[kenberg]

It's well known that all crucial decisions are close calls. For example.

It's matchpoints. And this is mostly for amusement, so I will show you all of the hands shortly.

---

Might you beat this? What are you leading? Are you confident enough to go after +200 at matchpoints. It is mps, what do you do?

And now the key question, would your answer change if the ♥8 were the ♥7?


So here is the hand.

---

OK, we can make 5♦, [Edit: Oops, not so, see Endymon below] we can make 3NT [probably also not so], we can make 5NT if they don't lead a spade. But looking only at the NS cards, it looks to me like 10 tricks in diamonds and NT has its problems. [So, fortunately, we were not there]

But we can score 200 against 2♥ if we organize it right. A bit of a fantasy, I suppose. It should be safe to lead a club. Partner opened the bidding and presumably controls one of the black suits. Maybe not, but probably. So we lead the ♣K, it holds, we shift to a ♦. Partner takes her diamond, realizes I would have led a ♦ at T1 if I had a stiff, and so plays Ace and another club. That's 4 tricks and the last club promotes my 8 when partner ruffs, dummy has the 8.

The shaggy dog enters: After the 2♥ bid I am contemplating a double if it comes to me. Maybe I would have, maybe I would not have. But partner decided to compete to 3♦. I left it there. It's just as well I did not have to face up to a decision on doubling, since in the actual hand, i had the ♥7. Dummy had the winning 8.


3♦ scored fine. Can make 3NT is not the same as did make 3NT, for example.


Tag line: This idea of playing the club before the diamond to warn partner off of trying to give you a ruff perhaps has merit?

[whereagles]

I don't dbl. I just pass and lead club king.

[kenberg]

At matchpoints, I was not going to pass. We have a known (or strongly indicated) 8 card diamond fit and the balance of power. At imps I am sure that I would bid 3♦. At mps, I was thinking about what to do when partner emerged with 3♦. I gave some thought to what I should make of this, and then I passed. I imagine that if it had rolled around to me, I would have bid 3♦.

I am pleased to see that you would also lead a club. It seems right. I doubt I have a ruff coming and since I control trump I will have time to switch to a diamond, well most likely i will have time, later if needed. With partner bidding and rebidding a suit it seems odd not to lead it but I go with the club.

It's an interesting situation of we take one diamond and three clubs, and then I produce the last club. I can imagine a declarer playing the ♥8 from dummy (with the actual had where I have the 7, dummy the 8) thinking that this will prevent third hand from getting a cheap over-ruff. I score my 7 if he does that.

With our 8 card diamond fit and the opponent's 8 card heart fit, LOTT says 16 total tricks. Since we can make 5♦ and they can make 2♥, it seems that there are 19. All in all, I found it to be an interesting hand.

[whereagles]

Fully understand that you wouldn't want to pass with the balance of hcp. I chose pass because I've been in situations like this before and doubling was bad. In fact, in this case I think 2♥ makes (I didn't see the hands before posting). Setting 2♥ is probably a good MP score if 3♦ doesn't make and an ok one if it does. 2♥X is a "top or zero" thing.

[Endymion77]

How exactly do you make 5♦?

[kenberg]

Endymion77, on 2014-April-10, 03:25, said:

How exactly do you make 5♦?

First things first, you caught me. That's the first thing. I was thinking that after ruffing the third spade you could just cash the high diamond, go to the board in clubs and hook the diamond. But obviously that is not enough.

However. Perhaps, at least given that they start with three rounds of spades, you can manage. Ruff the third, cash a ♦. go to the board in clubs, hook a diamond. Now ♣A, small club to the board, and the last club. West ruffs or he doesn't.

Case 1, he ruffs. You overuff and run diamonds, squeezing East in spades and hearts.
Case 2: he doesn't ruff, so he tosses a heart. You also toss a heart You lead the last spade and ruff it as he tosses another heart. Heart to the ace, and heart from dummy. North and West are both down to two trump and nothing else, so you have it.


BUT: If W takes the second spade and shifts to a heart, this is not working. I see no way to cope with that, double dummy or not.

[kenberg]

whereagles, on 2014-April-09, 08:00, said:

Fully understand that you wouldn't want to pass with the balance of hcp. I chose pass because I've been in situations like this before and doubling was bad. In fact, in this case I think 2♥ makes (I didn't see the hands before posting). Setting 2♥ is probably a good MP score if 3♦ doesn't make and an ok one if it does. 2♥X is a "top or zero" thing.

It's an interesting hand. As noted, we can beat 2♥ with exact defense if S holds the ♥8 but not if he holds the ♥7. No one wants to double on that, even if we grant the "exact defense" which would be a lot of granting. So I think, had it rolled around to me, I would not double.

I think that if I must choose between pass and 3♦, it is one of those times when partner should take it easy on me if I get it wrong. But five tricks in diamonds, three in clubs, and one heart does not sound like too much of a fantasy so I am going with 3♦. That it could be wrong, I agree. I don't really expect to be doubled. West, who did not respond to partner's heart overcall, may well have four diamonds but seems to be a little shy on points. East won't be able to judge the diamond situation very well.

I was wrong about making 5♦, but 4♦ is there. Of course that is resulting, but it may suggest that playing for nine ricks in diamonds is a fair shot. It's matchpoints, we have to guess, I guess 3♦. Or at least I think I would have. Partner did it first, so we will never know.

[whereagles]

You should thank pard for his 3D bid. Saved you a headache

[akwoo]

At IMPs I pass. The most I can lose passing is 6 IMPs (for the double part score swing), and I think more likely I might lose 0 (+110 vs +100) or 2 (-110 vs -50). Either doubling or bidding could cost me at least 12 if things go wrong. If I need a swing (because I'm behind or clearly outclassed in a knockout, or doing moderately well in the late rounds of a Swiss), things might be different.

At MPs, I would double. But while I concede there is some chance partner might pass with his or her hand, I would have thought that at least at MPs LHO would make an immediate raise with his or her hand. In my mind, the delayed raise shows something more like Qx or Kx. If 2♥ were passed around to me, I would've thought 14 or 15 total trump would be more likely that 16.

Maybe I should ask opps about the delayed raise. But that will open me to an accusation (possibly accurate!) that I am acting based on a judgement of their ability level based on how they answer the question rather than on whatever their agreements (or lack thereof) are.

[kenberg]

I think the correct answer to an inquiry about the delayed raise would be "Shows a hand that would have been happy to play in 1♥ but is unwilling to sell to 2♦". I don't think it is reasonable to expect them to be able to tell you more.

I also think that there is not just "some danger" of partner passing a double. I would expect him to normally pass the double unless he has some features that he has not already shown. He has shown a minimum hand with long diamonds. If he has a minimum hand with long diamonds, why would he pull? As North, if partner doubled, I would expect partner to hold four spades, short diamonds quite possibly a stiff, good defensive values, and some hearts. Pulling would not occur to me.

As I see it, if South wants to compete to 3♦ he should bid 3♦. This is not a "Partner, do something intelligent" situation. North has shown his hand, it is up to South to decide what the intelligent choice is. Sometimes he will choose less than optimally, but I think the choice is his. He should not double and pass the choice on to North.

Perhaps one more thing about what the delayed raise shows, at least if I were the one doing it: It says "Pard, 2♥ should be ok, but if you compete to 3[H3], remember I warned you against it." There were some pairs who did compete to 3♥. This was a mistake.

[akwoo]

I didn't mean partner passing a double - I meant passing it around for you to double in the first place. I agree a double should be for penalty.

LHO has already heard your negative double, so presumably the delayed raise to 2♥ should indicate a willingness to sell out to some contract. It's not like there is any reasonable chance they'll get to play in 1♥X.

Personally I really don't like West's action on the given hand. I can understand pass followed by pass. I can understand (and prefer at least at MPs) an immediate 2♥ raise. If you're using the delayed raise to show weakness, frankly the opponents have the balance of power and (assuming they are reasonably good) can use the information and the extra bidding room better than your partner can. If you are my partner and complain this makes my raises too nebulous, we can play Rosenkranz (though I prefer to stick with the nebulous raises, because I think opps can use the info better than partner).

(Yes all my regular partners know I raise in competition on all kinds of junk.)

[kenberg]

akwoo, on 2014-April-14, 13:32, said:

I didn't mean partner passing a double - I meant passing it around for you to double in the first place. I agree a double should be for penalty.

I misunderstood, I see now. As North, I probably would have done just that. South has two diamonds and a good hand, really a maximal hand given his pass of 2♦. He won't always have that. So yes, i think North has pretty much shown her hand already and could pass it around to South.

Quote

LHO has already heard your negative double, so presumably the delayed raise to 2♥ should indicate a willingness to sell out to some contract. It's not like there is any reasonable chance they'll get to play in 1♥X.

Personally I really don't like West's action on the given hand. I can understand pass followed by pass. I can understand (and prefer at least at MPs) an immediate 2♥ raise. If you're using the delayed raise to show weakness, frankly the opponents have the balance of power and (assuming they are reasonably good) can use the information and the extra bidding room better than your partner can. If you are my partner and complain this makes my raises too nebulous, we can play Rosenkranz (though I prefer to stick with the nebulous raises, because I think opps can use the info better than partner).

(Yes all my regular partners know I raise in competition on all kinds of junk.)

With the West hand, I probably pass and pass. Possibly an immediate raise to 2♥ will buy the contract but probably not. I can see the possible advantage but I just don't do it.

[the hog]

Pass, MPs or IMPs. Why not bid 1S rather than x over the H overcall so you can retain the X more minor suit hands?

[kenberg]

the hog, on 2014-April-14, 20:44, said:

Pass, MPs or IMPs. Why not bid 1S rather than x over the H overcall so you can retain the X more minor suit hands?

Last part first. You are suggesting that bidding 1♠ would show 4 or more, freeing up X to show a hand maybe with four clubs and three diamonds? Something of that sort? I know that not everyone buys into the idea that X=four spades, 1♠=5+ spades. I have not thought much about the merits or lack of merit since pretty much everyone I play with uses the X=4 approach.

Now to the pass. Seeing all four hands, I imagine you want to play 3♦, not defend 2♥. But of course one hand does not a proof make. So let's consider the auctions where I show my four spades one way or another and then pass my partner's 2♦ re-bid. After this pass, I see 2♥ on my left passed around to me. it seems to me that if I am not going to take another bid now, with this hand, I am not likely to ever be taking another bid with any hand after I have passed 2♦. OK, I could have been dealt three diamonds, with this I would pass 2♦ and then compete to the 3 level.

I suppose partner could have 3=2=5=3 shape. She was forced to bid after my negative double. But with a weak five card diamond suit maybe she would have tried 2♣ instead of 2♦, and with a strong five card suit she may well cope in the 5-2 fit. And she may nor be, and isn't, 3=2=5=3.

You would pass it out and I accept that, I am simply probing a little to see why you would. Assume mps. I accept that 3♦ might go wrong. But it might be right, and this is mps.

Btw, at imps I think that you are somewhat protected in 3♦ by the fact that an opponent who is contemplating a double needs to be pretty sure that he is setting it.