[bd71]

---

4SX didn't work out very well for us (E/W) last night at the club. A cold -790.

Appreciate thoughts about the East/West decisions here, although you can throw in criticisms of N/S too to help me think we got "fixed" a bit.

[CamHenry]

I think W should make a preemptive raise to 3♦ at his first turn. Similarly, N probably has enough to bid 4♠ straight off - he's pretty certain partner's short in ♦ and can ruff them early.

After E doubles 2♠ for takeout, W can afford to bid 4♣ over the 3♠ from S. E probably then realises there's a lack of minor-suit cards in NS, and can assess the fact that his ♦AK don't look so much like 2 tricks any more. He might well find the profitable 5m sacrifice as well.

Some might argue that W should pull the double of 4♠, but that seems like resulting.

My suggested auction:

---

[Cyberyeti]

2♦ is a bit limp on the W hand, if you bid 3♦ and partner knows it's preemptive, he'd be less inclined to double. N has partially fixed you by understating his hand looking for a double.

[TylerE]

On this sort of walk the dog auction I would expect at least a ♦singleton, but alost more likely a void in one of the opponents hands. In which case we might well not only not be beating it but might even be eating an overtrick if partners points are say finessing K♠ and random quacks. I'd prefer a preemptive ♦ raise, but I have some sympathy for 2♦. After the X of 2♠ E has more or less told his story, and should leave any X of 4♠ to west.

[Codo]

So, West denied 4 HEarts but showed a diamond fit and still you play the first double as take out? Why should I?

Ok, if this is GIBs method, fine, so be it. In this case I have no idea, why West did not take it out....

[neilkaz]

Codo, on 2013-July-17, 10:28, said:

So, West denied 4 HEarts but showed a diamond fit and still you play the first double as take out? Why should I?

Ok, if this is GIBs method, fine, so be it. In this case I have no idea, why West did not take it out....

While I'd prefer to make a preemptive raise to 3D as west, most of the fault lies with east's final double. I presume that his first X showed extra strength, but now he has no reason to expect to defeat 4♠.

[quiddity]

100% blame to West. I don't agree at all with previous comments about East's double - it looks obvious to me. At this vul East either wants to penalize NS (with his 4 quick tricks and partner's raise) or play 5♦. It makes no sense to allow them to play a red 4♠ undoubled. EW are not in a force so East must double.

This is not a "penalty" double; East couldn't even bid notrump at the two-level so how can he have a trump stack? This is an "extra values, do something intelligent" double. West has an extra diamond (or even two extra diamonds, he could possibly raise with 3-card support), a good chance of a side-suit fit, a stiff spade, and no sure defensive trick - how can he sit?

[TylerE]

East doesn't have 4 quick tricks on this auction. He should consider himself ahead of the game if one diamond cashes. Saying West could bid 2♦ on 3 is just asinine.

[ggwhiz]

Codo, on 2013-July-17, 10:28, said:

So, West denied 4 HEarts but showed a diamond fit and still you play the first double as take out?

3♣ instead of double also shows extras and west is better placed by staring at negative defense. When pard has already denied hearts, show where you live.

[nige1]

bd71, on 2013-July-17, 08:54, said:

4SX didn't work out very well for us (E/W) last night at the club. A cold -790. Appreciate thoughts about the East/West decisions here, although you can throw in criticisms of N/S too to help me think we got "fixed" a bit.

---

EW bid fine. Rub of the green Swap a North ♦ for a South ♥ and no ATB problem --- at least for EW

[FM75]

bd71, on 2013-July-17, 08:54, said:

---

4SX didn't work out very well for us (E/W) last night at the club. A cold -790.

Appreciate thoughts about the East/West decisions here, although you can throw in criticisms of N/S too to help me think we got "fixed" a bit.

Precision with agreements over interference.

2♦ 16-19 hcp and any 4441
Does south bid 2♠ over a strong opening? If so, with 0-7 partner bids cheaper of 2 4-card or longer suits. 3♣

3♠ by North?, 4♦ partner will have to figure out that I have a singleton spade from bidding and correct to clubs, if necessary.


After 4♠? pass and let partner decide best fit. - 5♦ maybe doubled and off 3 max. -500 vs -620 (or + 100)

At least we don't double, since we know that we have no defense against spades.

[TylerE]

nige1, on 2013-July-17, 20:36, said:

EW bid fine. Rub of the green Swap a couple of North's diamonds for a couple of South's ♥s and no ATB problem --- at least for EW

I don't buy this. Make the NS hands that square and I think they stay ought of game. That's the point of listening to the auction. When opponents seemingly bid the same values two or three times, either A: they're bad or B: their shape is improving. Assuming A: is somewhat dangerous if you don't know for sure, and if you do...

[nige1]

TylerE, on 2013-July-17, 21:51, said:

I don't buy this. Make the NS hands that square and I think they stay ought of game. That's the point of listening to the auction. When opponents seemingly bid the same values two or three times, either A: they're bad or B: their shape is improving. Assuming A: is somewhat dangerous if you don't know for sure, and if you do...

North was walking the dog and East stepped in something nasty but, IMO, East's second double just shows extra values and it's more credit to North than blame to East-West.

[quiddity]

TylerE, on 2013-July-17, 13:07, said:

East doesn't have 4 quick tricks on this auction. He should consider himself ahead of the game if one diamond cashes. Saying West could bid 2♦ on 3 is just asinine.

lol

[MrAce]

Codo, on 2013-July-17, 10:28, said:

So, West denied 4 HEarts but showed a diamond fit and still you play the first double as take out? Why should I?

When your pd doubles them, ( which seems penalty in your methods with the excuse that pd denied 4 card hearts, upto you) and opponents keep on raising their own suit after the double, this should be a warning sign that your pd and you maybe in wrong pages about this double. Regardless of who wins the postmortem argument, i think W had all the clue that the doubles by E were a sign of shortness in their suit and extras. It could still be the best place for EW to defend 4♠ doubled if you change some cards from W. Don't forget E doesn't even know yet that they have a 9 card fit.

With the hand W held, he had no reason to leave the double imo.

[PhilKing]

I would have bid 3♣ on the East hand.

Three reasons:

It could be a double fit hand, and our second fit can only be in clubs.

My hand is worth a try, and this is our cheapest meaningful manoeuvre.

Double of 2♠ does not show this hand for me. I would have a good hand with ♠KQJT. With a "take-out double" you can, of all things, make a natural bid.

[ahydra]

Although we've got a fit, I think X is a better description of East's hand than 3C - the reason being that he has lots of high-card strength but little shape. 3C should be 5-4 at least, if not 6-4 or 5-5, and might be based on shape rather than high-cards, whereas X shows high-card values for sure.

I do agree West should raise to 3D not 2D, then East might evaluate his AK as not being worth two tricks - indeed there's a chance they won't take any tricks, as here. Additionally it allows East to visualise a very-likely-making 4S and very-very-cheap 5D sac.

I would bid (starting from East):

1D 1S 3D 4S
5D p p X
out

ahydra

[quiddity]

PhilKing, on 2013-July-18, 02:19, said:

Double of 2♠ does not show this hand for me. I would have a good hand with ♠KQJT. With a "take-out double" you can, of all things, make a natural bid.

Is it standard to play this as a penalty double? I'm pretty sure most people play values/takeout at this level when both sides have a fit.
I prefer to be able to double with extras and a balanced shape like 2443 and have the 3♣ bid show real clubs.

[MrAce]

I would hav enever imagined pd with only 4-4 minors had he bid 3♣ tbh. On this hand it may work out but when E bids 3♣ he doesn;t even know at which level teh auction will come back to him. I would prefer using 3♣ bid by E here with much less values but shapely hand. It maybe very important for pd to do the right thing if S bids 4♠. I don't think he will often make right decisions if we can be 4-4 or more shapely for the same bid. Ototh i can't even think of sparing double for penalties when they bid and raise at 2 level.

[gszes]

lets picture a minimum 2d bid from p something like xxx xx Qxxxx Kxx
hard to imagine a worse 2d bid but note that opposite this dreck 5d looks
pretty darn good. Why are we thinking of penalizing 4s when we are
staring at what seems to be a high degree of probability vul game???

When viewed this way the bids by east seem to make less sense. They
should be more balanced 18-19 hcp type hands which really have no
clear direction xx AQxx AKxx AJx ,

This powerhouse is more along the lines of a 3s bid looking to see
if p can bid 3n hoping to collect 5/6 dia 2aces a spade and 1 other
somewhere. For the less adventurous bid 3c and hope that this will
encourage p to appreciate the club king as a precious resource even
if they are minimum and maybe your side can arrive in 5d..............
probably defending 5s x:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))