[kenberg]

I am going to give you all four hands, but I will start with just mine. This is BBO, imps, a partner you play with sometimes but have no extensive agreements with. We are vul, they are not.

---

OK, with some I have the agreement that 3♥ shows a spade fit and asks for a heart lead if we defend. But we are not playing that, so I can bid 3♥ to show hearts. Without the double I treat 3♥ as forcing, and I believe partner does. But with the double? I would think not. But we are vul and I have some tricks, so maybe I should just pass and trust partner's suit is good enough to bring in 8 tricks.

I couldn't help myself, I bid 3♥.


Here are the hands.

---

Result: +140, lose an imp.
The opening lead was the ♦ J after which there are five obvious tricks to lose but the defense slipped up. Sounds like a good result? Well, some are in 4♥ making. Gib says there are ten tricks in hearts and, given a bit of inspired play in the diamond suit, this seems right. If the defense leads a trump at trick 1, it appears that there are 11 tricks.


Upon reflection:

1. How do you play 3♥ in this auction, forcing or not, showing spade support or not?
2. Would you open the N hand 2♠, given we are vul, they are not. I wouldn't, but many do.
3. 4♥ making is obviously a bit lucky on these cards but given that, red against white, 2♠ presumably has some decent values, would it be crazy to bid 4♥ instead of 3♥?
4. Suppose 3♥ is available to you as a non-forcing bid at your first call. Pass it also available to you. Your call?
5. Suppose (change the hands if you need to) that you pass the double. Suppose the opponents are playing Leb over the X, W calls 2NT, partner passes, E bids 3♣. What would 3♥ by S now show? Edit: Obviously it would not show this hand since, as has been strongly mentioned, I would hit 3♣. But the question remains what passing and then coming in, not with spades, over a Leb 3♣, should show.
6. Any other thoughts?

[Endymion77]

Redouble and hammer whatever they decide to play, just take the money instead of trying to find a thin game on a misfit

[kenberg]

Endymion77, on 2014-January-04, 09:17, said:

Redouble and hammer whatever they decide to play, just take the money instead of trying to find a thin game on a misfit

You are not worried that after XX-P-P-P we might be -400? We won't be, but I am not sure that is clear at my first call.

[MrAce]

I would pass and double them wherever they run. Bidding 3♥ over double would not even occur to me, even if i knew E was making a penalty double of 2♠ as he did.

If you did not give all 4 hands, readers would have enjoyed it much more imo.

[Endymion77]

kenberg, on 2014-January-04, 09:19, said:

You are not worried that after XX-P-P-P we might be -400? We won't be, but I am not sure that is clear at my first call.

We might be, but I don't think they both would be able to stand for the redouble. If they are, I'll give up 200 extra points.

[kenberg]

MrAce, on 2014-January-04, 09:40, said:

I would pass and double them wherever they run. Bidding 3♥ over double would not even occur to me, even if i knew E was making a penalty double of 2♠ as he did.

If you did not give all 4 hands, readers would have enjoyed it much more imo.

I often am unsure of whether to give all of the hands. My expectation is that there are five spades, maybe six, on my left and that if I pass West will most likely pass also. Most people would be thinking along these lines. So I didn't want anyone to spend a lot of time thinking along those lines and then find me saying "Surprise, the spades are with East". So that's why I showed the hands.

But I appreciate the choice of pass, and I am thinking that is the best choice. If pard has an iffy suit, that's his problem, I am supplying the outside strength.

Thinking further about the XX option. I still don't agree. Maybe close though. If 2♠X is passed out and makes we already have a fine result so I think risking -400 instead of -200 is not worth it. But nothing is ever clearcut. Long ago in the final match of a Swiss I redoubled under similar circumstances, making, the same at the other table, and winning the match and the event depended on my redoubling.

If I pass, presumably there is 2NT on my left, 3♣ on my right, and now I double that and everything else, right? I think that I can go with that.I suppose we defend 3♣X and the play will be interesting. Surely we will beat it easily but maybe not 800. I guess I lead the ♥K.

[Endymion77]

I would think that spades are with West too. So if I redouble, and West passes (presumably for penalty), how many Easts do you think will sit comfortably for 2♠xx? How many have had even a brief discussion with their partners about this?

[kenberg]

Endymion77, on 2014-January-04, 12:24, said:

I would think that spades are with West too. So if I redouble, and West passes (presumably for penalty), how many Easts do you think will sit comfortably for 2♠xx? How many have had even a brief discussion with their partners about this?

True enough. For example, I haven't had such a discussion with my partners. Clearly there could be an auction 2♠-X-XX where fourth hand does not at all wish to play 2♠XX but has no strong preference as to where to run. He does what?
I had not thought of this, and I don't know what standard is. I guess even a psychic XX would be possible if a fourth hand pass suggests that second hand pick the run. So if a fourth hand pass is to play, how does he run?
No doubt this has been discussed somewhere long ago, but I really have no idea.Perhaps we need an XXX card.

[wank]

Endymion77, on 2014-January-04, 12:24, said:

I would think that spades are with West too. So if I redouble, and West passes (presumably for penalty), how many Easts do you think will sit comfortably for 2♠xx? How many have had even a brief discussion with their partners about this?

100% if you go above intermediate level

[PhilKing]

wank, on 2014-January-04, 13:07, said:

100% if you go above intermediate level

This is not true, unless you count Helgemo/Helness as intermediates.

[ArtK78]

I think the vast majority of players play that (2 or more) - x - xx - P is for penalties - the same as if the redouble were a pass.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2014-January-04, 13:48, said:

I think the vast majority of players play that (2 or more) - x - xx - P is for penalties - the same as if the redouble were a pass.

That is encouraging. I get strange looks from students when I tell them what a takeout double should look like and that if it isn't taken out, partner doesn't want to take it out.

It looks as if this E/W pair might not even know about takeout doubles, and a redouble would bite us in the butt. Anyway, passing 2SX and then doubling their 3-level bid (hoped for) seems about right.

[mycroft]

I think however, that one is different from two. Preempts go minus a lot (and get psychic redoubled). Opening bids not so much when they advertise 22+.