Dealing with a very high level preempt...

[inquiry]

Imps, no one vul...

 

You hold

S-xx

H-K732

D-void

C-KQJ9865

 

Bidding...

 

Pard RHO You

1S 5D ??

 

What do you bid?

[luis]

As usual in this position any bid can be right, wrong, very right or very wrong. So the good bid is the better bid in average.

I have a hand with 5 losers and a solid club suit so passing or doubling 5d are not options.

 

I'm bidding 6c expecting to make that maybe with an overtrick. If pd has a good hand and can bid over 6c -unlikely but not unreasonable under the cirunstances- I'll bid 7c.

[pbleighton]

6C, but I'm not as confident as Luis - this could go down on all sorts of 1S openers.

 

Peter

 

BTW Luis - I count 6 losers. Do you expect the 4th heart to score?

[luis]

I expect to stablish spades for 12 tricks.... if pd has AKxxx or AQxxx with the K that should be onside on this bidding. So with about 7 HCP in spades I have about 5 average HCP to spare. Since I have all the clubs but the Ace and the hK it's very likely to find the cA or the hA in pd's hand.

I'm optimist

[Free]

Isn't pass forcing in this case? If it is, pass would be my bid. Otherwise 6C might have a good chance. 7C is a wild guess...

[luis]

How can pass be forcing after pd opens 1 spade and they bid 5d?

You can have 0 or 18 HCP in this auction and pd is expected to do what

with either his minimum 11HCP or superb 19HCP ?

 

I can already imagine the line in the CC:

"If we open the bidding we are in a forcing pass situation"

[mishovnbg]

Hi Luis

This hand is from tournament where I played. I bidded 6CL too. Rado, who was my p, said that better is to pass and bid 6CL over his dbl, because here my pass will be forcing and i think he is right. If I bid directly 6CL he expect better support in SP. At table he bidded 6SP doubled and redoubled from him for -1000.

Misho

[keylime]

This isn't that difficult to me really. A double here is card-showing and showing values but by implication not tolerant of spades (if I got spade support I'm bidding to the level I think I can make). Pass asks partner to clarify the situation. What happens if partner on that crappy 12 count with a 5-3-3-2 with two clubs? He/she will probably want to defend and maintain if possible a positive position.

[inquiry]

Misho is right. This was from a tournment where I was kibitizing him and Rado. The hand offers an interesting position in what bids mean.

 

1) Would pass over 5D be forcing?

2) Is double takeout, penatly, or card showing

3) Should you simply bid 6C?

 

I will withhold my choice for a while, but anyone who has read Robson/Segal might guess what I would have bid here.

 

Ben

[flytoox]

Misho is right. This was from a tournment where I was kibitizing him and Rado. The hand offers an interesting position in what bids mean.

 

1) Would pass over 5D be forcing?

2) Is double takeout, penatly, or card showing

3) Should you simply bid 6C?

 

I will withhold my choice for a while, but anyone who has read Robson/Segal might guess what I would have bid here.

 

Ben

 

Hi, Ben, I think the 1st question is not really a question, pass cant be forcing in this situation. You may have nothing in ur hand.

the second question is a big one. Dbl here has to be flexible. I think it should be card showing.

As for the 3rd question, I prefer to dbl rather than bid 6c directly. RHO preempt to 5d doesnt mean we will have slam. It is better to get +100 or +300 rather than -500 or -800. Sometimes you have to accept the fact. This is the reason why we preempt.

So my plan is to dbl first, if pd correct to 5s, then i will correct to 6c. If pd pass 5dx, i will be happy with it.

[inquiry]

Hi, Ben, I think the 1st question is not really a question, pass cant be forcing in this situation. You may have nothing in ur hand.

 

I will just point out two things, still without giving my view yet. 1) Rado, Misho, and Free all say that PASS is forcing. You and Luis say that it is not. 3) This is point at least for discussing. Advantages/disavantages of such a treatment.

[the hog]

Is pass forcing? Well it certainly would not be in most partnerships. However I DO know that it IS played as forcing in a lot of expert partnerships.

 

Luis and Flytoox clearly think it is not. Rado, Misho and Ben clearly think it is. FWIW pd & I also play it as forcing.

 

What are the arguments for it to be forcing? Most times the 5D bid will be pre emptive. Playing pass as forcing gives you greater flexibility. You know have the option of passing and pulling the X to 6C, or of doubling immediately, or of bidding. An immediate x on this hand is clearly wrong. You have no defence and a strong offensive hand.

 

An interesting question is whether an immediate 6C shows S tolerance, or whether passing and then bidding 6C over a x shows S tolerance. I don't know the answer and guess it is up to partnership agreement. Any suggestions as to what is logical here?

 

Interestingly enough Marston and Burgess bid several '00 simulated hands where the opps bid high level pre empts over their 1 level openings. They concluded that a pass should be forcing.

[mishovnbg]

Hi all!

1. Why forcing pass after opps bid at 5 level over p opening? Because opening promisse 2+QT and opps most of time will not make their contract (exceptions only establish rules ;)).

2. Optional dbl - at this level it mean you have no void in opps suit. (Playing with Ben I must dbl for take out, even with less than void :))

3. Yes, as you know in my opinion. What is "enough support" at same level of competition is very unclear. But it is clear we will lose our possible 7CL/NT, if I pass or dbl and my LHO bid 6/7DI - now I will never can show my very long and good CL.

 

By the way, with my regular partners I play one simple and very usefull agreement ( A can be void in opps suit):

- Pass: 0 or 2A. Dbl from p mean if I have 0 A I must pass, if I have 2 - I must continue bidding.

- DBL: 1A - my bid in example.

- any other bid: 3A

 

Misho

[flytoox]

Is pass forcing? Well it certainly would not be in most partnerships. However I DO know that it IS played as forcing in a lot of expert partnerships.

 

Luis and Flytoox clearly think it is not. Rado, Misho and Ben clearly think it is. FWIW pd & I also play it as forcing.

 

What are the arguments for it to be forcing? Most times the 5D bid will be pre emptive. Playing pass as forcing gives you greater flexibility. You know have the option of passing and pulling the X to 6C, or of doubling immediately, or of bidding. An immediate x on this hand is clearly wrong. You have no defence and a strong offensive hand.

 

An interesting question is whether an immediate 6C shows S tolerance, or whether passing and then bidding 6C over a x shows S tolerance. I don't know the answer and guess it is up to partnership agreement. Any suggestions as to what is logical here?

 

Interestingly enough Marston and Burgess bid several '00 simulated hands where the opps bid high level pre empts over their 1 level openings. They concluded that a pass should be forcing.

 

 

If LHO is a passed hand, I would agree pass is forcing. LHO may have a big hand in this case. The problme with playing pass as forcing here is that basically you have to dbl opp's 5 level prempt whatever you have.

 

However, if Interestingly enough Marston and Burgess bid several '00 simulated hands where the opps bid high level pre empts over their 1 level openings. They concluded that a pass should be forcing.

is true, I may change my mind.

[the hog]

However, if Interestingly enough Marston and Burgess bid several '00 simulated hands where the opps bid high level pre empts over their 1 level openings. They concluded that a pass should be forcing is true, I may change my mind.

 

They did this before the last Bermuda Bowl they played together - was about 10 yars ago or so!

[luis]

Maybe pass should be semi-forcing in this particular position allowing pd to pass with a minimum opening, a reopening double must show extra values and then responder can decide if it is ok to leave the double or bid 5s or 6c if that's playable when pd has a good hand.

Anyway I'm bidding 6c and I think that doesn't show spade tolerance.

[inquiry]

Ok... Let me clear up some misconceptions about my view.

 

Ron stated that "Misho and Ben clearly think it is [pass is forcing]." This is not true. My comment about Rado and Misho and Free thinking pass was forcing was directed to the comment by flytool who addressed this issue commenting on the question if PASS was forcing by stating... "Hi, Ben, I think the 1st question is not really a question, pass cant be forcing in this situation." My comment was to express what Ron himself pointed out that some partnerships DO PLAY PASS as forcing. But not me, in this position my pass would not be forcing. Luis is closest to my view when he said that pass is "semi-forcing" and Misho got my position with this hand exactly right when he said "Playing with Ben I must dbl for take out, even with less than void."

 

The way I like to play doubles is that they are all for takeout if we have not found a fit. If I have a bunch of diamonds, I can pass this hand and wait for partner, who therefore will be short in diamonds, to reopen with a takeout double, which I then pass. This is why Luis is right, the pass is semi-forcing. If partner is short in diamonds he must take some action.

 

So the ways to treat the bid here are:

1) Pass is forcing and dbl is penatly

2) Pass is forcing and dbl is card showing

3) Pass is not forcing, and dbl is penatly

4) Pass is not forcing, and dbl is card showing

5) Pass is semi-forcing, and dlb is takeout

 

If pass is forcing, the right bid over 5D is pass, then pull the expected dbl to 6CLUBS. This denies spade support. Bid an immediate 6 clubs showing very nice clubs with spade tolerance. Some would play the pass followed by 6 clubs as showing first round diamond control and grand slam try, but at this level, finding the right strain is more important.

 

With this hand, I would (as misho pointed out), dbl. If partner bids 5 hearts, I will try to make 6 clubs. If partner bids 6 hearts he plays there. IF partner bids 5-SPADES, I join luis and others in 6 CLUBS. But the one advantage (or disadvantage) to the double is that if partner passes, we play 5 diamonds doubled.

 

This hand you catch your partner with nothing special...

 

S-AKJ542

H-Q86

D-A95

C-7

 

He would apply LOTT (figuring you for at most 2S for dbl, and likely 5 in the others) for an 8 card fit, and giving you likely 1 or 0 in diamonds for them to have 9 or 10 card fit. That is 18 tricks at most. If you can make 11 or 12 tricks, they will only make 6 or 7. The LAW will tell him to pass. 5Dx is down two. You can't make anything at the five level.

 

You need to discuss this kind of hand with your partner to know how you play it. The way I play it is straight out of Robson/Segal's Book "Partnership bidding" which is available in PDF format on the web. So anyone interested in examples and the like can find it in there. And note, the higher the level of the takeout double, the more likely partner will make a penalty pass.

 

Ben

[irg20]

At high levels it seems that double can do double can do one of to things:

 

Encourage partner to bid on with a normal hand in the context of the auction,

 

or

 

Encourage partner to pass with a normal hand in the context of the auction.

 

These definitions are vague, as they must be. There is not enough room to bid hands scientifically and judgement (and luck) will play a large part.

 

To my mind at this level card showing and penalty double are more or less the the same things if by card showing we mean optional (or any of a number of other potentially confusing terms).

 

I believe that the issue of whether pass should be forcing or not is seperate. (Related to this issue is that of whether pass and pull partner's double is strong or weak).

 

This sets up six possible situations:

 

Pass nonforcing: x=TO or x=pen (R&S suggests 1st situation is preferable)

 

Pass forcing: x=TO (pass and pull strong or weak) or x=pen (pass and pull strong or weak) - I believe that R&S suggest that any of these methods is reasonable though I don't have the book to hand.

 

To my mind bidding 6C never guarantees spade tolerance. If I have spade tolerance then I bid either double (if it encourages partner to bid on), 5S (no other suit worth mentioning), 5NT (choice of slam, could be any two of three suits I guess) or 6D (?). I think these last two bids probably need defining more closely in terms of what they show and deny (any suggestions!).

 

In the problem at hand I bid 6C (unless I'm a forcing pass with pass and pull weak man, in which case I pass and pull to 6C).

[inquiry]

Hi irg20, welcome to the BBO forum.

 

I want to take discuss three thing you wrote.

 

1) You suggested that pass then pull the partner's double can be out of weakness. If the bidding goes... 1y-(5D)-p-(p)-X.. and partner pulls, it should never really be out of weakness (assuming the dbl is penatly) . And if the double is takeout, then pulling just suggest a lawful decision to bid on rather than to defend.

 

2) While I do agree with you that a "card showing" and penalty double here are essentially the same thing. However, if pass is forcing, then the reopening double can not be in principle takeout (one of your options). This would be like anyother forcing pass situation, where the double then suggest more defense than offense. As an aside, I am CERTAIN that R&S, at least in their book, do not play this auction with forcing pass in place.

 

3) The interesting theoretical question is rather 6 Clubs on this auction shows a spade tolerance. You stated that "6C never guarantees spade tolerance". However, Rado (a system gold star) thought it did so much that he not only corrected to 6 Spades, but redoubled when he was doubled there. Misho (a reconginzed expert player) thought in highsight it should promise spades as well. And, I also thought that in the context of a forcing pass auction (which, BTW, I don't play here), it promises spade support. The reason goes back to if pass is forcing, with a hand without a spade fit, you pass, then pull partner's reopening double (or new suit bid) to 6 clubs. So the immediate action in this context shows a willingness to be overridden by parnter and taken back to spades. In this context, 6 clubs would be a "fit nonjump" to put it in R&S language. This seems the most logical and straight foward way to play this auction.

 

I, on the other hand, play dbl as takeout, and pass as not forcing. But even in my case, I play 6-CLUBS on this auction as showing a tolerance for spades. Why? With hearts and clubs, I double. With clubs and diamonds I pass, with clubs and spades I can bid clubs. This fit nonjump has worked well for me after lower preempts, although I have to admit it has not come up at the six level yet.

[irg20]

Sorry to reiterate this point but 5NT=choice of slams seems to cover hands that want to offer partner a choice of spades or clubs at the 6 level and is consistent with the notion that a choice of strains is more important than a choice of levels in these situations.

 

Perhaps this issue of 5NT and bids of opponents suits at the 6 level would make a fruitful seperate posting.

 

(If pass is forcing the of course you have all these delayed 5NT and cuebid auctions aswell).

 

Ian

[inquiry]

Sorry to reiterate this point but 5NT=choice of slams seems to cover hands that want to offer partner a choice of spades or clubs at the 6 level and is consistent with the notion that a choice of strains is more important than a choice of levels in these situations.

 

Perhaps this issue of 5NT and bids of opponents suits at the 6 level would make a fruitful seperate posting.

 

(If pass is forcing the of course you have all these delayed 5NT and cuebid auctions aswell).

 

Ian

 

5NT offering a choice would be great if partner knew what he was choosing between. That is, I use a quick bid of 5NT frequently as pick a slam, choosing a slow approach clearly establishing trumps when I want it to be grand slam force. Here, of course, the slow approach has been taken away from you, so the geneneral rule of 5NT as pickem would best apply. But there are two unbid suits (hearts and clubs). So to offer 5NT as a pickem is a little risky, although partner having the master suit makes it not that risky. As long as both you and partner understand that 5NT is pick between some unbid suit and spades. After all, spades is the master suit. But what if partner thinks it is pick between the two unbids suits, say you are 1-6-0-6 for instance, and picks one when you belong in spades because you are 2-4-0-6 and he picks hearts on a three card suit?

 

Also, imagine an auction that goes... 1C-(5D)-5NT for instance. As a pickem between clubs and a yet defined major would be, well, very odd treatment. Playing pickem, maybe this should be an almost demand for partner to bid his better major.

 

It is not my intent, however, to delve into the finer points of the treatement playing a forcing pass. Since this is not what I play. Maybe Maybe Misho or Rado, who advocate for pass being forcing and the new suit being a fit nonjump can step in here and explain their treatments, which I am sure they can do better than I.

 

This hand, as they say, however becomes a problem of frequencies. What kind of hand are you most likely to hold that will be problems bidding? Let's examine the hands.

 

1) Long in diamonds - pass and pass partners reopen dbl

 

2) Spade support - bid spades

 

3) Short D, no S fit - dbl for "takeout"

 

4) partial S fit, short is D - dbl and rebid spades if partner's rebid goes badly for you (not real likely).

 

5) partial S fit, short D, good suit - bid your suit (partner with "long" D is less likely to reopen)

 

6) partial S fit, long D, good suit - pass, partner will bid again

 

7) no spade fit, long D, good suit - pass, partner short in D will bid again, now you can bid your suit.

 

This works for me. As this example grouping shows, with a spade fit, you are going to bid spades. With no spade fit, you are going to tend to want to defend, will have the other two suits. or will have a one suiter. The way I play, with the other two suits, you double. With one other suit and their suit, you can safely pass, as partner will reopen when short in diamonds. So what is the problem hand? Short in their suit, partial fit for partner, good suit of your own. Here if you pass, it can go all pass. If you double, partner will not be thinking rebid his suit, and may jump in the third suit (the one you don't hold). So the fit nonjump works nicely to fill in the problem hand.

[irg20]

If I am 2-4-0-6 and we end up in an unplayable spot I will claim a misdeal. If the spot is playable then the opponents will claim a misdeal I imagine.

 

The remaining problem that needs to be addressed by your methods is how to show a club one suiter with short diamonds. I would like to be able to bid 6C with this handtype. I do not want to have to double and hope partner doesn't pass it.

 

I think fit non jumps are all very well in situations originally advocated by R&S, namely when I am a passed hand and so logically cannot possess a one-suited hand (as I would have preempted earlier on in the auction). At this high level I do not see to have that luxury.

 

I'l try a concrete suggestion:

 

Ian's scheme

 

5NT = two places to play (pd bids lowest acceptable suit).

Over this there is some luxury as if pd bid 6C (which he will a lot of the time I guess) I can bid 5D or 5H which can be used to distinguish either shape or strength with support for both majors).

 

6C = C one suiter

If pd has solid spades then he is still entitled to bid them. In such situations whether I have two small or a void is going to be of no little relevance.

 

6D = ? (can only really be based on spades or hearts and spades)

 

 

Ben's Scheme

 

5NT = GSF

 

6C = C+S. Here we seem to be arguing that a partial spade fit is sufficient. R&S in the auction p p 1H 2S, 3C suggest that x3y5 is pretty much the minimum typical S and C length. I'm not convinced that now we're at the 6 level (for a club bid) we should let in 2 card S suits in on our definition of what is acceptable tolerance.

 

6D =? (we agree here!?)

[sartaj1]

If pass were forcing, this is not the hand for it.

If you pass and then bid 6C, it shows a grand slam trial in most expert partnerships

[the hog]

Clearly your agreements are different with Paul than those of Stephen, Sartaj.

[mishovnbg]

If pass were forcing, this is not the hand for it.

If you pass and then bid 6C, it shows a grand slam trial in most expert partnerships

 

It is true, but it doesnt mean it is best way - just regular practice! Unfortunately grands are very rare and no need to vaste so many bids after forcing pass for it.

Misho