Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I agree with everything that has been said so far that everyone underbid or misbid. Still, it is a difficult problem.

 

If South is merely protecting, then 3 is plenty with the North hand. But if South has a full values for his takeout double, North should bid game or pass 3x.

 

If South has a distributional double, then passing 3x may not score well (assuming that you beat it - if you don't, it definitely will not score well).

 

So, NS has to have their guessing shoes on to get this one right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

South.

 

Or the partnership has a disagreement, since in the end it comes down,

how weak the reopening X could be.

 

As South I would have bid 3NT.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

I'd have also bid 3N as S to avoid this kind of problem, but I'd be doubling on a 4315 hand weaker than most people.

 

That said I'd have passed the double and hoped we were taking 300/500 if we weren't making game and 800 if we were (or 100 if partner has a poor 4315 and we were making nothing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

STW=NORTH

AT IMPS 3n stands out for more than just one reason---

the hand will be played virtually double dummy so even

if p has something like a 14 count we should have pretty

good chances for game with all of those intermediates since

east is far more likely than west to hold defensive assets

and we would know which player is more likely, by far, to

be the target for a squeeze/endplay/finesse.

 

AT IMPS

3n = 9 pass = 6 4h=3 3h = 1

 

At MP a much stronger case can be made for merely passing and not

worrying (so much) about possibly missing a vul game. No matter

the form of scoring 3h rates to be a non starter at best and even

a disaster.

 

Asking south to bid 3n either directly over 3d or over 3h is reckless and

shows no confidence in their partner's ability to evaluate their own hand.

 

AT MP

3n = 9 pass = 8 4h = 4 3h = 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have empathy for both N-S. I know we aren't supposed to say that 'pre-empts work', but they do and this is an example.

 

They tend not to work as well against experts precisely because experts have 'been there' enough times that they have learned how to resolve these issues with a high rate of reasonable success...they recognize that there is no 'right' answer and that all actions have risks.

 

Here, my guess is that most experts would pass as North.

 

Why? Process of elimination.

 

We lack the trick source to bid 3N, especially when we can reasonably expect short diamonds in dummy and hence possibly a relatively minimal reopening double. It isn't that we assume a weak dummy, but we can infer that if dummy is weak(ish) 3N won't likely make and yet 3 will still usually fail. When in doubt, place partner with the equivalent of Axxx Axxx x Axxx.

 

3 can be from utter weakness, and so we will miss too many games. In addition, if we can make +140 or +170, we have a decent shot at +300. Finally, we may be in the embarrassing position of failing in 3 with a decent plus available: picture AJxx Jxx x AJxxx with a 5-1 heart break.

 

4 is clearly too much

 

Pass: yes, they may make it but it is extremely unlikely. While I have as much or more abhorrence for doubling making partials into games as most and more than many, the truth is, as Eric Kokish once said (paraphrasing), if they aren't making some doubled partials, you aren't doubling enough.

 

There is one other possible reason for bidding 3 and that is when partner has a huge hand, unsuited for any action other than an initial double. We may miss slam and collect 300-500 in exchange. However, those hands are rare, and they truly do represent the meaning of 'pre-empts work'.

 

As for South, he had 2 ugly decisions. I empathize with the initial double: I think the hand is not quite right for 3N, especially since it seems probable, this being in the I/A forum, that the partnership lacked methods over 3N.

 

However, I think that he ought to have raised. One rule I learned, a long time ago, is that when one doubles a pre-empt, and partner makes a non-jump response, play him or her for some hcp...typically about 6-7. Once in a while you catch a horrible hand and go for a number, but partner is far more likely to hold 'some' values than 'no values', and the diamond A is a big card since it controls the likely tap suit on the initial lead.

 

It is possible to argue that he ought to bid 3N over 3, to show a flexible hand with only 3 hearts, but I think that isn't the sort of call one should inflict on a I/A partner in the middle of a hand :D

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

North, for not having the guts to pass the double.

 

While the South hand is nice, I can't see bidding 3NT on Aces and spaces. If partner can't show me a good hand after X , I don't want to be in game either.

 

We agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...