Mixed raises and Forcing pass ?

[Chamaco]

I was kibbing a friend of mine (we often partner in real life), and we had a friendly discussion on the following hand he was playing with his wife(so this is a regular partnership, not a pickup mate).

 

Please comment on the bidding and agreements :)

 

----------

 

Matchpoints pairs, none vuln

You hold as east:

JT9x-T9xx-Ax-Qxx

 

West deals and opens a Precision 1S

 

W.......N.....E......S

1S*....p.....3D*...4C

4S....5C...DBL... all pass

 

1S = 10-15 hcp, 5+ spades

3D = Rev Bergen mixed raise = 4 card support, 6/7-9 hcp (or, better, about 9 losers)

 

On the A of spades lead, dummy came down with

x- xxx- Q9xxx-K9xx

 

Declarer held

Kx- AQ- KJTx- AJTxx

 

Declarer managed to misplay the hand and go down: on the spade continuation he won in hand with spade K, then tried to go to dummy in diamonds to finesse the trump queen but west won with the ace and led a heart, for 5CX-1;

 

Of course, had declarer ruffed in dummy the second spades, she could have finessed trump Q and developed diamonds for a heart discard, making the contract..

 

------------------------------------------

 

In the post mortem, I argued that in my opinion the DBL was not a great bid:

 

1- It bids east's hand twice: our pard already knows our 4 card support + 7-9 values

 

2- it gives a hint to declarer to pick up the trump Q

 

My friend replied that the double was meant to:

 

a. protect the matchpoint score if we have a 4S game

 

b. stop partner rom the temptation of bidding 4S

 

On Point b, I replied

"you mean that pass would be forcing?", and he said

"At the 4-level, no, of course, but I think that at the 5-level pass would be forcing; if so, I am forced to double"

 

I responded:

"But opener has a precision opening (10-15), a limited hand, often very light; you have 7-9 hcp; how can pass be forcing ?

Besides, opener bid freely 4S over 4C, so she is likely to have extra length in spades, meaning that opps are short in spades and we might make no spade tricks at all"

 

I responded: "IMO, it wd be forcing at the 5 level if oyu had mader a LIMIT+ raise proimising some defense, say 9/10 hcp or better, but not a mixed raise. "

[coyot]

I would agree that against precision opening, pass over 5♣ is not forcing - but it is one of the things you really need to discuss with your partner, not just rely upon.

 

Without the agreement, though, pass is forcing - because:

1) East bid his hand only once - and he might have values for 5♠ if West has values for 4♠

2) You need to protect your matchpoint score - even at the cost of doubling a laydown game for opps.

[Chamaco]

I would agree that against precision opening, pass over 5♣ is not forcing - but it is one of the things you really need to discuss with your partner, not just rely upon.

 

Without the agreement, though, pass is forcing - because:

1) East bid his hand only once - and he might have values for 5♠ if West has values for 4♠

2) You need to protect your matchpoint score - even at the cost of doubling a laydown game for opps.

I quote the following examples from Eddie Kantar's booklet "Forcing pass":

 

Example 1

 

1H-(1S)-2H-(2S)

4H-(4S)- pass = ??

 

Example 2

 

1S-(2H)-2S-(3H)

4S -(5H)-pass =???

 

Example 3

 

1H-(p)-2H-(2S)

4H-(p)-p- (4S)

pass = ???

 

==============

 

In all 3 cases, Kantar suggests the agreement that the pass is forcing ONLY if we are vulnerable and they are not.

 

I think the case of the mixed raise (the hand originally posted in this thread) is like the 1H:2H raise in example 3.

In this case nobody is vuln, so according to Kantar's rule, pass shd not be forcing, even play std 5 card major and not precision.

[Gerben42]

This is my agreement: The weaker Bergen raise does not set up a forcing pass at any level. The stronger Bergen raise on the 5-level only.

[luke warm]

i play the constructive raise can't set up a forcing pass but the limit raise (any limit + raise) does, at any level

[pbleighton]

Whether the pass is forcing is up to you (I think it should be).

 

I agree with coyot that the double was right, given that it is matchpoints.

 

Peter

[Gerben42]

A request: if you play reverse Bergen raises, please call it Gerben raises. That's what I do :)

[Chamaco]

A request: if you play reverse Bergen raises, please call it Gerben raises. That's what I do :)

*Hehe*, alright :)

[EricK]

Have you got the oppositon hands right? The play doesn't make any sense - declarer already has the ♥ discard on the second ♠, and also has an entry to dummy for the trump finesse with the ♣K (and even the second round of ♦)

 

Eric

[Chamaco]

I agree with coyot that the double was right, given that it is matchpoints.

 

Peter

If you think of it, the only EXTRA asset for defeating 5C was the Qxx of trumps:

doubling gave this info away and an extra chance to opps to make.

By doubling, we are basically giving away our extra asset.

 

It does not sound a good strategy, even at MP (5C -1 might still be a decent score, because the tight 4S game might go down and quite a few tables would be in that contract; 5C made thanks to guessing the trump Q, doubled or undoubled, is a sure zero) ;.

 

 

Besides, if we pass in direct seat, pard can still make a penalty double, knowing we have something.

The fact that we are passing with Qxx of trumps does not mean that the end contract will inevitably be 5C undoubled.

 

 

I would make a penalty double if i had a SURE trick in clubs, not a "potential" trick that would vanish thanks to my double because declarer guesses the suit.

[Chamaco]

Have you got the oppositon hands right? The play doesn't make any sense - declarer already has the ♥ discard on the second ♠, and also has an entry to dummy for the trump finesse with the ♣K (and even the second round of ♦)

 

Eric

You are right eric.

 

I do not remember quite exactly the hands, but there was no H discard.

 

Assume something like

 

DUMMY

x- xxx- Q9xxx-K9xx

 

DECLARER

Kx- AQ- KJTx- AJTxx

 

I edited the original post accordingly.

[inquiry]

Direct raises that are not game force (responders) never establish forcing pass. Anid if opener wanted to establish a forcing pass situtation, he would have bid something other than 4♠ on the way to 4♠. This is not a forcing pass situtation playing precision or any other normal type system.

[coyot]

I agree with coyot that the double was right, given that it is matchpoints.

 

Peter

If you think of it, the only EXTRA asset for defeating 5C was the Qxx of trumps:

doubling gave this info away and an extra chance to opps to make.

By doubling, we are basically giving away our extra asset.

If you play forcing pass and opps know it, doubling is mandatory and therefore gives ABSOLUTELY NO INDICATION about ANY honors ;),

[Chamaco]

If you play forcing pass and opps know it, doubling is mandatory and therefore gives ABSOLUTELY NO INDICATION about ANY honors ;),

I agree with you.

Of course my comment was referring to the situation where we DID NOT AGREE A FP here.

 

My point here is: is pass is nonforcing, doubling just gives away our defensive asset.

If instead pass is forcing, doubling seems obvious to me. :-)

[EricK]

In a precision context, this 4♠ bid is often surely at best just a two-way shot (i.e might make might be a good sacrifice)

 

Pass can not possibly be forcing in that context, MP or not, can it?

 

Eric

[pbleighton]

"If you think of it, the only EXTRA asset for defeating 5C was the Qxx of trumps:

doubling gave this info away and an extra chance to opps to make.

By doubling, we are basically giving away our extra asset."

 

Not sure what you mean by "extra asset". The DA looks pretty good to me :)

 

Seriously, the opps have at most 23 hcp (in fact that is what they had). Doubling 5 at matchpoints looks pretty good to me. *maybe* this gives away a trick, more often than not, it doesn't.

 

Peter

[mike777]

1) Never forcing pass on this auction. Do not understand that comment.

2) Protect MP game? Do not understand that comment. We have 4 working HCP on defense and offense, rest of hcp are wasted. We have told partner we have 7-9. Pard is allowed to bid again if they have some very unusual hand.

[kenberg]

IMO a pass should be non-forcing here. Hearing only the auction and not seeing anyone's hand it seems very reasonable to think 5C is makable. Obviously there is a lot of shape going around, making a 2-2 club split less likely. You might contend that the double makes the 2-2 split more likely (and is thus truly devilish holding Qxx) as the double may be more attractive with two club losers. With three clubs and the assumed shortness in pard's hand, one may not want to discourage 5S. Anyway, my expectation would be that declarer will take the finesse regardless of a double or not. With the hands shown (maybe still not quite right since there is no need to ruff the spade: Take K at T2, lead to club king, finesse, draw, work on Ds, taking five clubs, four diamonds and two major cards) it appears 5C is unstoppable and 5S will be down one (losing one card in each side suit). Responder has no great reason to think 5C can be defeated and no reason at all to bid 5S. From his viewpoint, selling to 5C may be the best there is. Allowing him to express this through a pass seems right. Opener, with his 6-4-2-1 shape and with all his values in his long suits, may decide to try 5S. Or he may pass it out and hope 5C fails. Either is better than what happened.

 

Ken

[pclayton]

I dont think pass is forcing either, but I am intrigued about the general idea of setting up agreements about a pass being forcing at the 5 level instead of the 4 level (above our game).

[kenberg]

On second thought, which I perhaps should have had before posting earlier, I think declarer should play off the top two clubs and go down 1.

 

After two tricks he plays club to the king and club back, RHO following low. He reasons: LHO appears to have the heart king else he probably would have shifted to a heart at trick 2 or even led a heart at trick 1.This means, if clubs are 3-1, he can make four spades. If I rise with the ace and drop the Q, that's obviously good. If I rise with the ace and LHO shows out then I will be down 1 but I will get mps against all the tables where they were allowed to play 4S and, since there should be at least a few of those, I reckon the ace gets a top when it is right and still scores something, maybe even quite well, when it is wrong.

 

I realize this is off the original issue of the forcing pass but I couldn't help myself.

 

k