be in deep poo. The spade holding has nothing at all to do with anything.

 

You keep repeating this but it doesn't make it true. Some people show a good hand, some show a suit they're happy for partner to raise, some double purely for the lead. We will happily double on KQ109x and out and have had some success doubling minors on good 4 card holdings.

 

The spade holding does matter, if you have a stiff spade, it's much more likely they'll play spades than NT, and that will change the holdings on which you want to double for the lead. For example I might not double with x, QJ9xx, Axx, xxxx but I'd be more likely to with xxx, QJ9xx, Axxx, x.

[Jinksy]

I'm going to mount a defence of this X, since I don't think the criticisms are giving the full story. The arguments against:

 

1) I might help declarer make his contract.

2) They might XX with a good H holding.

3) I might get partner to make a poor lead from such as Ax.

 

The first is very unlikely against weak opponents, who I suspect won't pay any attention to the bidding at all during the play. What's more, since they play a weak NT, the a priori odds of them bidding game at all opposite a passed hand are slim, so this is most likely to help this with a part score if at all.

 

The second is possible but rare, and again rarer vs these opps who might not even have the system/confidence about system to deal with it. Look at the actual sequence for (admittedly post-hoc) evidence for this - N pulled S's redouble with three Hs, a ruffing value, and a hand that was about to push for game! Even if it did get XXed to me, I can pull to Ds, which gives me a chance of getting out for less damage than a making game.

 

The third is probably the most likely, but still pretty unusual - even if P has that, it might be the right lead against either 3N or 4S if he can get into my hand. Most of the time if he leads from a holding he might not otherwise - Kx(x), etc to 4S it won't do any harm, and if it's vs 3N it will be on an invitational auction where he wants a passive lead - which my Hs look much like being.

 

So I think the purported downsides are minor. The arguments in favour:

 

1) Pass is lead deterring.

2) They might well be about to fizzle in 2S, and this gives me a chance to offer a 3H competitive bid without actually bidding it.

 

No-one's even mentioned the first yet. I'm not sure how strong the effect is, but P on lead will note that I have failed to X Hs. Against 3N, that might push him to lead eg a D in preference to a H with HXXXX, DXXX, or worse, Hxxx, DJxx, and so on. Much of the time when a H is the best lead, since I have failed to indicate it, he will fail to find it.

 

Re the second, if I pass and 2S comes back to me, I won't much like Xing in case P passes, so I suppose I'll bid 2N. If he then bids 2C, well and good, but if bids 3D on such as HKxxx, DJxx, Cxx, or on any holding such that H => D > C, we'll have missed our best spot. Alternatively I could try a unilateral 3H at that point, which seems pretty grim. Or I could try X now which, notwithstanding the XX possibility, seems significantly safer. If P doesn't compete to the three level, it gives me an option to bid 3D when 2S comes back to me. Normally I probably won't, but I might be able to pick up some tells from LHO that his Ss are good enough to be worth competing. Against strong opps I'd think this too risky, but here I doubt they'll be able to judge when to X.

[billw55]

If you are choosing to ignore certain risks because your opponents are bad, ok. But in that case it isn't really a matter for discussion in the expert forum.

 

As for the lead, you have some points about hearts being led. But you forget also, what partner may not lead when you double. For all you know, he has a perfectly good normal lead, and you are forcing him off it to lead a suit that full of holes.

 

I know this is resulting a little, but look at the actual deal. Partner will be quite surprised to see declarer play the ♥AK after your double! He might even misdefend the entire hand assuming you have the other honor. Meanwhile, had you ended up defending 3NT, his natural diamond lead looks best.

[Jinksy]

If you are choosing to ignore certain risks because your opponents are bad, ok. But in that case it isn't really a matter for discussion in the expert forum.

 

Eh? Players of all strengths are allowed to play against poor opposition, and the tactics they use will influence the result.

 

But you forget also, what partner may not lead when you double.

 

I didn't forget it, I specifically discussed it.

 

I know this is resulting a little, but look at the actual deal ... had you ended up defending 3NT...

 

Ok: we did not end up defending 3NT.

[ggwhiz]

Eh? Players of all strengths are allowed to play against poor opposition, and the tactics they use will influence the result.

 

Just my opinion but employing these "tactics" against poor opponents is absolutely horrid.

 

It usually results in a three against one bidding scenario and in this spectacular example it's six against two. Your teammates.

[ahydra]

You keep repeating this but it doesn't make it true. Some people show a good hand, some show a suit they're happy for partner to raise, some double purely for the lead. We will happily double on KQ109x and out and have had some success doubling minors on good 4 card holdings.

 

The spade holding does matter, if you have a stiff spade, it's much more likely they'll play spades than NT, and that will change the holdings on which you want to double for the lead. For example I might not double with x, QJ9xx, Axx, xxxx but I'd be more likely to with xxx, QJ9xx, Axxx, x.

 

This is a very good point actually.

 

Q1098x is surely enough for X (lead-directing), particularly if we have some possible side entries. Partner would probably never lead his doubleton heart through dummy's J, or from his Jxx or Kxx, etc, otherwise. [if you think that Q1098x is bad, my partner once doubled Stayman (for the lead, the way we play) with a void :) You can see what he was getting at, but unfortunately we ended up defending 3N!]

 

ahydra