[apollo1201]

At red vs green, MPs, you deal and pass the not too bad in the context following collection

xx
AQxx
ATxx
T9x

LHO, no doubt taking of the favorable vulnerability, bids 4S, Xed by partner and passed back to you.

This high level TOX promises support for unbid suits and sufficient strength that if left in, has reasonable prospects to set. So, it is to be taken out if you really fear it is making and have a cheap save (eg very weak with a 6-cd suit), or if you think you can make an 11-trick contract.

At red I thought I wouldn’t get too rich, even at MPs, and could envision a high level contrat in one of the reds, so bid 4NT. It might also lead partner to slam and they can’t expect more, 2 aces, the HQ, all those 10s.

5C as expected from p, 5D to offer choice, corrected to 5H by p.

-1 and a bad score on the board, partner had an in between hand (Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx) and wasn’t expecting me to pull out.

Was my reasoning too IMPs?

[HardVector]

apollo1201, on 2022-April-22, 11:25, said:

At red vs green, MPs, you deal and pass the not too bad in the context following collection

xx
AQxx
ATxx
T9x

LHO, no doubt taking of the favorable vulnerability, bids 4S, Xed by partner and passed back to you.

This high level TOX promises support for unbid suits and sufficient strength that if left in, has reasonable prospects to set. So, it is to be taken out if you really fear it is making and have a cheap save (eg very weak with a 6-cd suit), or if you think you can make an 11-trick contract.

At red I thought I wouldn’t get too rich, even at MPs, and could envision a high level contrat in one of the reds, so bid 4NT. It might also lead partner to slam and they can’t expect more, 2 aces, the HQ, all those 10s.

5C as expected from p, 5D to offer choice, corrected to 5H by p.

-1 and a bad score on the board, partner had an in between hand (Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx) and wasn’t expecting me to pull out.

Was my reasoning too IMPs?

You just need to have a conversation with your partner on what a high (3 level +) level competetive bid is going to show. With your hand, I wouldn't be thinking 5 level, I'd be thinking slam. You have a magnificent hand in support of a partner who wants to play something at the 5 level opposite a passed hand and potential 0 pts. If your partner thinks that 4s-X just shows an opening hand, you are going to pretty much have to pass everything except total trash, and bid with that as a known sacrifice. Of course, if partner actually has legitimate values for the action, you are going to miss slams and grand slams.

It is actually sometimes correct to let preempts go.

[pescetom]

apollo1201, on 2022-April-22, 11:25, said:

This high level TOX promises support for unbid suits and sufficient strength that if left in, has reasonable prospects to set.

I don't much like the agreement to start with and would not have doubled given the agreement.

[helene_t]

pescetom, on 2022-April-22, 12:32, said:

I don't much like the agreement to start with and would not have doubled given the agreement.

But it was p who doubled, we haven't seen his hand yet

Anyway, I bid 4NT. Some 5-level contract must have play. Quite possibly we ware going to miss slam but c'est la vie, I am not going to hang partner.

[LBengtsson]

I think 4♠ doubled here shows general strength rather than distributional strength. Partner can bid 4NT instead as two places to play (not just minor suits). So with a balanced hand and two aces I would choose to pass. Other players might think differently to this analysis. Preemptive bids are there to make bidding for the opps difficult. Passing could be wrong, but it's a guessing game sometimes at this level what might or might not make.

[smerriman]

helene_t, on 2022-April-22, 14:53, said:

But it was p who doubled, we haven't seen his hand yet

It was in the OP - Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx. If the agreement for the double is really as described, I don't understand why it was made with that hand either.

[helene_t]

smerriman, on 2022-April-22, 16:10, said:

It was in the OP - Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx. If the agreement for the double is really as described, I don't understand why it was made with that hand either.

Ah right, my bad.

[nige1]

From 2022-April-22, 11:25:

apollo1201 At red vs green, MPs, you deal and pass the not too bad in the context following collection

xx
AQxx
ATxx
T9x

LHO, no doubt taking of the favorable vulnerability, bids 4S, Xed by partner and passed back to you. This high level TOX promises support for unbid suits and sufficient strength that if left in, has reasonable prospects to set. So, it is to be taken out if you really fear it is making and have a cheap save (eg very weak with a 6-cd suit), or if you think you can make an 11-trick contract.

At red I thought I wouldn't get too rich, even at MPs, and could envision a high level contrat in one of the reds, so bid 4NT. It might also lead partner to slam and they can't expect more, 2 aces, the HQ, all those 10s.

5C as expected from p, 5D to offer choice, corrected to 5H by p.

-1 and a bad score on the board, partner had an in between hand (Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx) and wasn't expecting me to pull out.

Was my reasoning too IMPs?

IMO your decisions are both close. About 50-50.

[apollo1201]

smerriman, on 2022-April-22, 16:10, said:

It was in the OP - Kxx KJT9x QJ AQx. If the agreement for the double is really as described, I don't understand why it was made with that hand either.

True it is not exactly what I was expecting.
But she thought I’d not have enough to think I can make ab 11 or 12 trick contract so would pass, then we’d collect hundreds instead of fifties.
She had a not great 16-count (where 4SX could really make btw if I just have an average balanced 7-8 count). 4SX is much more often left out than 4HX.