[Tramticket]

---

IMPs. The opponents open a weak no trump and you make a penalty double promising 16+ HCP (or 15 and a good lead). LHO bids 2♦ as a transfer to hearts. Your agreements (with this partner) are that partner will double for penalties, pass is forcing and a new suit is weak.

Given these agreements, how would you interpret the following actions from partner? (a) 2♠, (b) 3♠, © 4♠, (d) Pass, then when RHO completes the transfer and you make a penalty double, partner removes the double to spades, (e) Partner bids 2♥, then removes your subsequent bid (3NT maybe?) to spades.

You have a little more than you might have for the double. Will you bid further? In which auctions?

[Cyberyeti]

Do you have any agreement what 2N means ?

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-July-22, 02:13, said:

Do you have any agreement what 2N means ?

No

[Vampyr]

You and your opponents have inferior methods.

[Vampyr]

Vampyr, on 2019-July-22, 03:00, said:

You and your opponents have inferior methods. Anyway, I think the spade bids are to play. The other auctions are a bit strange.

[Tramticket]

Vampyr, on 2019-July-22, 03:00, said:

You and your opponents have inferior methods.

Well, I can't do anything about my opponents methods!

With another partner, I play that the first double is take-out and subsequent doubles penalty. But playing the first double as penalties is not unusual and I think that either method is playable. But a hand yesterday proved that we were on a slightly different wavelength and I wanted to gauge how others would play these sequences.

[Tramticket]

Vampyr, on 2019-July-22, 03:00, said:

Anyway, I think the spade bids are to play. The other auctions are a bit strange.

I agree that passing then taking out the double is a bit strange. But it was suggested by a team-mate, so I included it.

What would you do with genuine values, unsuited to defence? Would you start with a cue-bid? Or maybe jump to 3♠?

[P_Marlowe]

2S - weak
3S - invitational, but see below, so maybe forcing, but COG
4S - to Play

Pass and Pull to 2S - … inivitational, this may make 3S forcing, but COG, I would never
do this undiscussed

2H followed by 4S - SI, this is certainly the strongest Action he has available,
but I will pass, this would indicate, that 1NT was a Psyche, so be it

With Kind regards
Marlowe

[Tramticket]

P_Marlowe, on 2019-July-22, 03:17, said:

2S - weak
3S - invitational, but see below, so maybe forcing, but COG
4S - to Play

Pass and Pull to 2S - … inivitational, this may make 3S forcing, but COG, I would never
do this undiscussed

2H followed by 4S - SI, this is certainly the strongest Action he has available,
but I will pass, this would indicate, that 1NT was a Psyche, so be it

With Kind regards
Marlowe

If 3♠ is invitational, do you raise? And if pass and pull is invitational?

Are you passing 4♠ with this hand?

[P_Marlowe]

Tramticket, on 2019-July-22, 04:15, said:

If 3♠ is invitational, do you raise? And if pass and pull is invitational?

Are you passing 4♠ with this hand?

If Partner makes a inv. move I am bidding game, 3NT.
If Partner bids 4S to Play, I am passing, …, I was saying, that I passed a SI move by Partner,
so I will pass a direct 4S for sure.
A direct 4S bid by Partner sounds like Partner has a 3 Level spade preempt, he was taking chances
for bidding game facing a strong NT. I have a bt more, but not much.

If he makes a SI move, pass is certainly too cautious, all honors will be well placed, and 12 tricks
are on, but I prefer to go plus.
The alternative to passing 4S out is 6S, I dont think any other bid will tell you enough to make a better
founded decision than what you already know.

With Kind regards
Marlowe

[Tramticket]

West (me) actually held:

---

I know that I am somewhat short of points, but there is a bonus for making game and I thought that it would have chances opposite many penalty doubles.

Unfortunately, partner thought that I must have more for this leap. She counted her 20 points and bid 4NT. The diamond finesse worked, but spades split 3-1, so 5♠ was impossible. The subsequent discussion with partner and team-mates revealed that we were making different assumptions about all of these bids.

[Vampyr]

Tramticket, on 2019-July-22, 03:10, said:

Well, I can't do anything about my opponents methods!

With another partner, I play that the first double is take-out and subsequent doubles penalty. But playing the first double as penalties is not unusual and I think that either method is playable. But a hand yesterday proved that we were on a slightly different wavelength and I wanted to gauge how others would play these sequences.

Yes, playing the first double (technically the second one) as takeout is not only useful on its own, but actually leads to more penalties.

[P_Marlowe]

Tramticket, on 2019-July-22, 05:45, said:

West (me) actually held:

---

I know that I am somewhat short of points, but there is a bonus for making game and I thought that it would have chances opposite many penalty doubles.

Unfortunately, partner thought that I must have more for this leap. She counted her 20 points and bid 4NT. The diamond finesse worked, but spades split 3-1, so 5♠ was impossible. The subsequent discussion with partner and team-mates revealed that we were making different assumptions about all of these bids.

What did they suggest, that you do instead?
Take away the Queens, game is still nice, do they move after a 2S bid?
If yes, they would bid the same values twice.

Bidding 4NT is just …, if they believe you Need more for the 4S bid, a Point view
I can understand, they should just bid 6S.

[nige1]

Tramticket 'IMPs. The opponents open a weak no trump and you make a penalty double promising 16+ HCP (or 15 and a good lead). LHO bids 2♦ as a transfer to hearts. Your agreements (with this partner) are that partner will double for penalties, pass is forcing and a new suit is weak.Given these agreements, how would you interpret the following actions from partner? (a) 2♠, (b) 3♠, © 4♠, (d) Pass, then when RHO completes the transfer and you make a penalty double, partner removes the double to spades, (e) Partner bids 2♥, then removes your subsequent bid (3NT maybe?) to spades.You have a little more than you might have for the double. Will you bid further? In which auctions?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If pass is forcing then perhaps you should agree that immediate bids, including the 2♥ cue bid are non-constructive. .e.g
-- 2/3/4♠ = PRE.
-- 2♥ = CUE, T/O e.g. 4045.
-- 2N = UNT, Minors
With this understanding, perhaps, after (1N) X (2♦) P (2♥) X (P) ??,. you should agree a kind of Lebensohl.?

---

[Vampyr]

Tramticket, on 2019-July-22, 03:17, said:

I agree that passing then taking out the double is a bit strange. But it was suggested by a team-mate, so I included it.

What would you do with genuine values, unsuited to defence? Would you start with a cue-bid? Or maybe jump to 3♠?

Probably start with a cuebid, although I have never really discussed what 3♠ is with any partner. The default would be to play.

By the way, don’t waste any headspace on the difference between action over 2♦ and 2♥, since few opponents will use these methods.

[Tramticket]

Thanks all. Some helpful ideas for discussion tonight.

[msjennifer]

nige1, on 2019-July-22, 08:36, said:

Tramticket 'IMPs. The opponents open a weak no trump and you make a penalty double promising 16+ HCP (or 15 and a good lead). LHO bids 2♦ as a transfer to hearts. Your agreements (with this partner) are that partner will double for penalties, pass is forcing and a new suit is weak.Given these agreements, how would you interpret the following actions from partner? (a) 2♠, (b) 3♠, © 4♠, (d) Pass, then when RHO completes the transfer and you make a penalty double, partner removes the double to spades, (e) Partner bids 2♥, then removes your subsequent bid (3NT maybe?) to spades.You have a little more than you might have for the double. Will you bid further? In which auctions?'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If pass is forcing then perhaps you should agree that immediate bids, including the 2♥ cue bid are non-constructive. .e.g
-- 2/3/4♠ = PRE.
-- 2♥ = CUE, T/O e.g. 4045.
-- 2N = UNT, Minors
With this understanding, perhaps, after (1N) X (2♦) P (2♥) X (P) ??,. you should agree a kind of Lebensohl.?

---

Sir,Thanx for supporting our way of Lebensohl that we have discussed and agreed on.No opportunity so far to implement on the table.Just interchange the hearts and spades in the given EAST hand and watch the fun.!

[FelicityR]

I don't have any agreements to contribute to this thread, but your partner bidding 4NT (RKCB/Blackwood) is, on reflection, lunacy. Your partner may be over the weak 1NT bidder, but there are too many holes (and high card points) to guarantee that a slam is on. Yes, you could find the 1NT bidder with ♠Qx ♥xxx ♦KJxx ♣AQxx but that is too precise distribution to ask for.

As quoted: The opponents open a weak no trump and you make a penalty double promising 16+ HCP (or 15 and a good lead). LHO bids 2♦ as a transfer to hearts. Your agreements (with this partner) are that partner will double for penalties, pass is forcing and a new suit is weak.

That is your agreement: weak, implying a weak hand, a weak suit or both. ♠AKxxxxxx is anything but.

[GrahamJson]

Tramticket, on 2019-July-22, 05:45, said:

West (me) actually held:

---

I know that I am somewhat short of points, but there is a bonus for making game and I thought that it would have chances opposite many penalty doubles.

Unfortunately, partner thought that I must have more for this leap. She counted her 20 points and bid 4NT. The diamond finesse worked, but spades split 3-1, so 5♠ was impossible. The subsequent discussion with partner and team-mates revealed that we were making different assumptions about all of these bids.

You should have called the director. West appears to have only 12 cards.

[Tramticket]

GrahamJson, on 2019-July-23, 05:34, said:

You should have called the director. West appears to have only 12 cards.

You should have called Specsavers. I count 13!