[FrancesHinden]

This isn't from the final, but from an earlier round.
You are playing with a client who is generally considered not very good, but you have recently won a number of major events with him.

Scoring: MP

---

LHO opens 1C which is either natural or 14+ balanced without 4 diamonds or a 5CM (so a 2 card suit if exactly 4432).
Partner doubles.
RHO passes.
You pass(1)
LHO redoubles (SOS)
Partner passes.
RHO (me) bids 2H. RHO could have bid 2H 4-8 HCP 6-card heart suit the previous round, or 1H natural & forcing, but didn't.

Your go.
Pass is not forcing.

(1) I don't agree with this, but you are one of the best matchpoint players in England, so maybe I'm wrong!

[mike777]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 3 2005, 01:30 PM, said:

You are playing with a client who is generally considered not very good, but you have recently won a number of major events with him.

hmm Not very good.

How many major events do I have to win before I can be upgraded to at least ok from "not very good" player then?

I would think anyone winning a few major events say a few Spingolds and a few Vanderbilts is at least an ok player even if sponser.

[FrancesHinden]

Depends on how much you pay your team-mates. But we're not talking about Vanderbilts & Spingolds here.
If Mike's the Mike I think he is, he can probably guess who we're talking about and can form his own opinion.

Re-state to "not very good considering he's won a number of major events recently" if you like. Or ignore the comment completely, if you like. Let's just say that when I play this pair, I know which of them I'd rather was declarer...

[MickyB]

I don't think Mike is who you think he is. I don't think I'm the Mike who you thought he was, but I know who your opps were And it isn't just a case of how much you pay your teammates, but whether you manage to pick the ones who are going to be +120 IMPs on the Butler over 100 boards in a very strong field!

What shape can LHO have for his XX? Sounds like you have bid your 8 card heart fit to the 2 level...in which case pard will almost certainly have 4♠ with me...can we take 2♥ 2 off against our part-score? Seems like too narrow a goal to be aiming at. I'll bid 2♠, this must show about the strength I have because I wouldn't have passed the double if I was that weak and had four spades.

[Fluffy]

I don't remember this one, so I can vote hehe, the problem is partner doesn't know our strenght, he might be willing to double, but we don't know he won't pass this, so 2♠ seems the right bid.

[flytoox]

I will bid 2S. Pd's dbl is t/o, isnot it?

[Double !]

2♠

[FrancesHinden]

I thought 2S looked pretty clear here, but the player who held these cards is -as I said - a very good matchpoint player and he chose to pass, I assume hoping his partner could double.

That was a 3% board when it finished the auction and he didn't lead the ace of clubs. The ace of clubs led is about a 30% board as it beats the contract by one (you get two diamonds, two aces, a club ruff and a diamond ruff; partner is 4342).

Your partner was then given a strict telling off for not bidding 2S in the pass-out seat, holding KQJx xxx AKxx xx... but I don't think you'd shown 2 aces and 4 spades yet!

I enjoyed bidding 2H (x Kxxxx xxxx Jxx). It got me a very dirty look from my screenmate!

[whereagles]

Your so-called 'best matchpoint player of England' seems to be out of shape

RHO bid 2♥ after the SOS redouble, so he will have 5 hearts (not 6 because he didn't bid 2♥ the 1st round) and a weakish hand (he didn't bid 1♥ over the double). Pard, who rates to have a few clubs (otherwise no sos XX) didn't bid 1NT or a suit over the redouble so he's probably in the 12-14 zone. In such a zone, pard will have at least 3 hearts, but given the sos XX, pard probably won't have more than 3 hearts. Now think of this: with 33 in the majors, 12-14 and a few clubs, pard would have passed. Conclusion: it's a virtual certainty that pard will have 4 spades to justify his double.

Doesn't the hand scream for 2♠ now? Besides, if pard is a not-so-hot player, he might not realize the need for balancing 2♥, especially with a minimum hand. In other words, the expert must assume his responsibilities and bid now.

[FrancesHinden]

whereagles, on Jul 5 2005, 04:48 AM, said:

Your so-called 'best matchpoint player of England' seems to be out of shape

"one of the best". Personally I would say David Burn is probably the best, and this wasn't he.

But I agree with you. I wanted to see if I was being absurd or he was!

[mr1303]

AS far as I'm aware, your pass here is forcing, so partner has no excuse for passing out 2H

[cherdano]

I agree that pass looks absurd but I think the problem is with your premise that "pass is not forcing". Doesn't it look like South very much assumed the opposite, and just passed in case partner has a penalty X of 2♥?

Arend

[mikeh]

Maybe the expert assumed the pass was forcing, but in the absence of an explicit agreement (and this is an unusual sequence so few pairs will have such an agreement) logic suggests non-forcing. The pass of 1♣ could be on xxx xx xx QJ1097x. The redouble would not deny a good hand. If you held AQxx AQxx AKx xx and opened 1♣ doubled around to you, 1N might show your values, but put me down for redouble every time. Game is now remote and the opps will lead ♣ against 1N.

Now, if the redouble were known to be 12-14 balanced, pass as forcing makes some sense... but surely that was not announced at the table.

So the expert screwed up, and likely knew that... hence the abuse of partner. Many players react to their own mistakes by criticizing partner. So my guess is that the expert knew in his heart that he ought to be bidding 2♠ and prayed, after passing, that his partner would rescue him.

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Jul 5 2005, 04:59 PM, said:

Maybe the expert assumed the pass was forcing, but in the absence of an explicit agreement (and this is an unusual sequence so few pairs will have such an agreement) logic suggests non-forcing.

Probably you are right, but I am not sure "pass is forcing after we have made a penalty X or penalty pass" would be a silly agreement at MPs. Anyway, I think the 2♥ bid did its job here; apart from being the right contract, it put opponents into unchartered territory.

Arend