Who should wield the axe?

[ahydra]

MPs, nobody vul

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sat95htdk87ca7543&n=sk82hq8daj432cj92&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1c(NAT%20or%2015-19%20BAL)1h2d4hppp]266|200[/hv]

 

NS can make 110 in ♣ and ♦ so 100 was poor compensation at pairs. Who should wield the axe?

 

ahydra

[jfnrl]

Forcing pass auction (as opening + 2D = 23+HCP)

South's pass is correct : values for 5D or X

North must X : soft values.

[FelicityR]

Sometimes an axe shouldn't be wielded. Doubling 4♥ making is just as bad a score at pairs. I think the decision is more marginal than it first appears. Sometimes you just have to let a board go at pairs and recognise other pairs will be in the same contract, good or bad. Next board.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sat95htdk87ca7543&n=sk82hq8daj432cj92&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1c(NAT%20or%2015-19%20BAL)1h2d4hppp]266|200|

MPs, nobody vul

NS can make 110 in ♣ and ♦ so 100 was poor compensation at pairs. Who should wield the axe?[/hv]

Agree with jfnr. By agreement, in normal circumstances, an opening bid and 2-level new-suit response should create a forcing-pass context. So, in the pass-out seat, North should act. Double seems best.

FelicityR is right that, from North's point of view, 4♥ might make, on some layouts. Bidding is not an exact science, however, and. IMO, in the long-run, such default agreements comply with the probabilities.

[cherdano]

If you think 2D establishes a forcing pass, what do you think does a minimum 2D bid look like (either with 6 diamonds, or with 5 diamonds and 4 clubs)?

[steve2005]

Agree with jfnr. By agreement, in normal circumstances, an opening bid and 2-level new-suit response should create a forcing-past context. So, in the pass-out seat, North should double.

FelicityR is right that, from North's point of view, 4♥ might make, on a different layout, but bidding is not an exact science, and. IMO, in the long-run, it pays to have such default agreements.

Opps have a 10 card fit. How can you double and be sure you are not handing a top to NS?

You can't you got it wrong big deal.

 

 

[nige1]

If you think 2D establishes a forcing pass, what do you think does a minimum 2D bid look like (either with 6 diamonds, or with 5 diamonds and 4 clubs)?

Depends on your methods. I think it's a reasonable understanding. Helpful in many auctions.

Opps have a 10 card fit. How can you double and be sure you are not handing a top to NS? You can't you got it wrong big deal.

From North's point of view, opponents might have an 11-card fit. 4♥X might make overtricks. Story of my life :(

Alternatively, 4♥ undoubled might be a good sacrifice against a NS game or partscore.

IMO, at MP, most players don't double enough. I feel that double is with MP odds, here.

 

 

 

[cherdano]

I wasn't trying to score a rhetorical point or anything. I am genuinely curious what the minimum for a 2♦ bid looks like for those who advocate for a forcing pass on this auction.

[nige1]

I wasn't trying to score a rhetorical point or anything. I am genuinely curious what the minimum for a 2♦ bid looks like for those who advocate for a forcing pass on this auction.

Playing a strong notrump: 11 HCP or a good 10. e.g. ♠ x x x ♥ K x x ♦ A Q J x x x ♣ x.

[cherdano]

Playing a strong notrump: 11 HCP or a good 10. e.g. ♠ x x x ♥ K x x ♦ A Q J x x x ♣ x

Ok. My minimum looks more like xx xx KQJxxx Qxx or xx xx AJxxx KTxx. You wont be surprised to hear that I don't think my 2D bid generates a forcing pass!

[rmnka447]

North is looking at an 11 count opposite a 2nd seat opener. Now, if you very aggressively open so that opener can hold complete slop, it's a harder decision. But if opener opens on decent values, you've got more than the balance of the points. It looks like you've got enough, likely 23-24 count, to probably make a 3 level part score.

 

So this looks like an "ornery" double situation at MPs. You double in this situation not because you are sure that you can beat 4 ♥ but because you are ornery enough to believe most of the time they won't when you have the majority of the points. Holding the North hand, I'm doubling in a flash.

 

I think the claim that 4 ♥x gives the opponents a top is a bit of red herring. Do you expect every other pair to be in 4 ♥ when you hold more than the balance of the points? If not, you're looking at least at a below average result by passing. So 4 ♥x may be trading a bottom for a below average result. Big deal.

 

If you don't give up an occasional -590 or -790, you're not doubling enough. But here +300 is likely to be a top versus any other result.

[nige1]

A serious problem is that players rarely disclose "Forcing pass" agreements.

See the Demonstraby Suggested topic.

This can severely disadvantage their opponents. For example

 

Suppose that, after (1♣) 1♥ (2♦) 4♥ (Pass) ??,

the 1♥ bidder is contemplating a slam try.

If he's aware that opponents are in a forcing pass context, however, then he might well elect to pass, hoping to settle for a good score in 4♥X or XX.

[ggwhiz]

Imo you must double with the north hand.

 

If south (known to have short hearts has some wormy 5-6 hand in the blacks, they can pull and 5♣ has potential. If it goes float and they make it you turned 20% into 0 at worst, or 40% into 20 etc. I don't always look both ways before crossing the street or sleep with a night light.

[0deary]

Norths final bid:

 

E/W swept to game despite our 15-19 Balancing choice in the 1C,

North cant rely on more than a couple of defensive tricks if using 11hcp/Rule 19

Qx trump might be worthless

Only sure AD

It’s likely N/S have some sort of spade fit (West didn’t X) but 4 level ain’t the time to explore it now

 

So it’s easy to pass

 

But its match points. If E/W has 4H then you are booking a poor Match points score anyway. Doubling might cost a lot of imps but only a few percentage points at MP. But if they are a trick or two short then they might make money amongst our part score minor contracts, and the best way to get our score out of the thicket is to double. I thoroughly hate it but I’d now double as North

 

PS I just generated a field of 12 boards, 6 in 3 minor tick, 3 in 4H tick and 2 in 4H-1, in one 4H-1 doubled then doubling increases our MP from 32% to 46%, but if they went 2 off then doubling gives 100% over the 32%

[nekthen]

I do not think I am in a forcing pass situation. I agree with cherdano that you want to compete with less than 11 with a good suit. This means it is necessary for North to double. You expect partner to be providing 2 tricks for his opening and you expect 2 from your holding and no reason to suppose we have game ourselves

[Caitlynne]

Opener has nothing extra and lacks any kind of big fit. In contrast, responder knows this deal is his/her partnership's hand - i.e., that the 2D bid was made primarily on the basis of honor values rather than extra distributional values - so responder must be the one to double. Pass was a clear cut mistake at pairs.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm curious that this was a really poor score, given that had opps bid only 3♥ it would appear they win the board whatever you do.

 

That said, I'm with Caitlynne, if anybody is going to double it should be responder.

[miamijd]

Sometimes the field doesn't do what it is supposed to do, and as a result, you get a bad board.

 

This is NOT your hand; it turns out it is the opponents' hand. The last making contract is 3H by E/W. Since that is the case, any plus score your way should be fine. If you are telling me that a lot of N/S pairs got to play 3C, then you have E/W pairs with 18 HCP and a ten-fit not bidding 3 over 3 in MPs. That is insanity, but sometimes the other E/W pairs give you no protection. In a good field, +100 would be fine. It would not be 32%, as a previous poster suggested. All of the E/W pairs should bid to 3H or 4H. No one should sell to 3C.

 

As far as doubling goes, I would never double with either hand in a good field. There is no point. Do you think we can make 4C? Probably not. Do you think we will defeat them 2 tricks doubled looking at North's hand? Highly doubtful. So what are we protecting? Any plus score our way should be average or better. And against good opponents, I would expect 4HX to make a good deal of the time.

 

Cheers,

mike

[ggwhiz]

This is NOT your hand; it turns out it is the opponents' hand.

 

If only I knew what the post-mortem would be during the auction I would win a lot more often, like always.

[Cyberyeti]

Sometimes the field doesn't do what it is supposed to do, and as a result, you get a bad board.

 

This is NOT your hand; it turns out it is the opponents' hand. The last making contract is 3H by E/W. Since that is the case, any plus score your way should be fine. If you are telling me that a lot of N/S pairs got to play 3C, then you have E/W pairs with 18 HCP and a ten-fit not bidding 3 over 3 in MPs. That is insanity, but sometimes the other E/W pairs give you no protection. In a good field, +100 would be fine. It would not be 32%, as a previous poster suggested. All of the E/W pairs should bid to 3H or 4H. No one should sell to 3C.

 

As far as doubling goes, I would never double with either hand in a good field. There is no point. Do you think we can make 4C? Probably not. Do you think we will defeat them 2 tricks doubled looking at North's hand? Highly doubtful. So what are we protecting? Any plus score our way should be average or better. And against good opponents, I would expect 4HX to make a good deal of the time.

 

Cheers,

mike

 

No, it's your hand, they took a NV 100 out of 4♥ for -2 so the limit is 3m your way, 3♥ is -1 for a good score for them whether doubled or not.

 

I would consider the pass over 4♥ forcing although I'd be very uncomfortable on the S hand, I'd have to X.

[miamijd]

No, it's your hand, they took a NV 100 out of 4♥ for -2 so the limit is 3m your way, 3♥ is -1 for a good score for them whether doubled or not.

 

I would consider the pass over 4♥ forcing although I'd be very uncomfortable on the S hand, I'd have to X.

 

You are right about the last making contract -- it's 3C. I misread the problem and thought E/W were vul and thus had 9 tricks in H. My mistake.

 

But my original analysis still stands. The opponents have a 10-fit and 18 HCP. They should NOT be allowing N/S to play 3C -- ever. So all of the other E/Ws should at least be bidding 3H, if not 4H. If you set them two instead of one (or instead of going off one in 4C), you will get a good score. In a good field, +100 is going to be a good score, and 4H will often make.

 

I would be interested to see the E/W hands. I can't imagine how they let N/S play 3C unless West's heart suit is so bad it isn't worth an overcall.

 

And I don't think that a 2D bid here means that a pass by opener is 100% forcing, but that's something to agree upon with partner (I can see playing it either way).

 

Cheers,

Mike

[MrAce]

The idea that says 2♦ created a forcing pass sounds ridiculous to me.

 

NS can make 110 in ♣ and ♦ so 100 was poor compensation at pairs. Who should wield the axe?

 

ahydra

North should X 4♥.

[Winstonm]

To me the question is what does South promise for his opening. If he promises 2 1/2 quick tricks, North, with his 1 1/2 should double. If South doesn't guarantee much in the way of defensive strength for his opening, then pass is a much more promising option.

[Cyberyeti]

We have the meta agreement that if we have a known (to both players) at least half the points, and the bidding is at the 4 level, then passes are forcing. This may not be best but has the advantage of being simple and makes lots of hands a lot easier. It's not comfortable on this one.

[kuhchung]

if we agree that 2D does NOT create a FP, then the answer is clear

 

if it does (????), looks to me like it's still north

 

so north