[Fluffy]

---

Match Points.

[akwoo]

LoTT says you should bid here with 18 total tricks. It's not possible for 3♠ and 4♥ to both go down.

Now, actually, with me holding ♠Qxx, there could very well be only 17 on blind play. But if I pass or double here, opponents will probably figure out that I have the spades, and so there will actually be 18.

So I have to bid.

[mike777]

I will try pass, conservative but I think 2s told my story.

adjusted roughly 9.5 loser hand, I have some defense.

[MrAce]

You invited pd, he rejected it.

I know everyone here thinks auto that pd has stiff ♠, but then again he is allowed to look at his own singleton and bid accordingly.
It is still tough due to being MP. You have a lot of negative adjustments, (Qxx and Qx) but you also have the 4th ♥ which is good.
I'd pass myself..

[apollo1201]

I would pass.
I can hope to set 3S with my defensive values, while partner despite his likely S singleton refused to bid game. I gave him all required info about my hand and he doesnt seem to think we have game, I have no reason to think differently.
I dont think 4H will work as a transfer to 4S, and X seems to be looking for trouble or giving away the SQ position.

[FrancesHinden]

I wish I had been able to show a 4-card raise last round, in which case I would defiinitely double now.
I suspect it is right to double anyway. It sounds strongly as if they are in an 8-card fit.

[MrAce]

FrancesHinden, on 2015-July-12, 08:29, said:

I wish I had been able to show a 4-card raise last round, in which case I would defiinitely double now.
I suspect it is right to double anyway. It sounds strongly as if they are in an 8-card fit.

I'd double too had my hearts been only 3 card.

But if pd has AQ ♥ and a hand like Jx AQxxx xx Axxx or similar to this, I do not wanna sign up for a zero. All i know is, from my own experience of course, opponents who bids red vs white to 3 level if only with 8 card fit and not too many hcps, tend to have a singleton and sometimes they both have a singleton. I know a lot of people use the phrase "It is MP so what the heck.." but I found over the years that those bottom boards severely drop our % and are very hard to recover from.

Of course we can also get a zero by not doubling at MP. This hand just does not quite turn me on for some reason. I do not have a single card in my hand that I can confidently claim that it will score a trick!

[lamford]

FrancesHinden, on 2015-July-12, 08:29, said:

I wish I had been able to show a 4-card raise last round, in which case I would definitely double now.
I suspect it is right to double anyway. It sounds strongly as if they are in an 8-card fit.

I think you are assuming that NS and EW are expert, but partner is void in spades, and the opponents have ten, assuming the hand is one I have already seen in another context.

[MrAce]

lamford, on 2015-July-12, 09:48, said:

..... I have already seen in another context.

Where?

[lamford]

MrAce, on 2015-July-12, 09:50, said:

Where?

http://www.bridgebas...-discrepancies/

There was a break in tempo by North, it would seem.

[gnasher]

lamford, on 2015-July-12, 10:45, said:

http://www.bridgebas...-discrepancies/

There was a break in tempo by North, it would seem.

Next time you post a bidding problem and I happen to know partner's hand, is it OK if I tell everyone what he's got?

[MrAce]

lamford, on 2015-July-12, 10:45, said:

http://www.bridgebas...-discrepancies/

There was a break in tempo by North, it would seem.

I see, interesting, thanks.

I totally agree with your ruling btw.

EDIT: I think Andy has a point. Seems like we ruined the topic for Gonzalo and probably for everyone else as well.

[Vampyr]

MrAce, on 2015-July-12, 11:45, said:

EDIT: I think Andy has a point. Seems like we ruined the topic for Gonzalo and probably for everyone else as well.

I think that lamford's comment pretty clearly indicated that partner's hand would be in the other thread.

[mike777]

lamford, on 2015-July-12, 09:48, said:

I think you are assuming that NS and EW are expert, but partner is void in spades, and the opponents have ten, assuming the hand is one I have already seen in another context.

Unless we are told otherwise the rule of the game is to assume the opp and partner are true exp/wc players.

[Fluffy]

The purpose of this thread had already been fulfilled when the results were presented to the appeals comitee, not very succesfully though, full story at the other thread.

[beatrix45]

4♥. This might be wrong, but I can't help it. We do have 9 trumps. Plus, the opps have another chance to bid.

[nige1]

Fluffy, on 2015-July-11, 14:03, said:

Match Points.

---

It's likely that game is available for one side or the other but partner has already rejected your effort in that direction. Hence, IMO the calls rank:

• Pass: Quacky with a possible slow trick in opponent's suit.
• 4♥: Might make,
• Double: 3♠ is less likely to go down if you double.

[Phil]

How many times have we been just screwed by doubling with a hand like this? A bunch of soft crap. They have some weird mesh or two suited fit and wrap 9 or 10.

I love kicking them in the teeth when they step out, but I think you need to pass here.

[Phil]

Double post.

[PhilKing]

It sounds like they believed the hesitation was not established, so there was nothing to consider.