Trouble (bidding hand)

[shyams]

I need some inputs, both on a question of style and re. what you'd do with this specific hand. This occurred at MatchPoints.

 

1. Which suit do you bid here? (if at all)

[hv=pc=n&s=s943hkt8d974c8642&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=pp1ddr(max%20pass.%20Hoping%20to%20punish%20NS)?]133|200[/hv]

 

2. Assume you have a generic horrible hand (like the above) -- with some 3=3=(3-4) OR (3-2)=4=4 type distribution and nothing that stands out.

What is the preferred course of action in such scenarios?

[LBengtsson]

PASS! partner could have 5♥ and 16+ here. 1♦ could be third in hand bid, even red. let partner decide if you agree pass by you as forcing. you have 3 card support for all other suits. it's now for partner to decide, not you with garbage.

[paulg]

With this hand it is clearly better to pass and let partner make a choice unless it suggests playing in one diamond redoubled.

 

I believe it was John Carruthers who wrote about passing a redouble in these situations, but I cannot find the original article. I am also slightly concerned that it might have been mikeh and not Carruthers. Anyhow, the rules in my notes say:

1. Pass is penalties if opener guarantees only two or less in suit (eg Precision 1♦, short or Polish 1♣)
2. Pass is penalties in sequences when redouble is by the bidder of the suit eg (1x) P (P) Dbl; (Rdbl)
3. Pass of a redouble of any immediately raised suit is not penalties eg
   (P) P (1♠) Dbl
   (2♠) P (P) Dbl
   (Rdbl)
4. Pass of a redouble of any later raised suit or mere preference is penalties, eg
   (1x) P (P) Dbl
   (P) 2y (2x) Dbl
   (Rdbl)
5. Pass of a redouble of any opening pre-empt is penalty

So in this situation passing the redouble is only a suggestion of a final contract when the opening minor could be short as two, such as a Precision 1♦.

[DavidKok]

I would pass, which is called a "you got us in, you get us out"-pass. I can live with 1♥ but it would be somewhat of a psyche, partner will never run with 3-card support so you may land in a poor 1♥X.

 

Presumably if 1♦ can be short, as in precision, partner's double has a more specified meaning than 'takeout of diamonds'. But I don't think this is relevant for the problem of the OP.

[mcphee]

Pass is clear to me. Bidding a 3 card suit is simply silly imo. 2C is for dreamers.

[mikeh]

This is a question that cannot be answered without knowing whether we have an agreement and, if so, what that is.

 

What would we do in second seat with xx xx QJ9876 xxx?

 

If we’d pass, as I think is normal, then we’d very much like to pass here for penalties. I have played penalty passes of redoubles off and on for many years. I think it came up once, but I might be imaging it🥸

 

Absent this agreement, pass simply says I have nothing to say, which is pretty close to an accurate description of my hand.

 

There is no need to bid 1H. If hearts is our best fit, partner will run to 1H. Meanwhile, if he is, say, 4=3=2=4, he’ll run to 1S and, in my dreams, he’s 3=3=2=5 and runs to 2C.

 

Finally, a useful rule in situations where a disaster may be lurking is to let partner play it😛

[shyams]

The hand came up in a Robot tournament and was held by the Robot. It bid 2♣! The result: 2♣x -2. 500 to the bad guys and a 28% MP score for me.

 

https://tinyurl.com/y4snku2p

[shyams]

This is a question that cannot be answered without knowing whether we have an agreement and, if so, what that is.

 

What would we do in second seat with xx xx QJ9876 xxx?

 

If we’d pass, as I think is normal, then we’d very much like to pass here for penalties. I have played penalty passes of redoubles off and on for many years. I think it came up once, but I might be imaging it��

 

Absent this agreement, pass simply says I have nothing to say, which is pretty close to an accurate description of my hand.

 

There is no need to bid 1H. If hearts is our best fit, partner will run to 1H. Meanwhile, if he is, say, 4=3=2=4, he’ll run to 1S and, in my dreams, he’s 3=3=2=5 and runs to 2C.

 

Finally, a useful rule in situations where a disaster may be lurking is to let partner play it��

 

Many years ago, when playing with a regular partner, I too had an agreement that pass is "to play". We used to play MPs significantly more often than we played IMPs so we had tried to customise our bidding system to it.

 

The thesis (if I recall) was based on 1m redoubled not being enough to make game so if it turns into a (redoubled) partscore battle, we had agreed to defend such that we minimise the overtricks. I don't recall if it ever worked, but I do recall that we did some simulations/analysis then and had found that passing "to play" was not a disaster.

[helene_t]

I have some sympathy for AWM's style in which pass is penalty. So playing that style I bid 1♥, and then 1♠ if we get doubled, and hopefully partner can figure out that I have this hand and can correct to 2♣ is appropriate. Too bad if 1♥X was the least bad contract.

 

But playing normal methods, I can pass which I obviously do.

 

By the way, I think that I can only pass with tolerance for all three suits, since if I try to scramble partner will think that I am strong (because the forcing pass is the only way to show a strong hand over their redouble, other than bidding opps' suit). But maybe that's a stupid convention - after all, I will rarely have a strong hand in this position, unless opps' have a 3rd seat opening in which case I am a passed hand too.

[mikeh]

I have some sympathy for AWM's style in which pass is penalty. So playing that style I bid 1♥, and then 1♠ if we get doubled, and hopefully partner can figure out that I have this hand and can correct to 2♣ is appropriate. Too bad if 1♥X was the least bad contract.

 

But playing normal methods, I can pass which I obviously do.

 

By the way, I think that I can only pass with tolerance for all three suits, since if I try to scramble partner will think that I am strong (because the forcing pass is the only way to show a strong hand over their redouble, other than bidding opps' suit). But maybe that's a stupid convention - after all, I will rarely have a strong hand in this position, unless opps' have a 3rd seat opening in which case I am a passed hand too.

Helene, surely a good hand can cuebid 2D or (if 8-10, which is a strong hand unless someone has psyched) 1N with a stopper?

 

But I agree that one bids right away if one has a 4card major or 5 clubs.

[helene_t]

Helene, surely a good hand can cuebid 2D or (if 8-10, which is a strong hand unless someone has psyched) 1N with a stopper?

 

But I agree that one bids right away if one has a 4card major or 5 clubs.

 

Do you play 1NT as natural here? Maybe over a minor there's no other sensible meaning. Bergen plays it as showing minors over 1M-x-xx

 

With say 9 HCPs and a 5-card major, you would have responded 2M without the redouble, I thought that now you have to pass first and then bid 2M afterwards. But maybe it's not such a good idea.

[ali quarg]

Playing Double as a Power Double - 1H to show weak & 4+♥s

[sfi]

Many years ago, when playing with a regular partner, I too had an agreement that pass is "to play". We used to play MPs significantly more often than we played IMPs so we had tried to customise our bidding system to it.

My standard agreement is pass of a redouble is to play, with the only exception being the auction (1 suit)-X-(XX). Here I would obviously get to pass to show no preference.

[gszes]

my usual garbage and 2c is by far the least encouraging bid of all. I would consider pass ONLY if we have an agreement that it says I have nothing worth bidding. A treatment I like a lot but it also loses out on some large penalties.