[lamford]

---

Matchpoints.

This post has been edited by lamford: 2013-June-04, 04:19

[wank]

i don't think anyone would seriously consider anything other than pass, unless they were in a forcing pass situation, which would be a little odd.

still, that doesn't mean i agree with what you said in the other thread.

[Lord Molyb]

I'm passing, you have a minimum anyway.

[Cyberyeti]

Lord Molyb, on 2013-June-02, 17:30, said:

I'm passing, you have a minimum anyway.

What do you think partner has ? I can see bidding being right, but not sure I can bring myself to do it. Give partner KQJxxx, AKxx in our suits and opps a singleton each for example.

[mcphee]

If partner is strong for the 4H bid he will double and we can bid or pass. If they have bid on shape perhaps they will bid 5H. Partner was under some pressure when they bid 4H, no reason for us to do anything other than pass now.

[billw55]

I already showed everything this hand has to offer. In addition, partner still has a call coming. Clear pass.

[FrancesHinden]

I and one other person I know of who had this hand at the table doubled. We both wanted to make a forcing pass but unfortunately weren't playing it.

[jallerton]

What's the form of scoring?

[PhilKing]

jallerton, on 2013-June-03, 17:06, said:

What's the form of scoring?

Appeals committee.

[awm]

Double would really never occur to me here. I have minimum values with all my points in partner's suits, and basically one trick of defense (spade ace). In fact I am more tempted to bid 5♥ than double, since partner's 4♥ jump is often (but not always) a 5-5 or 6-5 hand and I rate our chances at the five-level as fairly decent...

However I think pass is a standout.

[dake50]

SA, to SK, S-ruff. HQ out, expecting another 1,2 tricks.
Double.

[the hog]

I have already shown my hand with the initial x. Why on earth would I bid my hand twice? Obvious pass.

[rogerclee]

I pass, since I am okay with all of partner's possible decisions (pass, X, and 5H).

Doubling is a huge loser when partner would bid had you passed. Bidding is a big loser when partner would have doubled had you passed. I try to pass if reasonable whenever this is true, and it's certainly true here.

[rhm]

dake50, on 2013-June-03, 19:52, said:

SA, to SK, S-ruff. HQ out, expecting another 1,2 tricks.
Double.

And of course

a) Partner has the SK
b) Partner has no more than 5 spades, even though he is probably void in clubs.
c) The remaining spades are divided 3-3 in spite of opponents vigorous bidding.

Dream on.

Rainer Herrmann

[lamford]

jallerton, on 2013-June-03, 17:06, said:

What's the form of scoring?

Matchpoints, and I am suprised that you do not recognise the hand as someone at your table probably had the hand a few days ago, although it is possible it was your sit-out. Even if you don't, the "Matchpoints" hidden away just after "Your Bid" could have helped.

[helene_t]

rogerclee, on 2013-June-04, 01:20, said:

I try to pass if reasonable whenever this is true, and it's certainly true here.

I thought your philosophy was to double when it's reasonable

Seriously, I can imagine doubling when this is action rather than penalty oriented.

[Fluffy]

having all the stuff on the majors is a little bit tempting but not enough.

[gszes]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-June-03, 12:54, said:

I and one other person I know of who had this hand at the table doubled. We both wanted to make a forcing pass but unfortunately weren't playing it.

Let's assume you were playing FP --- This is an interesting point as I believe
FP differs when we are considering going to the 4/5 level than when we are
considering slam. At the 4/5 level control in opps suit is not as serious a
matter and can usually be bid based more on general power and/or
distribution. The quesion than does this hand qualify as a FP??
FP can then be used to help quantify an as yet unlimited hand like the
hand responder showed with x. Responder hand looks exactly like what
opener might expect from a minimum x of 2c though closer to the bottom
than the top.
Under these conditions responder must x. This allows opener to make a
highly informed decision w/o worries of responder having extra values.
Another benefit is that if opener does not wish to sit for the x opposite
a minimum partner they know bidding on is a good idea. I noted you
wanted to make a forcing pass with this hand and wondered how your
thinking of FP in this situation differs from mine and why??

[dake50]

And of course

a) Partner has the SK
b) Partner has no more than 5 spades, even though he is probably void in clubs.
c) The remaining spades are divided 3-3 in spite of opponents vigorous bidding.

Dream on.

Rainer Herrmann

*** Of course! Partner won't have DAK, nor CA, nor SK, on and on. Quite pessimistic.

[FrancesHinden]

I would make a forcing pass if I could because although I have a minimum, all my points are in the majors and I don't have a club honour. I don't want partner to pass 5C out: I want him either to bid or to double but I don't know which. This isn't about whether or not we have a slam, it's about whether to defend or play.

It's not about points as such, it's about uncertainty. I would double with xx Kxxx KJxx xxx or x Axxx QJxx Qxx. The actual hand is very offensive for its HCPs and it could be right to bid because (for example) 5C is making: try giving partner Q109xx AKxxx Qx x. he has no reason to pull a double of 5C but 5C could easily be making and we are cheap.