To sit or not to sit?

[Jinksy]

[hv=pc=n&s=skqt3hajt2da653ck&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1d(Minimum%20length%20undiscussed%2C%202%2F1)dpp]133|200[/hv]

 

MPs, P is good, opps are BBO randoms. What now?

[whereagles]

Now 1♥.

 

Sure, you may make an overtrick or two in 1♦X. But you may also go 1-2 down for no good reason lol.

[MrAce]

I am % 100 running but where I run depends on your 1m opening agreements and XX.

 

If XX is S.O.S (which is what I think it should be) I XX.

 

I open standard old school 1m, which is 1♣ from 3-3 and 1 ♦ from 4-4 and better minor. In this context 1♦ can be less than 4 in only one combination and that is when I hold 4-4 majors. I will redouble now and force pd to choose a major or NT. I will say sorry if 1♦ was our best place to play.

[Siegmund]

Against known strong opponents I would run.

 

My opinion of the average BBO random is low enough that I would take my chances.

[whereagles]

Ideally you would want to bid 1♠ later, so as to have every chance to play the hand :)

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, and this is a WTP.

 

XX is for money, if they want to get me, fine, but then they shouldpay me game,

if I make. lets see, if they have the nerves to sit it out.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

Rdbl for money when pard might have 0 HCP? That doesn't sound like a good idea to me :)

[P_Marlowe]

Rdbl for money when pard might have 0 HCP? That doesn't sound like a good idea to me :)

Maybe, but playing SOS with me is a lot worse.

We started to play weak NT, so the XX tends to show the strong NT, it allowes p

to compete further.

[MrAce]

Maybe, but playing SOS with me is a lot worse.We started to play weak NT, so the XX tends to show the strong NT, it allowes p to compete further.

 

Dude...your pd passed 1♦. Who cares whether you have strong NT or not. He told you he does not even have a decent 4 hcp + a long major. I am not insisting on running from 1♦ but playing xx as showing a strong NT hand or anything other than S.O.S, when their take out double is converted to penalty is plain wrong. And who cares about what kind of NT you play anyway? OP would have mentioned it, had he played weak NT.

 

1 minor doubled contracts are more dangerous than 1 M. This conversion of double is also lead directing. It asks doubler to lead trump. do not expect to score ruffs in 1♦ with your entry rich dummy and lack of ♦ lead.

Do not expect pd to hold some ♦ tolerance just because he passed the double. At the time he passed he had no idea that it would be converted. People do not respond to 1m after double just incase it will be converted. Pd may open with a lot of hands that will backfire if you try to pre rescue each time they double 1m.

[biggerclub]

I am not playing XX as pain, but I am not sure that I have a rescue oriented hand. P probably has at least 3♦s and is unlikely to have a MAJ suit worth hearing about.

 

I don't know that I have high hopes for P, but I don't see that escaping is going to improve the situation.

 

This may be optimistic, but I rate partner to have 3+ ♦s more often than not. And, with somewhat less certainty, LHO and partner hold clubs while RHO and P are relatively short in the MAJs.

 

If I am running, I am going to start with 1♥ since to run in the first place = short ♦ which = 4-4 in the MAJs. Therefore I need not risk confusion over the meaning of xx.

 

But again, if we are beat here (diamonds), we are beat there (MAJ) and they will find the best defense wherever we go.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skqt3hajt2da653ck&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1d(Minimum%20length%20undiscussed%2C%202%2F1)dpp]133|200

MPs, P is good, opps are BBO randoms. What now?

[/hv]

XX (SOS) = 10,1♥ = 7, 1♠ = 6, Pass =5. Mr Ace's arguments work for me.

[mycroft]

Fred said here, many years ago, and he says it's not original with him: "If the opponents want to defend 1 of a minor, they're right."

 

I see nothing about this hand that makes this an exception - I expect to be very quickly playing 1NTx for 300 a trick - with the benefit that RHO has entries in the diamond suit she wouldn't have at 1NTx to lead through all my wonderful cards. I don't even have spots that will make me believe that I have a hope of two trump stoppers.

[Jinksy]

I bid 1♥ at the table, then thought I should have XXed (we had 7-card fits in both ♠s and ♦s, and ended up in 2♦X).

 

My worry with XX is the risk of P bidding 2♣. Presumably we'd also want to XX with the S3 in with the ♣s, so he could be forgiven for bidding it with such as 3325, for eg. Perhaps he would even do it with 4315? Could we be 2443 or similar, esp if our ♦ suit is weak?

[MrAce]

I bid 1♥ at the table, then thought I should have XXed (we had 7-card fits in both ♠s and ♦s, and ended up in 2♦X).

 

My worry with XX is the risk of P bidding 2♣. Presumably we'd also want to XX with the S3 in with the ♣s, so he could be forgiven for bidding it with such as 3325, for eg. Perhaps he would even do it with 4315? Could we be 2443 or similar, esp if our ♦ suit is weak?

 

As I said it pretty much depends on your 1m opening structure. By XX you are telling pd that you do not want to play in diamonds. Whether this was a good decision or not does not matter after you redouble. In standard methods (although I am not sure what is standard nowadays) Most of the time you wanna run from 1♦ is when you hold 3 cards in this suit. And there is only 1 combo that opens 1♦ with 3, it is 4432. In that context I think pd should play you for 4-4 majors and if he bids 2♣ I will pass, thinking he has 6 of them.

[wank]

lol could be my diamond holding be any worse for 1dx?

 

a 5 point nige1 differential between xx and pass says it all.

[rmnka447]

East has announced a ♦ stack against you. It could be something like ♦ KQJxx or KQxxxx, so you want to run. If XX is SOS, then this is the time to use it and pass whatever partner bids.

[jdeegan]

You can argue all you want. My experience is that if the opponents like the contract, I don't. Slide to 1♥ and try (as best you can on BBO) to read the opponents' reaction. I don't want the cheese. I just want out of the trap.

 

Realize, partner's Pass (to quote the late, great Bridge philosopher Gee) DNPA. If you Pass, the auction is over. If you redouble, wtf is partner supposed to do? What if he bids clubs? Try to regain control. It is more important, imo, to appear confident and to force the opponents make the next guess.

 

You tell me just how they can arrange to double me out in 1♥ and collect a telephone number even if it is theoretically available. Pard knows my ♥ suit is a 4-bagger, and he is supposed to know how to play. This is a classic dial-a-suit auction. Have a little faith.

[P_Marlowe]

East has announced a ♦ stack against you. It could be something like ♦ KQJxx or KQxxxx, so you want to run. If XX is SOS, then this is the time to use it and pass whatever partner bids.

Maybe. And maybe not.

Sometimes, they pass out the T/O due to lack of a better place to run, this is

not an LOL action, it quite often is the best, concede -180, and move on.

Getting rich in trying to get them at the 1 level is not something you want

to do for a living. Maybe you beat the contract, but quite often 3NT your way

makes. They are red, we are green, fair enough, but you still need to beat the

contract -3 to show a real profit. 500 vs. 400 is only relevant at MP, at IMPs

I dont care.

 

Getting burned in 1Dx happens, that's why playing XX as SOS is not stupid, but it

does not happen as often as peoble in this thread claim, which means, playing XX as

SOS is not matadory.

[nige1]

Getting burned in 1Dx happens, that's why playing XX as SOS is not stupid, but it does not happen as often as peoble in this thread claim, which means, playing XX as SOS is not matadory.

Pass Pass 1♦ Double Pass Pass ??

It's barely possible that passing 1♦X could work but it's inconceivable that redouble could mean anything other than SOS.

[the_clown]

Maybe. And maybe not.

Sometimes, they pass out the T/O due to lack of a better place to run, this is

not an LOL action, it quite often is the best, concede -180, and move on.

Getting rich in trying to get them at the 1 level is not something you want

to do for a living. Maybe you beat the contract, but quite often 3NT your way

makes. They are red, we are green, fair enough, but you still need to beat the

contract -3 to show a real profit. 500 vs. 400 is only relevant at MP, at IMPs

I dont care.

 

Getting burned in 1Dx happens, that's why playing XX as SOS is not stupid, but it

does not happen as often as peoble in this thread claim, which means, playing XX as

SOS is not matadory.

 

I disagree I dont think people pass 1♦X for no reason. They made a limited opening, partner doubled, next hand passed, you are broke. Putting this together I think there is a very good chance partner has some strong hand, (maybe even game in his hand). So bidding will give him a chance to describe it. Obviously with 2263 0 count you will probably pass because every other bid feels horrible, but other than some rare and specific hands passing 1♦X is taking a huge chance.

 

I agree that people dont pass 1mX very often. But the reason is that they need a very suitable hand to pass for penalties. And when they have it, its usually not a good idea to defend.

[mikestar13]

I assumed a partner who is better than BBO average, but not a regular partner with whom I've discussed a lot of sequences. 1♥ feels safer than XX, if partner is good, it's not so much that he might take it as business (not logically possible on this auction, assuming opponent are merely poor to average, not insane), but that he might infer that I am willing to hear him bid clubs, where odds are he is long but not long enough to play opposite a stiff.

 

In a regular partnership I would hope we had an agreement on sos redoubles: a good one is that it promises two places to play--partner chooses between the two cheapest (the majors, in this case), and redoubler corrects if needed. With that agreement I know he won't bid 2♣ without six decent ones, which will make clubs playable.

[Phil]

Its clear to run. I don't think I've ever had this discussion, but what about:

 

1. 1♥ is TWO places to play, including short hearts - since we will xx when it comes back.

2. xx shows more of a balanced hand. (or maybe it can be the blacks if you don't like (1).

[jdeegan]

I assumed a partner who is better than BBO average, but not a regular partner with whom I've discussed a lot of sequences. 1♥ feels safer than XX, if partner is good, it's not so much that he might take it as business (not logically possible on this auction, assuming opponent are merely poor to average, not insane), but that he might infer that I am willing to hear him bid clubs, where odds are he is long but not long enough to play opposite a stiff.

 

In a regular partnership I would hope we had an agreement on sos redoubles: a good one is that it promises two places to play--partner chooses between the two cheapest (the majors, in this case), and redoubler corrects if needed. With that agreement I know he won't bid 2♣ without six decent ones, which will make clubs playable.

Absolutely correct analysis! My only quibble is that, imo, you shouldn't really need a partnership agreement for an auction that comes up, maybe once a year, if that. Pure bridge logic says that a redouble is SOS. Not redoubling on this hand is simply a commonsense measure to avoid a potential blood bath in 2♣ doubled.

[mikestar13]

Absolutely correct analysis! My only quibble is that, imo, you shouldn't really need a partnership agreement for an auction that comes up, maybe once a year, if that. Pure bridge logic says that a redouble is SOS. Not redoubling on this hand is simply a commonsense measure to avoid a potential blood bath in 2♣ doubled.

 

Thanks. I would trust anyone good to recognize the redouble, it's the I only promise two suits aspect I suggest as one of the many possible meta-agreements that are worthwhile, Phil's might be another. It is worth taking 20 seconds somewhere along the line to nail this down when you at the stage of agreeing on low-frequency sequences. I really should have specified long-time partnership, like the gentleman I played Precision with in the 80's for about six years.

[jdeegan]

Thanks. I would trust anyone good to recognize the redouble, it's the I only promise two suits aspect I suggest as one of the many possible meta-agreements that are worthwhile, Phil's might be another. It is worth taking 20 seconds somewhere along the line to nail this down when you at the stage of agreeing on low-frequency sequences. I really should have specified long-time partnership, like the gentleman I played Precision with in the 80's for about six years.

Imo, this is not a conversation one can profitably have in advance. Partner has to be good enough to figure it out based on his/her hand. Redouble implies a tolerance to play in all unbid suits or ♦ or else a way to escape if partner bids the wrong suit. 1♥ is 99+% a ♥ 4-bagger and a hand not suitable for a redouble.

 

The only good thing about this dial-a-suit goat rodeo (from my point of view) is we know roughly what the opponents have. Sometimes, the outcome of these oddball auctions is deterministic. Sometimes, it depends on luck. Sometimes, it depends on who loses their nerve first.