Over 4H on your right

[rfedrick]

Imps (KO teams), love all. Dealer on your right opens 4♥. [Edit - before anyone asks: double is take-out of course].

 

[hv=pc=n&e=sk5hkdk652cakq753&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=4h]133|200[/hv]

 

Double? Keeps 4♥ doubled in the picture, but obviously risks a silly result (though partner will not pull without real shape - there's little danger of playing 4♠ in a 4-2)

5C? A little committal?

Pass?

 

Interested in opinions (my choice turned out to be sub-optimal).

[billw55]

I will try 5♣.

[PhilKing]

Double carries zero risk of playing in 4♠, because I intend to remove to 5♣. The two-step sequence shows a good flexible hand, so it puts slam in the picture. I could overcall a direct 5♣ with a lot less in the way of high cards.

 

And I disagree slightly about the guidelines for removing the double - partner should remove to 4♠ freely on a four card suit, but remove to the five level rarely, and never without good shape.

[mikeh]

while I agree with PK about the risks of playing spades on a 4-2, and the solution of not passing, I don't like his plan of double then 5♣ because I don't see this hand as (quite) good enough. I have only 1 first round control, a lot of diamond losers, and the worst trump holding compatible with that plan, so for me I content myself with a direct 5♣.

 

I need a lot of help to make slam. Partner needs 2 aces and even then I still have diamond losers and trumps to worry about (not to mention that if he has the red Aces, admittedly improbable, the spade suit could be a problem).

 

The main advantage of double is when we catch partner with a very good hand, in context, and spades and diamonds....he may be able to bid 4 or 5N, and correct clubs to diamonds. However, that is a tiny target and won't always work out well even when we find out 4-4 fit as opposed to our 6-2 or 6-3 club fit.

[ahydra]

I prefer the direct 5C - with the HK likely waste paper on offence, the hand isn't as strong as it looks.

 

ahydra

[Zelandakh]

The main advantage of double is when we catch partner with a very good hand, in context, and spades and diamonds....

Surely the main advantage of double comes when we catch partner with the rest of the hearts? Reaching a diamond or spade fit instead of playing in a club misfit is a nice extra. Do you think these combined to come to less chance than finding partner with 4 diamonds and a club fragment? Or are you more worried about them making 4♥ on too many hands with partner passing? Or is the main issue reaching a doomed slam?

 

The last of these should be somewhat mitigated if we have agreed to double-bid on these types of hands. It is circular I know but so are a lot of competitive agreements. The other events do not seem to me as likely as the positives. That makes 5♣ seem like the small target and doubling a larger spread - so I am interested in more details of your thought process here.

[mikeh]

Surely the main advantage of double comes when we catch partner with the rest of the hearts? Reaching a diamond or spade fit instead of playing in a club misfit is a nice extra. Do you think these combined to come to less chance than finding partner with 4 diamonds and a club fragment? Or are you more worried about them making 4♥ on too many hands with partner passing? Or is the main issue reaching a doomed slam?

 

The last of these should be somewhat mitigated if we have agreed to double-bid on these types of hands. It is circular I know but so are a lot of competitive agreements. The other events do not seem to me as likely as the positives. That makes 5♣ seem like the small target and doubling a larger spread - so I am interested in more details of your thought process here.

we hold the K of a suit opened at the 4-level. The odds of partner holding heart tricks are very, very low.

 

As for finding our spade fit, I can't imagine doubling and passing 4♠, and note that PK explicitly said he wasn't planning on doing so either. While one doesn't pull 4♠ x to a 4 card suit, and one doesn't pull 4♥ to a 4 card suit at the 5-level, I consider it normal to pull to 4♠ on many hands with 4 spades.

 

So the chances of a double leading to our finding a playable spade fit are also tiny....even if we have one....say partner holds QJ10xxx......we aren't planning on staying in spades when he bids them. Now, if he jumps to 6♠, as one remote possibility, we will pass, but good luck waiting for that to happen, and better luck making it when he does.

 

I am not overly worried about defending when partner has crap. Yes, I expect they will often make their contract when that is the case, but it's not as if 5♣ is going to be a walk in the park either. I think that if we are in disaster country, then there isn't a lot to choose from between 5♣ and double. Maybe double has a slight edge, in that we might score the heart K and eke out a 1 trick set, but otoh if partner has something like xxx xxx Qxxx Jxx, we rate to get out for 300-500 against their 590 or 690, so I think it is pretty much a wash.

 

I think the main advantage to double is that we might play diamonds and diamonds might play better than clubs. However, this isn't the type of hand on which the 4-4 fit rates to outplay the 6-3 or even 6-2 fit, or at least not very often, and there are layouts on which clubs will outplay diamonds, so this isn't a huge factor.

 

Bear in mind that partner will not be bidding 4N if his 2-suiter includes spades....he will bid 4♠ (altho 4N then 5♠ is an interesting issue), so he will show the 2-suiter, only if he has minors (and we will play clubs then anyway, so the double doesn't gain) or then he has slam interest, and bids 5N. I think all too often we will be too high then.

 

So the main chance of finding diamonds is when he has a lot of them, and again I think that to be low odds. With say 4 spades and 5 diamonds, I expect him to bid spades first, and it is far from clear that our then pulling to clubs will get him bidding diamonds...he may or he may not, depending on his hand and view of the world.

 

As for the circular argument that we can avoid my feared bad slam by agreeing that double then clubs can be this hand: you're right....the argument is circular. That doesn't make it automatically wrong, but it does render it difficult to show as being 'right'. After all, by defining double then clubs as weaker than I would, you will miss some slams that I will reach. it is more or less a wash, even after trying to allow for what that does to the definition of a 5♣ overcall. You would presumably define it as limited on the upper end by the failure to double, so my partners may push too high when I hold what for me would be a minimum, and my partners cater to a maximum.

 

I don't claim that I see this hand as clear cut. I can readily see many holdings on which double will work. I just happen to feel, rather than calculate, that 5♣ is a slightly better action.

 

At the end of the day, these sorts of decisions cannot be resolved by any amount of simulation or argument, since the outcome is often dependent on partner's view of the situation, and that depends on how partner thinks we think, etc...not to mention being dependent on the opps. My experience informs my view, and I know enough about my game to know that my view isn't infallible.

[gnasher]

For me, this is almost a prototypical double-then-convert-to-5♣. The sequence shows about 6 clubs, about 4 diamonds, short hearts, and enough high cards to be willing to hear partner pass.

 

If double is played as showing a flexible hand, I don't understand Mike's concerns about getting to the wrong minor. If partner is something like 5242, he will bid 4♠ and then pass 5♣. If he is 4351, he'll bid 4♠ and then convert 5♣ to 5♦.

[ahydra]

deleted nonsense

[rhm]

while I agree with PK about the risks of playing spades on a 4-2, and the solution of not passing, I don't like his plan of double then 5♣ because I don't see this hand as (quite) good enough. I have only 1 first round control, a lot of diamond losers, and the worst trump holding compatible with that plan, so for me I content myself with a direct 5♣.

 

I need a lot of help to make slam. Partner needs 2 aces and even then I still have diamond losers and trumps to worry about (not to mention that if he has the red Aces, admittedly improbable, the spade suit could be a problem).

 

The main advantage of double is when we catch partner with a very good hand, in context, and spades and diamonds....he may be able to bid 4 or 5N, and correct clubs to diamonds. However, that is a tiny target and won't always work out well even when we find out 4-4 fit as opposed to our 6-2 or 6-3 club fit.

I disagree that 5♣ is weaker than DBL followed by a correction.

These sequences show different hands, but the risk of getting too high is similar.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[daffydoc]

Dbl will get a 4S response nearly 100% of the time - and while you can then pull to 5C keeping diamonds in the picture - it feels convoluted - this looks and feels like a 5C bid so that is what i will bid. Could easily go for a number but expect similar result at the other table, regardless of the action taken as long as my teammates also open 4H. daffydoc

[WesleyC]

Double then 5C (over 4S) seems very clear here.

 

This sequence does slightly overstate my values, but the advantage of keeping 4Hx and 5D in the picture more than make up for that.

[Dinarius]

This is a nice 4 loser hand. It will take very little from partner to make 5/6 in a minor.

 

To me, Dbl followed by five Clubs (over an inevitable 4 Spades) to clarify the two suiter seems correct.

 

It also keeps the option of penalties open if your partner does indeed have the rest of the Hearts, as suggested above.

 

I don't like the committed nature of an immediate five Clubs at all.

 

D.

[zillahandp]

Boring 4nt next ?

[eagles123]

Boring 4nt next ?

 

:lol:

[mike777]

5c

 

As a nonexpert I would be concerned that double and pulling to 5c shows much more than this.

 

If I was more confident pard would not raise me to 6 on little then x and then 5c makes sense.

 

I do not see this as a 4 loser hand just yet since I do not know we have a confirmed fit.

[steve2005]

This is a nice 4 loser hand. It will take very little from partner to make 5/6 in a minor. .

 

D.

 

Trouble with loser count is it's only valid if you have a fit and can find it (in this case at the 5-level)

 

 

 

 

 

[wbartley]

I think the probability that you're making game combined with the probability that the opponents are making four hearts takes pass out of the picture although it would be interesting to see a Monte Carlo analysis assuming RHO holds AQJ eight times in hearts. Anyway, my gut tells me that pass is a bad idea and obviously so do the guts of everyone else who bothered to answer. The next question for a computer is, how often will partner have five or more spades when you double and he bids spades? Since there are likely eight or more spades out there, the conditional probability that partner has five or more spades has to be fairly high. So, my inclination is to double and leave him in whatever he bids. If LHO doubles four spade, run to clubs. If he doesn't double and you're not making, you may not be making anything.

[Dinarius]

The more I think about what I wrote above - a strategy with which others agree - the more I don't like it.

 

While it will take very little from partner to make 5/6 in a minor, it will equally take very little to make 4 Spades.

 

So, if I double, and I hear 4 Spades from P, then pulling to 5 Clubs (to show my "two-suiter", as I wrote above) would look stupid with a partner hand such as:

 

S: A,Q,9,8,x,x

H:x,x,

D:x,x,x

C:J,x

 

Partner now "corrects" to 5 Diamonds, which may not have a prayer, while 4 Spades is probably laydown.

 

Of course, we can make up hands that P might have all day long, but we have only one bid.

 

On reflection, I think I like Pass the most - hoping to hear a protective noise from partner.

 

In the heat of the moment, I would probably still have Doubled.

 

D.

[Zelandakh]

Partner now "corrects" to 5 Diamonds, which may not have a prayer, while 4 Spades is probably laydown.

What happens if partner "corrects" to 5♠ instead? I do not understand why you want to play the 4-3 fit here - it seems to me to be the third choice action.

[Dinarius]

What happens if partner "corrects" to 5♠ instead? I do not understand why you want to play the 4-3 fit here - it seems to me to be the third choice action.

 

That's my point, isn't it?

 

I no longer feel that correcting partner's 4 Spades (after my Dbl) to 5 Clubs is the right move - though I might well have done this in the heat of the moment, as I indicated above.

 

I either Dbl, and pass his 4 Spades, or I Pass and hope he protects.

 

D.

[gnasher]

With AQ98xx xx xxx Jx, partner will bid 4♠ and then pass 5♣. Opposite that hand, 4♠ is better than 5♣, but there's no particular reason to expect partner to have six spades.

[WesleyC]

So, if I double, and I hear 4 Spades from P, then pulling to 5 Clubs (to show my "two-suiter", as I wrote above) would look stupid with a partner hand such as:

 

S: A,Q,9,8,x,x

H:x,x,

D:x,x,x

C:J,x

 

Partner now "corrects" to 5 Diamonds, which may not have a prayer, while 4 Spades is probably laydown.

 

Hey Dinarius,

 

Firstly, I think you're misunderstanding what double followed by 5C shows. A distributional 2 suiter with both minors would bid 4NT the first time. A flexible hand with both minors and a preference for diamonds would double and then bid 4NT. Which leaves double then 5C as specifically showing a strong flexible hand with long clubs.

 

Your choice to double and then pass 4S isn't crazy. This is especially true if you're playing against opponents that will often double aggressively with a trump stack.

 

However, it could also work poorly if your partner has bid 4S on a 4 card suit, perhaps even when holding a longer minor or significant extra values. Now 4S might be going down while 5m or even 6m is making. To offer a couple of my own example hands, I would bid 4S on both [QTxx xxx AQxxx x] and [AQ98xx xx Axx Jx]. After I continued 5C, holding the first hand partner will correct to 5D. Holding the second hand, partner will advance with 5NT offering choice of slam (ending up in 6C).

 

Wes

[wbartley]

Dinarius mentioned the possibility of partner protecting in fourth seat. The fact that partner will protect on some portion of the layouts where we make game, pass may be more attractive than it seems. In other words, in my original analysis I ruled out passing because I felt the possibility that either side is making a NV game is too high. But you have to subtract those hands where partner protects. I still think a computer analysis would be invaluable here, especially if we could somehow quantify what a fourth seat balancer's hand contains.