[Adam1105]

---

My partner said, "Why Pass?"

Sayc tourney and first time partner. Am I supposed to know we have slam and therefore keep bidding?

[helene_t]

No, partner knows you are in slam when he has 12 points and a diamond control opposite your 2♣ opener.

I don't like your 3♣ bid too much - either raise spades (if you think partner must have five of them) or bid 2NT to to show your shape and diamond stopper.

The auction is probably not described in the SAYC booklet (what does the redouble show? Does your first pass show clubs? Is partner's 2♠ bid on a 4-card suit OK on the basis of the idea that he probably would have bid a decent 5-card suit on the first round?) so it is difficult to say how it should have gone. But in any case, partner knows enough to bid 6NT or 6♣, and otherwise he can always keep the auction alive by bidding 3♥ or 4♦.

3NT was a terrible bid. Your final pass was correct.

[billw55]

Having already opened 2♣, the west hand is almost minimum. Therefore decisions are mostly partner's now. 3NT was not a good one. I don't much like 2♠ either with only four cards. Perhaps east should try a diamond cuebid, or just 6NT directly instead. On the actual bidding, west's final pass is correct.

It looks like east knew about slam, but forgot that his partner did not yet know, and so neglected to tell you. Or perhaps he thought that the redouble set a slam force. In any case, miscommunication in slam auctions is a common problem with pickup partners.

[Jinksy]

Agree with everything the others said, and also your P's XX was a really horrible call designed to completely mess up the bidding in a scratch partnership. Undiscussed bids in new partnerships are natural unless they can't possibly be natural - so here XX should be 'I've got good clubs, so I suggest we play right here, P'.

He's lucky you had his clubs for him, or you could have ended up defending 2♣XX making (with slam on your way).

[mycroft]

I have to agree with everyone else; I dislike everything that East did on this hand.

I don't see it specifically in the SAYC booklet, but default standard bidding plays "x or xx = bust, pass = neutral but GF, bids are positives with strong implication that defence isn't the right idea". So the redouble "should" show a really bad hand and imply that +300 beats all partscores and +100 beats going down. After that, I would expect a pass of 2♦ and a pass of the double - but of course East doesn't have that.

Clearly neither East nor West thought the redouble meant a bad hand. East should be thinking slam as soon as she sees the 2♣ opener, and after the double (do you know what the double meant, by the way?) the only question is "what score are we going to get for +800, or are we going to need +1100?" I think East is going to have a very difficult choice after 2♣-(X)-p (my choice);XX (2♦)-p;X-? (at the table, 2♣-(X)-XX; p-(2♦)-?, same problem). At these colours you need -5 to beat slam, and if doubler has a long diamond suit (but why would he?) you aren't getting it; and there's nothing about your hand that warns against "they have two tricks before we get 12". Much as I hate letting these people off the hook (because they *will* keep doing it), I think I'm bidding 2NT (GF, remember), and if partner doesn't bid a major, then bidding 6NT. I have enough extras that (especially at MPs - you didn't say if it was MPs or IMP scored) even with a 4=4 major fit that we don't find, I'm comfortable in NT.

Without the double, it should go 2♣-2♦; 2NT-3♣ (standard Stayman, I assume); 3♦-6NT. East therefore can't make a call that partner could pass short of 6 (and 3NT is the ultimate "partner could pass" call); I don't like the idea of making a call that could lead to playing slam in the 4-3 fit (or bidding 6NT worrying about the Moysian and finding out it's a 4-5 fit!), but I also hate wrongsiding the NT, so I can't say "East can't bid 2♠" either (but I'd like to).

If I have any criticism of West it's that he didn't raise spades after 2♠. ♠KQx is golden opposite the supposed 5+ trump (and not waiting to see if 2♦ gets doubled implies strongly "+") - why rebid your minor?

Small note: If this is IMP scored, I'm much more likely to try for the telephone number in 2♦. +800 into +990 is -5 and not the "shared bottom" it is at MPs; and +1100 is a distinct possibility (2 diamond tricks and a card); +1400 isn't out of the question (two diamond tricks). And there is an element of "if you do take it for 1100, you'll never have them interfere over 2♣ again" (without the nuts).

[billw55]

I am also curious what exactly north was up to.

[neilkaz]

East is the fault here. Once his pd opens 2C he should be thinking slam and certainly thinking slam after hearing the 3C rebid as now his Q works. But one wonders how much 2Dx would go for if he doubled it instead?!

[Cyberyeti]

I strongly suspect you missed the boat in 2♦X let alone a slam.

E bid this like an idiot, I can live with the XX, 2♠ is manic (ToX if you play one, 3♦ if you don't), 3N is worse. You have no reason to suppose partner has 12 rather than 8.

[eagles123]

yep the others have it in one, East is a moron.

[rmnka447]

North has interfered with a double. I assume XX shows values and that pass would be the weakest call.

As West, I'm looking at a balanced 23 HCP hand with stoppers in all suits AND the auction hasn't gotten any higher than it would without interference. It seems to me that opener has an easy 2 NT bid showing the big balanced hand (23-24). When you can make a bid that describes your hand, why not make it?

Once West makes that bid, life becomes simpler for responder. East can Stayman and then bid 6 NT.

When West passes, the auction gets murky because neither player knows exactly what their partner is doing. I'd be much more in favor of responder bidding NT rather than showing ♠ on a 4 card suit. Over 2 ♠, I think opener should bid 2 NT rather than 3 ♣. It's more descriptive. With a 12 count and a ♦ stopper, I don't think that East can simply make a 3 NT call. It could be made on a lot less than 12. If you want to have the auction as up to the 3 NT call by East, how about East bidding 3 ♦ and then bidding NT later? That certainly would show a stronger hand.

[rmnka447]

deleted

[johnu]

Your partner is clueless. Put him on ignore and look for another partner.

[all loomis]

you deserve one another. x 2d, for starters. if xx is 10+hcp, then w must at least raise 3n to 4. nothing wrong with 3c, e is presumably short in diamonds [no x] c's might be the best spot. but then he wants to play nt.
at this point you wish you had bid 2n over 2s, because clearly e is clueless.
lesson 1: playing with strangers, bid nt first.
lesson 2: be humble, passing 3n is also clueless.

[lycier]

Obviously it exposed a serious defect of your bidding system.

[Adam1105]

 all loomis, on 2015-December-09, 01:22, said:

you deserve one another. x 2d, for starters. if xx is 10+hcp, then w must at least raise 3n to 4. nothing wrong with 3c, e is presumably short in diamonds [no x] c's might be the best spot. but then he wants to play nt.
at this point you wish you had bid 2n over 2s, because clearly e is clueless.
lesson 1: playing with strangers, bid nt first.
lesson 2: be humble, passing 3n is also clueless.

So I KNOW my partner has slam values in SAYC bidding which doesn't really cover this bidding at all. I'd like to know how you know East has Slam values (East is the one who knows, not me) and based one WHAT you call my pass of 3nt "clueless?"


This is so typical --
A: You're clueless, partner.
B: So the right bid is what, partner?
A: Ah ,,, I don't know, partner.

[Jinksy]

 Adam1105, on 2015-December-09, 03:49, said:

So I KNOW my partner has slam values in SAYC bidding which doesn't really cover this bidding at all. I'd like to know how you know East has Slam values (East is the one who knows, not me) and based one WHAT you call my pass of 3nt "clueless?"

This is so typical --
A: You're clueless, partner.
B: So the right bid is what, partner?
A: Ah ,,, I don't know, partner.

Ignore all loomis. He sounds like he's a sock puppet of your partner making a desperate effort to make himself seem less of a cretin.

Penalising 2♦ would be nice, but difficult even in an experienced partnership, IMO. With diamonds (and the honours) split so evenly between the two suits, neither of you has a full blooded penalty double (or penalty pass, depending on whether you think you're playing TO doubles). E's hand is closest, but given that he's almost certain you have slam on, trying for penalties at the 2-level with KTx doesn't seem like a great proposition.

[lycier]

 Jinksy, on 2015-December-09, 04:55, said:

Penalising 2♦ would be nice, but difficult even in an experienced partnership,

Not difficult in fact.
After 2♦ ,East bid 2♠ is a very wrong action,normally East should make a takeout double twice,if opener really holds a long good ♦ suit,opener will translate it into penalty. And what's more,responder would give a chioce to opener,then opener will rebid 2nt with denied 4-card major, now it is very easy for East to bid up to 6nt.

[Zelandakh]

 lycier, on 2015-December-09, 06:09, said:

Not difficult in fact.
After 2♦ ,East bid 2♠ is a very wrong action,normally East should make a takeout double twice

As CY already pointed out, not everyone will play a takeout double here. From East's point of view, West's pass on the second round was a penalty pass and the default is that this sets up penalty doubles on subsequent rounds. Given that this was probably a fairly inexperienced partnership, doubling here and expecting partner to read it as take out is asking for trouble.

Incidentally, for those that want the XX to show a bust, the SAYC booklet makes it clear that XX after a double of a conventional bid shows the suit, in this case clubs. Regardless, the worst call in the auction from E-W was clearly 3NT. What I suspect happened here is that East thought their XX showed 10+hcp. So we can perhaps put this down to a simple system misunderstanding.

[lycier]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-December-09, 07:47, said:

Incidentally, for those that want the XX to show a bust, the SAYC booklet makes it clear that XX after a double of a conventional bid shows the suit, in this case clubs. Regardless, the worst call in the auction from E-W was clearly 3NT. What I suspect happened here is that East thought their XX showed 10+hcp. So we can perhaps put this down to a simple system misunderstanding.

Now I got it,thank you very much.

[Jinksy]

 lycier, on 2015-December-09, 06:09, said:

After 2♦ ,East bid 2♠ is a very wrong action,normally East should make a takeout double twice,if opener really holds a long good ♦ suit,opener will translate it into penalty.

Ok... and since West doesn't hold 'a long good ♦ suit', how will they successfully penalise 2♦?