[billw55]

---

IMP pairs, BBO randoms all around.

East? West? Rub of the green? What are better alternatives calls?

[trevahound]

W opened then jumped to the 3 level opposite a partner that didn't respond to 1♠, in an auction where he was surround, and at unfavorable, and E can go to bed silently with an A and a K? Worse yet, both are positional behind the doubler?

E's final pass is a joke, in my opinion. Hopefully it was just thoughtless, distracted, and half asleep, because if it's based on evaluation E has a serious problem.

100% East.

[neilkaz]

100% East

[the hog]

Neither, though if you had to apportion some of the blame it would go to East. You can easily lose 1S, 2H and a C. Not on this hand granted, but just move the CK to Ds and see what happens as now you have 2 Cs maybe 2H and a S to lose.

[Jinksy]

Both for me, though definitely more for E. As W, I'd prefer to just open 4♠ in this seat, since we want to be in game opposite as little as K Jxxx xxxxx xx, and might make on a favourable lead given a few other non-responding holdings, yet can hardly envision slam.

Agree with trevahound about E's pass of 3♠ though. That bid is seeking game at these colours, not preempting (not to mention if W had a minimum opening hand with long ♠s, he should just open two or three ♠s in this seat). If E doesn't have a max* for his pass, he's playing a different game than the one I'm used to.

* Plus a point or two.

[MrAce]

% 100 East for me. He has 3 controls and passed and then passed again.
He thought his pd is asking trump support with 3♠ I guess, lol.

[whereagles]

If you trust opener to actually have his 3♠ bid, then East should bid 4.

Trouble is, sometimes people take liberties when their partner passes, so it's not 100% clear-cut.

[MrAce]

Jinksy, on 2014-November-11, 22:47, said:

Both for me, though definitely more for E. As W, I'd prefer to just open 4♠ in this seat, since we want to be in game opposite as little as K Jxxx xxxxx xx, and might make on a favourable lead given a few other non-responding holdings, yet can hardly envision slam.

Agree with trevahound about E's pass of 3♠ though. That bid is seeking game at these colours, not preempting (not to mention if W had a minimum opening hand with long ♠s, he should just open two or three ♠s in this seat). If E doesn't have a max* for his pass, he's playing a different game than the one I'm used to.

* Plus a point or two.

Jinsky, I have no problem with opening 4♠ or opening 1♠ and then jumping to 4. Or opening 1♠ and then jumping to 3. They are all reasonable actions to me. I can hardly blame anyone for their style when their bid is reasonable. This is not the case, however, for E. His pass is not reasonable at all to me. You should not blame a player for not bidding exactly in your style. Imho you need to judge their bid with how reasonable they bid. I think opening 1♠ and then jumping to 3♠ vs a passed pd who also passed over double is reasonable. At least huge majority of the people who voted think so.


Another thing I would like to mention is the difference between opening 4♠ and now bidding 4♠. We know that now it is easier for them to punish us when it is right to do so. I mean you can cherry pick K J Jxxx xxxxx xx placing pd with 2 critical cards, each of them providing a sure trick for you and still pray for a favourable lead of course. But the matter of the fact is, ♦ A, even if it looks like a totally wasted value, is actually a great card. compared to KJxxx KQxxx QJxxx. It increases your tricks as well as their tricks as oppose to the holdings I just gave, given that they have 8 card fit in this suit. All of this sums up to not much of anything of course. I still think your choice of opening 4♠ or jumping to 4 in second round is reasonable, as well as jumping to only 3♠. Passing 3♠, however, at imps, looks very wimpy to me.

[aguahombre]

I blame East, who had two chances to show a response to partner's 1S. He could have done whatever the partnership uses to show a 1NT response on the first round (redouble as a transfer, or just bid 1NT in kitchen table Bridge).

Was he passing with the expectation of doubling the opponents is one of his 3 suits? If so, he is a sick person.

Opener would have rebid 4S after a NT response; why let a double, which takes up no room, silence us?

East would get full credit for his ill-advised silence if the Spade 5 and Spade King were exchanged for N/S. Now ACE, Jack of hearts beats it.

[Jinksy]

MrAce, on 2014-November-12, 02:12, said:

Jinsky, I have no problem with opening 4♠ or opening 1♠ and then jumping to 4. Or opening 1♠ and then jumping to 3. They are all reasonable actions to me. I can hardly blame anyone for their style when their bid is reasonable. This is not the case, however, for E. His pass is not reasonable at all to me. You should not blame a player for not bidding exactly in your style. Imho you need to judge their bid with how reasonable they bid. I think opening 1♠ and then jumping to 3♠ vs a passed pd who also passed over double is reasonable. At least huge majority of the people who voted think so.

Yeah, I don't think 1♠ is wildly unreasonable, and certainly E's actions are far worse. 'Blame' is a confluence of prediction and luck though, and had it gone 1♠ PPP when E had the hand above, I suspect I know who'd have got the most votes in the subsequent ATB.

In any case, opposite a passed hand I think there must be a 'right answer' to the question of what to open, even if we don't yet know what it is - you could sim how often game makes opposite hands that wouldn't pass as well as how often it would stop N from finding a bid that would lead to a good sac, then assume that E would never bid slam, so reduce the expectation accordingly, then estimate how often a single-bid auction would lead to a game making on the lead, add the expectation from that. The latter would be hard to do, but I suspect a determined statistician could come up with some plausible heuristics. So - admittedly without high confidence - I would guess that opening 4♠ ultimately has higher expectation here than something more modest.

[Wackojack]

East 100%.

However, had I been sitting West knowing that East was a typical intermediate BBO player, then I would blame myself for not opening 4♠.

[Trinidad]

whereagles, on 2014-November-12, 01:49, said:

If you trust opener to actually have his 3♠ bid, then East should bid 4.

Trouble is, sometimes people take liberties when their partner passes, so it's not 100% clear-cut.

Exactly, this is why East should not pass the first round with an ace and a king: He will not be able to rely on West's bidding as showing strength anymore. If he simply would respond 1NT the first round, showing his values, he can rely on West's bidding in the next round(s).

But if East passes first, West will assume East is broke and West will focus on making life hard for the opponents instead of finding his own optimal contract (even at unfavorable vulnerability).

Rik

[ggwhiz]

billw55, on 2014-November-11, 13:09, said:

BBO randoms all around.

Especially East.

[BillPatch]

1 NT may show this E hand in kitchen table bridge, but most authorities prefer that in this auction it show a balanced hand. 100% blame for E for not accepting the game try on the second round.

[aguahombre]

BillPatch, on 2014-November-14, 00:56, said:

1 NT may show this E hand in kitchen table bridge, but most authorities prefer that in this auction it show a balanced hand. 100% blame for E for not accepting the game try on the second round.

Yes, E had a second chance. I agree that "most authorities" would prefer a 1NT response (or the equivalent) to a 1S opening to contain a bit more balance. But I cannot imagine anyone claiming to be an authority passing 1S with an Ace and a King. They would all show responding values, and hopefully none would perpetrate 2/1. That only leaves a 1NT response...forcing or not. So the interloper Doubled. And now, we are supposed to not show responding values???

[the hog]

aguahombre, on 2014-November-14, 02:37, said:

Yes, E had a second chance. I agree that "most authorities" would prefer a 1NT response (or the equivalent) to a 1S opening to contain a bit more balance. But I cannot imagine anyone claiming to be an authority passing 1S with an Ace and a King. They would all show responding values, and hopefully none would perpetrate 2/1. That only leaves a 1NT response...forcing or not. So the interloper Doubled. And now, we are supposed to not show responding values???

Clearly you are unaware that many top players use transfers in this situation after a x
hence 1NT - t/f to 2C
"So what do they do with an Ace and a K and no biddable suit or no raise?" you ask. They pass! Sure that does not mean they should pass 3S.

[billw55]

OK, thanks, I was west. I thought maybe east owed a call, but that pass was at least conceivable.

Actually, I even had doubts about 3♠, which could easily go -500 if east is broke or has values only in diamonds.

[Trinidad]

the hog, on 2014-November-14, 07:37, said:

Clearly you are unaware that many top players use transfers in this situation after a x
hence 1NT - t/f to 2C
"So what do they do with an Ace and a K and no biddable suit or no raise?" you ask. They pass! Sure that does not mean they should pass 3S.

Clearly you were unaware that EW were actually playing Magic Diamond... so West was underbidding frantically.

Don't you think that the OP would have mentioned it if they would have played transfers (or Magic Diamond for that matter)?

According to the OP, we are dealing with 4 BBO randoms. With a BBO random, you would obviously play transfers after a double. The "many top players who use transfers in this situation" would not, which is one reason why they are top players.

So, the question remains: What do these top players do with a hand like this (when they are playing with their favorite partner)?

• Some of them might pass, as you say, but that means that they will have to have a method for West to show whether he has a power hand or a weaker distributional hand, since East can still have values. If West shows the power hand, East will raise. If West shows the weaker distributional hand, he won't.
  
• Some others show their values right away with a redouble: a transfer showing a 1NT response.

Rik

[aguahombre]

the hog, on 2014-November-14, 07:37, said:

Clearly you are unaware that many top players use transfers in this situation after a x
hence 1NT - t/f to 2C
"So what do they do with an Ace and a K and no biddable suit or no raise?" you ask. They pass! Sure that does not mean they should pass 3S.

Do you think the careful placement of "(or the equivalent)" in my post was clearly unaware???

Many players, "top" or not-so-top, who have given transfer responses to 1MX some serious thought...start their transfer responses with a redouble. So after 1S (X) XX would be the EQUIVALENT of a 1NT response which they would have made without the Double. Actually, since the Redouble allows Responder to bid again freely, it can include game-forcing single suiters as well.

Transfer responses have the purpose of using the extra room provided by the opponents' gratuitous Double to improve on the tools we have. The "extra room" is only the availability of the Redouble. If we don't use the redouble as part of our scheme, we have not gained anything, just replaced things and lost something in the process. Here, the 1NT response is lost if we employ transfers which start at 1NT instead of redouble.

Bottom line: Yes, Mr. Hog I am aware of transfer responses; and I believe that it is not a good thing to pass with responding values. So, I am aware that I don't have to pass with responding values if we use their takeout Double fully.

[rmnka447]

Definitely, the lion's share of blame goes to East.

West with a 4 loser hand might consider a stronger bid than 3 ♠, but I can't quibble too much with the actual bid.

East is looking at 2 probable tricks opposite a partner who has willingly bid 3 ♠ without any assurance East has anything. Vulnerable IMP scoring makes it right to push to less than even games. So East has to bid 4 ♠.