[FM75]

---

Both Vulnerable

I am actually sitting West here. Vulnerable, I should have the values for my bid. What should my partner do?

We ended up -12 imps in a team game on this hand, though the bidding was considerably different at the other table.

[MrAce]

FM75, on 2012-March-21, 18:18, said:

WHAT DO I DO NOW ?

3♣ by RHO is forcing, just pass and see what is going on.

[sasioc]

MrAce, on 2012-March-21, 20:11, said:

3♣ by RHO is forcing, just pass and see what is going on.

+1

[menggq]

Someone must have been overbid obviously.I guess there is a no FIT suit here for both since weather PD has H4 would DBL instead of 2♦, so Dbl by me.

[masse24]

A nice waiting Pass stands out.

[FM75]

ROFL at squirrel.

Maybe I should not have mentioned that we were -12 imps on this. Perhaps it was more pertinent that the team match occurred in BIL.

My partner and I are a new partnership trying to learn precision, not that precision matters on this auction.

[the hog]

Pass looks great to me.

[aguahombre]

Is it possible the OP bidding diagram is wrong? If not, I can't imagine wanting to "do" anything but let the opponents go wrong, for the moment.

[billw55]

Let's see, length and strength in opponent's suits, void in partner's suit, good defense values ... looks like a hand to double something and ring it up. But let them dig their hole deeper before the unpleasant surprise. Pass for now.

[the_clown]

Anything other than pass seems insane to me.

[mikeh]

This is truly a non-problem if E simply thinks about what is going on.

He certainly cannot make a natural bid, holding a void in partner's suit and a 10xxxx heart suit and minimal values.

A double, for penalty, may seem to have something going for it, but a moment's thought shows why that is an illusion.

For one thing, E has no assurance that he can set 3♣...what if his partner's clubs look like his diamonds?

Far more to the point is that the auction is not over. If he thinks he can double the opps in something, why not wait until the next round to do so? And even then would be premature if the opps are still in a forcing auction.

Btw, I wouldn't double 3N here. We have zero communication with partner and the opps may be able to run 5 or 6 club tricks, so wouldn't need much on the side to wrap it up.

[ggwhiz]

I agree with all of the above with the possible exception that I may well double 3nt if they bid it if there is even the slightest thought/reluctance.

Even with a smooth 3nt bid I only risk 4 imps IF they can sit and make it, (I can't imagine overtricks) and I might chase them into something I can really hammer.

Whadya think Mike?

[mikeh]

ggwhiz, on 2012-March-22, 11:43, said:

I agree with all of the above with the possible exception that I may well double 3nt if they bid it if there is even the slightest thought/reluctance.

Even with a smooth 3nt bid I only risk 4 imps IF they can sit and make it, (I can't imagine overtricks) and I might chase them into something I can really hammer.

Whadya think Mike?

If LHO is bidding 3N, and that seems most plausible.....our major holdings suggest he probably lacks a 6th spade or a 4th heart, and our minor holdings suggest he is likely to have at least length, if not strength, in diamonds.....and we double, we are getting a diamond lead for sure. I mean, even if partner's diamonds are weakish, to the point that he might consider another lead, our double is a strong suggestion to lead diamonds...we'd typically hold Hx and some scattered cards including a club stop or two.

And if there is one thing that we can say with some confidence it is that unless partner had very good diamonds, we don't want him to lead that suit.

Not only is he likely giving away a trick, unless he has very good diamonds, but he is possibly yielding a tempo (often critical when, as here, we will often hold only a single stop in their main source of tricks) and our void will tell dealer more than we'd like him to know about our hand, especially after we double and place some hcp for him.

While I agree that the cost of a double will usually be low, if they were always making, my fears are:

1. we increase the odds of their making by doubling, for the reasons above
2. it is not normal for the opps to run...and if they do maybe they run from a failing 3N to a making 4♣...i agree...that isn't at all likely, but neither is the chance that your speculatve double will cause them to run
3. it strikes me as improbable that they are going for their life. It's not as if we are cashing a lot of winners in our hand, and we seem to have a slight problem helping partner out in the diamond department.

So the downside may be modest, apart from (1) but the upside even more so.

[ggwhiz]

By agreement my double of 3nt says get off your natural lead (a ♦) and take your best shot at something else. Unlikely that others have had that discussion but it has served us well over time.

[FM75]

Partner passed. Opener apparently did not consider 3♣ to be forcing. So it was passed around to me:

---

I could not find a way not to pass.

Unfortunately I did find a way to take one too few tricks. At the other table EW bid unopposed to 4♥ making - though on the layout it was cold for 6. My teammate South passed a 13 count 5=3=3=2 hand!

[MrAce]

FM75, on 2012-March-22, 16:06, said:

Partner passed. Opener apparently did not consider 3♣ to be forcing. So it was passed around to me:

---

I could not find a way not to pass.

Unfortunately I did find a way to take one too few tricks. At the other table EW bid unopposed to 4♥ making - though on the layout it was cold for 6. My teammate South passed a 13 count 5=3=3=2 hand!

If that was NF in their system, or if the opener thought it was, he shd have alerted it. Then your pd, knowing that 3♣ is a neg free bid, would take an action. Your pd has a pretty strong case to call TD imo even if you yourself didnt call already.

[aguahombre]

IMO, the posting of the actual West hand was not helpful to the thread's discussion. It isn't a hand where the given auction would occur. "IMO" means just that. If you agree with the 2D overcall instead of a double, fine; however, the thread does self-explain why I disagree.

[the hog]

aguahombre, on 2012-March-22, 17:21, said:

IMO, the posting of the actual West hand was not helpful to the thread's discussion. It isn't a hand where the given auction would occur. "IMO" means just that. If you agree with the 2D overcall instead of a double, fine; however, the thread does self-explain why I disagree.

2D on this tacky suit with a good 4 card H suit on the side is a very poor bid. Sorry but this is not an "interesting" bridge hand and should have been posted in the new beginners forum instead.

[Fluffy]

Why do you complain? 2♦ X is what you deserved with the overcall. 3♣ looks so great compared to that.

[ggwhiz]

2♦ instead of double is not that bad if you follow it with a TO double of 3♣.

However......

You were clearly jobbed by the failure to alert the non-forcing 3♣ call and would have won any Director or committee ruling.