[vodkagirl]

---

I do not give the outcome as I do not want a results oriented analysis.

I double 6♥ as I have the ♥A and hope partner with his weak jump over call has the ♦A.

With ten ♦s between us the remainder should break 2-1 (later verified as 75% likelihood).

Was this double good or bad?

If bad are there any conditions (eg tournament needing a top) in which it would be good?

Look forward to you all throwing light on my darkness.

Many thanks.

[wank]

it's pretty bad.

you can hope partner has the ace of diamonds, but there's no real reason for him to do so and even if he does west can have a void - the opps were under no pressure to bid 6.

if he does, it will go 1 off (any more than that is very unlikely), but that will often not increase your imp score at all. you would get +200 for 6hx-1 and score up with +650 from 5h making, but 850 net is the same 13 imps as 750 net. it's very unusual for people to bid slams off 2 aces (blackwood available) so if it's happened at your table, you're almost certain to win points.

on the other hand, if partner doesn't have the ace of diamonds and 6 makes, you increase the opps' score from 1430 to 1660 (2070 if they redouble). if it turns out it's a normal contract and your score up with 1430, you've generated a 230, 6 imp loss.

as for the likelihood of diamonds breaking, i don't know if 75% is an accurate figure or not a priori, but that's not the point: when west declines to use blackwood, it implies he has a void diamond so the chances of taking a diamond trick are not great.

[inquiry]

Do not double.

First, as noted above, if you set 6♥ you are getting a good result anyway. How good. Let assume this was IMPS and your teammates managed to stay out of slam missing the two aces you propose.

They score +650 doe making an overtrick in 4♥, while you score 200 at your table. Result then is 850, that is 13 imps for your side. How about if you didn't double? You would +650 at one table and +100 at the other, for +750 and THE EXACT SAME 13 IMPS. On the other hand, if the contract does make, if your partner bids 6H also (undoubled) you would be +1430 at one table and -1660 at your table for a net minus 239 or lose 6 IMPS And should your partners stop In 4H making six while they make slam against you, you lose 14 IMPS, while if you don't double, you would lose only 13 imps.

So there if you set it and partners don't bid it, there is no net gain for double.
If you Set it and partners also bid it undoubled, you win 3 imps
If you don't set it, and it makes when partners also bid it, you lose 6 imps
If you don't set it, and partners didn't bid it, if you double you lose 14 imps, if you don't double you lose 13 imps.

So basically you gain little, but so what? IF you feel confident your partner has the diamond ace, why not double? The reason is this double is MOST OFTEN played asking for an unusual lead. That means your partner, if he understood your double as Lightner (make an unusual lead) will not lead a diamond. Since if your partner has the Diamond ACE, they will have all the other points, it might be possible they can discard their diamond loser on a black winner before you can get in.

So no, I would not double, hope partner can cash the Diamond ACE and then be happy it is down one. Also, note, your partner should have seven diamonds, you have three diamonds. That is ten. So they have at most 3 diamonds. They can be 2-1 or 3-0, the fact that they DID NOT use keycard to check for ACES suggest it is more likely diamonds are 3=0 rather than 2-1.

[Lord Molyb]

West showed a diamond control with 4♦ or just a GF raise? Either way I wouldn't double since west probably has ♦A or a void.

[Bad_Wolf]

Put it this way. I bet everyone would recommend not doubling even if YOU had the ace of diamonds!

[the hog]

vodkagirl, on 2014-April-13, 16:26, said:

---

I do not give the outcome as I do not want a results oriented analysis.

I double 6♥ as I have the ♥A and hope partner with his weak jump over call has the ♦A.

With ten ♦s between us the remainder should break 2-1 (later verified as 75% likelihood).

Was this double good or bad?

If bad are there any conditions (eg tournament needing a top) in which it would be good?

Look forward to you all throwing light on my darkness.

Many thanks.

The x is very bad:
1) Who says your pd has the DA?
2) Who says one of the opps does not have a D void.

[Antrax]

wank's reply said it all. What I can try adding to that is that you shouldn't assume your opponents are dumb. What this means is that (informally) you double when you have a "surprise" for them, i.e. something in your hand to make you think they misjudged. Here your hand is fairly predictable, balanced and weak. So, you have no reason to think they made a mistake, thus no surprise for them, hence no double.

[1eyedjack]

If they did not have a diamond void they would likely have checked for aces with blackwood

[Cyberyeti]

The only thing in your favour is that you don't have anything other than your ace, and the opps will likely get any 2-way guess wrong or play for bad breaks that don't exist, it's a horrible double.

[helene_t]

At matchpoints (pairs) you can think this way:
- if opps are off two aces, few people will bid the slam so one down undoubled will be a near top already
- if opps are not off two aces, other people may bid it as well so letting them make it doubled could be a lot worse than letting them make it undoubled.

So there are many reasons not to double.

[mycroft]

If you can find it, read the first couple of chapters of Simon's Why You Lose At Bridge. There's a lot to learn from in the entire book, but much of it is outdated in strategy, and more of it is specific to rubber bridge, or at least not Matchpoint Duplicate. But the first serious chapter is "do you double a slam with two aces?" and the argument isn't any different now.

Plus, knowing the math and the logic behind "no" allows you to understand the math and the logic behind "in fact, it's so not worth it, that it *is* worth it to make the double mean 'we can set this if you do something you wouldn't ever do'"; in a way that just explaining that's what it means won't.

[vodkagirl]

Thanks for all the replies.

The collective wisdom astounds me.

A clear consensus was established: the double was bad.

The actual result was 6H-2 for 13.3 imps.

I won't let the result seduce me for all the reasons given.

[guido]

In addition to the other comments (with which I agree),in my partnerships, a double here would be lead directing. Specifically, make an unusual lead: here that means not a diamond. Since doubling a freely bid slam to increase the penalty makes so little sense, it is common to use the double to direct the lead (e.g.,I have a black suit void, find it).

[1eyedjack]

vodkagirl, on 2014-April-14, 11:21, said:

Thanks for all the replies.

The collective wisdom astounds me.

A clear consensus was established: the double was bad.

The actual result was 6H-2 for 13.3 imps.

I won't let the result seduce me for all the reasons given.

Doubling would have gained you 2 IMPs

Had the contract been making, then doubling would have cost you 1 IMP If no-one else was bidding slam, but 6 IMPs if all other comparisons were in slam. With something between the two if there were two or more comparisons in a variety of contracts.

But this reckons without the possibility of a redouble, which then gets very expensive indeed (12 IMPs) if the room is in 6 undoubled and making. For this reason, speculative redoubles are quite good odds and not infrequent, when you are sure that you are within a trick of making.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

by passing Ace Asking indicates a void, the Ace Asking was by passed by the one, who
indicated a splinter bid, 4D is not 100% a splinter, but given, that you have 10 cards
between you makes the splinter not less likely.

If you need a top score, ..., if they bid a slam with 2 cashing Aces, you will get one.

With kind regards
Marlowe