[jallerton]

Matchpoints, the opponents are vulnerable, your side is not.

---

[WesleyC]

Not reopening with a double here is a crime!

[apollo1201]

X as I live a dangerous life. I hope those two K will be enough when it gets passed out (they probably sit after dummy's honors) but I'd like a small spade to fire back through declarer (red the suit should be decent-ish though). Or maybe dummy with 12HCP and a small doubleton S will bid 3S over partner's suit and I'll have done the job.

[BRBanger]

Partner may think that double is criminal when he sees my hand. He has 4-5 spades, but how good are they? He chose not to overcall, so I hang him out to dry? I'll double at MP's.

[PhantomSac]

 WesleyC, on 2015-November-15, 03:35, said:

Not reopening with a double here is a crime!

Must be a ruling. I don't care if my partner tanked for 2 hours and said "I have a problem out loud", I would reopen X lol.

[shyams]

It's MPs. We're white vs red.

Absolutely yes.

[aguahombre]

 PhantomSac, on 2015-November-15, 05:39, said:

Must be a ruling. I don't care if my partner tanked for 2 hours and said "I have a problem out loud", I would reopen X lol.

You need to be more assertive in your posts, so we don't have any doubts about how you feel.

My partner's tempo will not be a problem, here; in a decent game, the double does seem clear. However, at the club my RHO will have told me if it is right to pass.

[neilkaz]

 aguahombre, on 2015-November-15, 09:31, said:

You need to be more assertive in your posts, so we don't have any doubts about how you feel.

My partner's tempo will not be a problem, here; in a decent game, the double does seem clear. However, at the club my RHO will have told me if it is right to pass.

At some clubs your CHO will tell you if it is right to pass, unfortunately.

Oh and I voted to balance with an X and think it clear.

[fromageGB]

Although I double, I do so a little reluctantly, certainly with far less enthusiasm than others. I think we may be in a no-fit situation here, with the points evenly balanced, and we may struggle in a phantom sacrifice. Maybe poster #5 has had plenty of experience of this.

[cherdano]

 PhantomSac, on 2015-November-15, 05:39, said:

Must be a ruling. I don't care if my partner tanked for 2 hours and said "I have a problem out loud", I would reopen X lol.

Given this was posted in the I/A forum, I would think we can't count you as a peer...

[rmnka447]

Double for me also.

[aguahombre]

 cherdano, on 2015-November-16, 06:18, said:

Given this was posted in the I/A forum, I would think we can't count you as a peer...

The people polled about whether a person of a certain level with similar information and agreements would have considered a certain action do not have to actually be peers of that person.

In fact, asking peers of an inexperienced player what they would do often results in garbage- out because they don't really understand the situation as explained.

[WesleyC]

 aguahombre, on 2015-November-16, 12:57, said:

The people polled about whether a person of a certain level with similar information and agreements would have considered a certain action do not have to actually be peers of that person.

I think there's a difference between 'polling' and 'asking for a second opinion'.

Seeking guidance from an experienced player/director about the strength of the player in question and if the situation warrants further investigation is OK.

However, giving an experienced player the problem in isolation and then using that as as a 'vote' in your poll would not be fine.

[aguahombre]

 WesleyC, on 2015-November-16, 18:13, said:

However, giving an experienced player the problem in isolation and then using that as as a 'vote' in your poll would not be fine.

No, when establishing logical alternatives, we give the experienced player the information he needs: the methods in use, the experience level of the player involved, the auction, the colors, the form of scoring...hardly in "isolation", and quite fine.

[WesleyC]

 aguahombre, on 2015-November-16, 19:56, said:

No, when establishing logical alternatives, we give the experienced player the information he needs: the methods in use, the experience level of the player involved, the auction, the colors, the form of scoring...hardly in "isolation", and quite fine.

Obviously practical considerations often necessitate cutting a few corners, but using this as your default plan seems misguided. I've seen some bizarre bids allowed based on a unanimous polling of players at a different level to myself (in both directions).

[PhantomSac]

 cherdano, on 2015-November-16, 06:18, said:

Given this was posted in the I/A forum, I would think we can't count you as a peer...

True but it was posted on a discussion forum. It has never been the case that only I/A opinions were welcome on I/A, and novice opinions on novice etc. If it is being used for a ruling or something I'm sure jallerton will not count my opinion. I just think it must be for jallerton to be posing it since I think it is such an obvious double.

[NickRW]

Well, if it is a peer opinion that is really what is being asked for, then I'm closer to being in the right category - and I think I couldn't resist an X

[lycier]

Pass is my choice.

[gszes]

x

This would be a much closer problem if we were unpassed. Our passed hand status means p will realize our lack of general overall value wen deciding to leave the x in for penalty. Our distribution is fine and p will almost always make an accurate decision to defend or bid. Lots of potential reward (MP not necessarily numbers) not a huge amount of risk makes x a superb MP call. A closer decision at IMPS where there is not a monster amount of upside since setting the contract 1 is no big deal at imps while huge at MP) I would pass at imps since the occasional opps making is pretty darn huge

[nige1]

jallerton says "Matchpoints, the opponents are vulnerable, your side is not".

I rank
1. Double. Less dangerous, after your initial pass, but if partner passes for penalties, the ♠void might be a liability.
2. Pass. Likely to be a common action, in spite of the BBO consensus.
3. 2N. This might avoid 2♠X+1
4. 3♦. Unilateral and a poor suit.

---