Wackojack Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 [hv=pc=n&w=sa9hq8daj8632cjt5&e=sk4hkjt975432dc64&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1n4h4sdppp]266|200[/hv] 1NT was 12-14. You may wish to apportion the blame (if any) for the bidding. However, it was the worst of all worlds when I made the normal looking lead of Q♥. What would you do differently? Team mates were in 5♠x-2, so -13 imps against -5 when I don't make the (I think) unlikely lead of A♦. Or a certain? -9imps if we take the 5♥ (phantom?)sacrifice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 We had the exact same auction, lead and result T_T I think 5H is better than doubling 4S - with a likely heart void in either N or S, it really doesn't look like you're going to beat 4S. Leading HQ is perfectly normal. Indeed 5H normally makes in practice - requires an unlikely club lead from South's ♠QJ8532 ♥- ♦QT7 ♣A972 ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 5H X made at our table, when partner led the Q of spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 We made it on a diamond lead, but we weren't doubled. Anyway I think that double is best in the West seat. Well, that's what I did, anyway. In the OP case I think that ♦A is clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Duplicate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 I agree that the heart lead is probably 'normal', but I don't think that makes it 'correct'. We tend to instinctively lead partner's suit, but there are times when I think one needs to sit back for a moment and think about the lead. Partner bid 4♥. Now, he may well have the heart A and even the AK. However, that trick (expecting 2 tricks on defence in the suit is fanciful even if he has AK) to go away if we lead diamonds seems.....implausible. Meanwhile, if the opps have first round control (as in fact they both did), leading the heart surrenders a tempo. In the interim, partner may be very short in our longest suit. I don't think it is playing on results to argue that the diamond Ace is the correct lead on this auction. I'm not saying it would always work....if partner held a stiff and dummy had, say, Kx in hearts, we might well not get the continuation right...and there will be other times when, on the lead, partner wins, can tell that there is no future in the suit, and switches to a diamond, such that we have no choice but to win and give him a ruff. However, I think the odds favour leading the diamond Ace so as to get a look at dummy, while also maybe finding out that partner can ruff this suit. After all, we doubled(!) with 2 defensive tricks.....thus we are playing partner for 2 as well, and a ruff is far more viable a candidate for his second than is a high card. As it happens, I think the problem was in the auction more than in the lead. I cannot imagine doubling 4♠ on this auction...I think 5♥ was clear. I think it to be an excellent rule that when partner makes a high-level pre-empt and we have a fit we should assume that partner has no defence. Thus, to make a penalty double one needs to have a decent chance of beating the contract in one's own hand.....and we have no semblance of even a 3rd trick, let alone a 4th. Incidentally, I assume that at the other table the diamond Ace was led. I appreciate that at the 5-level one sometimes thinks differently than at the 4-level, but I think that that can be overdone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 your p 4h bid is a form of unilateral decision that essentially states that given the right circumstances 4h should be our best possible game and slam should be very unlikely given the bidding. These types of hands have a rather large range and most are preemptive in nature (ie weak). When you think of the 4h bid this way the x of 4s starts to look like a little to no upside decision since there are few if any weak hands p will be able to produce the needed 2 defensive tricks with a fair amount of downside and that assumes they wont make 5s). If you think you can set 4s pass and save x where things look at least a bit more certain. A pass of 4s is not forcing or suggesting any action to partner. 5h might also be a winning action with the heart Q and 2 aces making it far less likely the opps will want to x. If you want to bid beyond 4s IMO your best bet is 4n (rkc) and at least pretending to be interested in slam intending to sign off in 5h no matter what p bids (since you have the heart Q they cannot bid 5s). If the opps compete over your 4n at least p can now have a say in the proceedings as they can expect at least 2 aces from you for your 4n bid. If you bid 5h they will have no rational reason to do anything. One last upside to 4n is that p (expecting at least 2 aces from you) might have the right sort of hand to consider 6h void Kxxxxxxxx Kx Ax for ex:) IMO 4n=9 pass=6 5h=4 x=3 nothing is perfect and 5h takes a lower rating because it is 1 dimensional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfa1010 Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 To get unbiased answers it would be better to show only the west hand. Fwiw, I think west has a 5♥ bid. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 My partner bid 5♥ after (1♣)-4♥-(4♠). 5♥ looks obvious to me, in either auction. As East, I was also thinking that I might remove a double. With a nine-card suit it's not often right to defend at the four-level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broze Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 As East, I was also thinking that I might remove a double. With a nine-card suit it's not often right to defend at the four-level. Does this imply that you would also have bid 5H after 4H-(4S)-Pass-(Pass)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Fwiw, I think west has a 5♥ bid. I think that partner's bid is a bit wider-ranging than others seem to. Perhaps partner has decent defence, but is hoping to buy the contract and avoid having to compete over 4♠. That's why I like double, and why I chose it at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 I think that partner's bid is a bit wider-ranging than others seem to. Perhaps partner has decent defence, but is hoping to buy the contract and avoid having to compete over 4♠. That's why I like double, and why I chose it at the time.I don't get this at all. You have to decide whether you want double to be penalty or card-showing, with transferable values, such that partner will convert with defence and bid 5♥ otherwise. What you can't do is to play it as meaning both, since that reduces your agreement to having partner become an inspired guesser. In a vacuum, either approach has merit, but in this case, the utility of the second approach is reduced (not eliminated) by the fact that a pass by us is not forcing but does allow partner to reopen with a double if his 4♥ were bid to make, with side cards. By contrast, if the opps have, under the pressure of the 4♥ call, guessed wrong, we have no way to punish them unless double is penalty. It makes little sense to have to sit there with a loaded-for-bear defensive hand, such that partner is vanishingly unlikely to hold the bid to make variety of 4♥ and have to pass, hoping that he can reopen....and this is exactly the wrong time to make a 'do something intelligent' double, since we can be virtually certain that he's going to run. My view is that when the opps pre-empt, our doubles should be oriented to takeout or, as the level of the auction increases, to 'do something intelligent', but that when it is our partner who has pre-empted, our doubles (not partner's) are pure penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 why would i want to X this with only 2 tricks and decent length in partner's pre-empt suit? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Does this imply that you would also have bid 5H after 4H-(4S)-Pass-(Pass)?I don't think it necessary implies it, but yes, I would have bid on in that sequence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 The ace of diamonds seems like a very normal lead to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wackojack Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Yes I have taken this on board suitably chastised. So: Mistake 1: MY initial double. I now buy the argument for bidding 5♥. And yes if opps fail to lead ♣then I make 5♥ Mistake 2: My lead of Q♥. The A♦lead now makes sense to me. So thanks guys particularly Mikeh and thanks Justin for making me smile. Incidentally of the 15 pairs in 4♠ doubled or undoubled all 15 led the Q♥. Of the 17 pairs in 5♠ 15 led Q♥ and 2 (strong) pairs led the A♦other than our opps. There were 48 pairs in 5♥ doubled or undoubled 46 of them making and 2 going off. 1 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.