Do you remove?

[Echognome]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=s1052hkj97da102cakj]133|100|Scoring: MP

(2♠) - X - (XX) - P

(P) - ?[/hv]

 

2♠ was alerted as spades and a minor

XX is undiscussed

 

Your call?

[hotShot]

Opps may not know what XX means, but your X asked partner to make a choice. He has chosen to pass. So if this partnership has a meaning, you should pass too.

[mike777]

Lead S, this is a lead problem correct?

 

P

WTP?

[whereagles]

I'm going to bid 2NT.

[flytoox]

Opps may not know what XX means, but your X asked partner to make a choice. He has chosen to pass. So if this partnership has a meaning, you should pass too.

You said it.

[Guest Jlall]

Passing XXs generally say "my hand has no clear direction" unless you have agreed otherwise. Do those who say partners pass has made the decision think the same about 1H X XX p? I will bid 2N, scrambling

[EricK]

Passing XXs generally say "my hand has no clear direction" unless you have agreed otherwise. Do those who say partners pass has made the decision think the same about 1H X XX p? I will bid 2N, scrambling

If you will always "take out" partner's pass then opponents can rescue themselves from their doubled contract by redoubling, even with a singleton spade!

 

I think there is a difference between the pre-empt auction and the 1♥ auction. In the former case doubler is guaranteed to be stronger than opener so the opportunity for playing for penalties at a low level is more often going to be diagnosable.

 

This of course raises an interesting disclosure problem: If your methods allow opponents to escape via a redouble how are they meant to discover it?

 

Eric

[Guest Jlall]

Yes they can psyche a XX. I'm not saying that pass being pen is wrong, I'm saying it is certainly not standard. And in the real world they rarely psyche XX (though I have a partner who has done it).

[whereagles]

Passing XXs generally say "my hand has no clear direction" unless you have agreed otherwise. Do those who say partners pass has made the decision think the same about 1H X XX p? I will bid 2N, scrambling

There are two schools of thought on the issue of 1x dbl rdbl pass.

 

One school (US) says pass = no preference, you pick suit.

 

The other school (mostly Europe) says pass = I actually have some cards in suit x. Pls pass unless your hand is very offensive.

[luke warm]

this is a good one to have understanding on.. i think partner should bid with any hand that doesn't want to penalize opps, so a pass should be penalty... there are ways to show good hands here, but only one way to double 2s for penalty

[Echognome]

A related question. If XX is alerted as "values" do you now pull?

[EricK]

Yes they can psyche a XX. I'm not saying that pass being pen is wrong, I'm saying it is certainly not standard. And in the real world they rarely psyche XX (though I have a partner who has done it).

Maybe they don't psyche a redouble because they don't know that your methods allow them to get away with it!

 

Eric

[hotShot]

2♠ even with this 2 suiter is a preempt. For all we know, he is trying to keep us out of game or slam. This is very different for a redoubled 1 level opening. Since opener will usually hold 5♠s and we hold 3, it is not sure that opps have a fit at all. With 3-3 in the minors we have no idea what openers second suit is. But we can expect, that there is a high risk, that any suit we might have, breaks unfavorable. We signaled our strength, and some sort of flat distribution to partner, so that he can make the best choice.

He might hold 4-5♠ and nobody has a fit anywhere. There is also the chance that opener in fact preempted his partner and our side has nothing, and maybe there are only partscores around. But the one with most information about our sides strength and distribution is our partner.

 

So his pass of the redbl, must have a well defined meaning. Itf it does not pass a lot of information, he puts you in a bad position just guessing from your own hand.

 

What would i do, if XX is alerted as values? I'd still pass. If partner is weak, it is not a good idea to let opps play 2MXX with overtricks (although this is mps, and it maybe does not matter that much how high we loose). So he should have bid his longest suit as a takeout. He did not. Values does not mean fit, so still your partner might hold ♠ as his best suit.

Perhaps it is poor judgement of partner, but to me, his bid indicates, the best we can do is play 2♠XX. So why on earth should i change his judgement, when he knows more about our combined hands than me.

If his judgement is that poor, maybe this partnership has no future, but a system where opps can get away with weak preempt bid, without being punished is flawed.

[Guest Jlall]

Yes they can psyche a XX. I'm not saying that pass being pen is wrong, I'm saying it is certainly not standard. And in the real world they rarely psyche XX (though I have a partner who has done it).

Maybe they don't psyche a redouble because they don't know that your methods allow them to get away with it!

 

Eric

That's fine. I don't think they're going to ask in the middle of the auction "what is pass if I XX" and if they do hopefully partner will have the table feel to sniff it out. Whatever reason that they don't, in real life they almost never do.

[mike777]

Last night I had a hand with a related theme.

1C=P=1D=2D(ME)

X==P==P=2S

X==3C=X=?

 

VUL AT IMPS

I assumed p wanted me to bid my better major over first pass and I did with 2s.

 

 

Perhaps bridge is not the game for me.

[EricK]

Yes they can psyche a XX. I'm not saying that pass being pen is wrong, I'm saying it is certainly not standard. And in the real world they rarely psyche XX (though I have a partner who has done it).

Maybe they don't psyche a redouble because they don't know that your methods allow them to get away with it!

 

Eric

That's fine. I don't think they're going to ask in the middle of the auction "what is pass if I XX" and if they do hopefully partner will have the table feel to sniff it out. Whatever reason that they don't, in real life they almost never do.

But this is the sort of thing that makes disclosure of methods somewhat of a farce.

 

You can be playing substandard methods and we might never have the opportunity to find out in time to take advantage of them. Or if we do find out it is by asking questions which might reveal our hand.

 

Are you happy with this state of affairs? Because to me it goes against the spirit of the laws.

 

Eric

[Double !]

My Lead?

 

partner's bidding is predicated on the hypothesis that I hold the template hand for a double of 2 spades: sound opening hand and 1-4-4-4 distribution. With a poor hand, partner would be expected to bid something (2NT Leb included), so the pass has to show a willingness to defend, i.e. decent with spades. Otherwise partner's pass to say "no clear action" is, IMO an example of partner-hanging. The doubler has already said "choose a suit, P" with the dbl of 2S. To pass with the intent of saying "no clear action, P" is tantamount to saying, "No, I don't wanna, you choose!" With a 1-4-4-4, the doubler is now dead.

 

If the partnership agreement is to pass with no clear action, then I guess I remove to 2NT? Will P take this as a scramble as opposed to a strong 19-20? I do not know.

 

Just another of 1001 bidding situations that need to be discussed.

[Guest Jlall]

Yes they can psyche a XX. I'm not saying that pass being pen is wrong, I'm saying it is certainly not standard. And in the real world they rarely psyche XX (though I have a partner who has done it).

Maybe they don't psyche a redouble because they don't know that your methods allow them to get away with it!

 

Eric

That's fine. I don't think they're going to ask in the middle of the auction "what is pass if I XX" and if they do hopefully partner will have the table feel to sniff it out. Whatever reason that they don't, in real life they almost never do.

But this is the sort of thing that makes disclosure of methods somewhat of a farce.

 

You can be playing substandard methods and we might never have the opportunity to find out in time to take advantage of them. Or if we do find out it is by asking questions which might reveal our hand.

 

Are you happy with this state of affairs? Because to me it goes against the spirit of the laws.

 

Eric

Sure, but I have already accepted that full disclosure is and never will be possible. We do the best we can but it's simply impossible.

[MickyB]

It is one thing to gain occasionally from not being able to disclose your sound methods, quite another to gain from not being able to disclose methods that work only because they haven't been disclosed!

 

IMO there should be a space on all CCs for forcing and 'almost forcing' passes.

[bearmum]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=s1052hkj97da102cakj]133|100|Scoring: MP

(2♠) - X - (XX) - P

(P) - ?[/hv]

 

2♠ was alerted as spades and a minor

XX is undiscussed

 

Your call?

TRUST your P and pass

[bearmum]

Passing XXs generally say "my hand has no clear direction" unless you have agreed otherwise. Do those who say partners pass has made the decision think the same about 1H X XX p? I will bid 2N, scrambling

UNLESS I am going crosseyed - and winebefuddled also - WHY in your example would you not pass XX from P (unless XX was rescue me please p-- in which case you bid again ;) )

 

But also in my winebefuddled state I really believe the original question where the OPENING bid was a 2 suited bid IS different to a 11-22 one opener and when P redoubles I feel (if for no other reason than to keep partnership trust) I am obliged to pass - TRUST your P ( even if occasionally it doesn't work out - is better than

occasionally[/color]not trusting gets a good result

 

This is MY personal observation after playing with my husband for ALMOST 40 years :blink: :D

 

 

AND let's not forget (for most of us ) it is only a game in the "Grand scheme of things"

 

(even if lots of folk disagree lol) which they probably will :lol: :blink: :ph34r: :ph34r:

[Finch]

Luckily this is one situation I have discussed with my partner, so I pass.

We have agreed that ANY pass of a redouble shows a desire to play there, with the sole exceptions of 1suit x xx P and 1suit P P x xx P.

 

It doesn't matter if the redouble showed "values", I am secure in my partnership agreement.

 

I agree this is an area where your opponents will be better off in a long teams match, because they can find out from reading your convention card in advance what your methods are, and whether they can try out a psychic redouble on you.

 

There was a hand in Malmo in a match involving England, where Townsend/Gold passed a redouble showing a wish to play there, and neither of them alerted. Partner of the redoubler assumed an un-alerted pass was neutral, and passed expecting the next hand to bid. When the contract was passed out, he claimed MI and called the TD. The TD ruled that pass "to play" was alertable as it was an unexpected meaning of the pass, ruled MI and allowed him to change his call.

 

The ruling was appealed, and England said that pass = "to play" is the most natural possible meaning of a pass here and so obviously shouldn't be alerted. The AC discovered that the TDs hadn't been able to agree on whether it was alertable or not, and then found that they couldn't decide either, so decided to uphold the TD's ruling as they didn't seem to know any better. In effect, the AC decided that the player who passed, then changed his call when it was passed out, was genuinely surprised by the meaning of pass rather than trying for a double shot, and so under "full disclosure" principles should be allowed to make the call he would have made had he known the opponents' system in depth.

 

So even the European Championships AC couldn't decide what the standard meaning of pass is in this sort of auction...

 

p.s. I recognise this hand from another forum...

[Echognome]

This was a hand where I was on the offending side giving MI. I opened the 2♠ hand holding a 6214 shaped hand, whereas partner had a 0553 hand and was trying to rescue. I was totally asleep and alerted XX as "values" rather than "undiscussed" (as this was the first time we were playing together). Advancer (the doubler's partner) asked a whole bunch of questions and then passed. The doubler pulled and then they cried foul when they didn't get the result they wanted. I was trying to see how they should bid if there wasn't MI and also if there wasn't UI. It seems that the doubler should leave in the XX anyway, so I had little sympathy for them.

 

However, the piece de resistance was when the director came over after the hand and advancer says "my partner would have left the double in had there not been MI." To which almost simultaneously myself and the director said "you can't speak for the actions your partner would take."

 

Justice prevailed in the end though as they got a decent score out of the board anyway. I learned a lesson of when in doubt, it's ok to say "undiscussed" or "I don't know. Sorry."

 

Edit: I was the perpetrator of the MI in both. Figured I'd try to figure out the UI aspect in this forum and the laws aspect in the other.