[ahydra]

MPs. Both vul. You play 5cM weak NT

---

XX = standard (~9-10 points or more, without a spade fit). 2D = running away

ahydra

[apollo1201]

The 50-points deck? More seriously I guess that partner’s 3C is really distributional and is aimed at preventing me from Xing 2 sth from opps.

The fact that op says XX is 9+ probably makes my pass non forcing, so I have to act. With a good fit but no really top cards (KQ H are probably worthless for p), 4C should be enough. I really don’t see where I would find 9 tricks in NT. And I’m not doubling yet (4H I will).

And obviously if the above analysis is wrong and W is having fun with a very odd way of bidding, and partner has more strength, she will add the 5th or suggest 4S with 6 and JT will be a good catch. So it seems 4C covers most cases in this contested auction.

[Cyberyeti]

apollo1201, on 2019-March-17, 04:45, said:

The 50-points deck? More seriously I guess that partner’s 3C is really distributional and is aimed at preventing me from Xing 2 sth from opps.

The fact that op says XX is 9+ probably makes my pass non forcing, so I have to act. With a good fit but no really top cards (KQ H are probably worthless for p), 4C should be enough. I really don’t see where I would find 9 tricks in NT. And I’m not doubling yet (4H I will).

And obviously if the above analysis is wrong and W is having fun with a very odd way of bidding, and partner has more strength, she will add the 5th or suggest 4S with 6 and JT will be a good catch. So it seems 4C covers most cases in this contested auction.

Well if partner has say AQxxx, x, Qx, KQ10xx and the doubler has the rest which would not be unreasonable, I have 9 easy tricks in 3N and no chance in any other game.

[apollo1201]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-March-17, 05:01, said:

Well if partner has say AQxxx, x, Qx, KQ10xx and the doubler has the rest which would not be unreasonable, I have 9 easy tricks in 3N and no chance in any other game.

I was fearing some kind of weak freakish 56 or 65 with maybe 10 or 11 HCPs eg AKS and KJC. With the « normal opening » hand you give, are you not supposed to let partner X 2D if so they want?
Of course if 3C is constructive, I’d try 3NT hoping the lead won’t be 4th best from QT 5th in D with small singleton in dummy!

[rmnka447]

3 NT

It's MPs and you've got red suit stoppers. Partner has no business free bidding 3 ♣ without a pretty decent hand. If partner pulls to 4 ♣ or 4 ♠, it should be playable.

[mikeh]

The bidding is strange. RHO is ostensibly showing a hand too good to overcall in hearts, and we can infer that he lacks real length in either minor. Some 6322 shape seems plausible. However, his hearts are not exactly prototypical for the sequence.

I think constructions that give opener Hx in diamonds are really unlikely. I’m not bidding 3N, since as little as Q10xxx in diamonds in LHO leads to an immediate and ugly set, even with a heart lead, if RHO has something like Kx AJ109xx AKx xx, and he should have more than that. Meanwhile this gives partner AQxxx xx x KQJxx

As for my choice: in matchpoints, this is very difficult. On some layouts we can score better in 3S than in 4C, or make 4S when 5C has no play. Or we might score 200 if I double and, finally, 3N isn’t completely impossible. So my choice of 4C is somewhat cowardly. I am pretty sure one of the other choices would be better...but which one or ones?

[ahydra]

apollo1201, on 2019-March-17, 04:45, said:

And obviously if the above analysis is wrong and W is having fun with a very odd way of bidding, and partner has more strength, [s]he will add the 5th

Ding ding ding!

---

OP was partner's decision. Maybe my 5C was somewhat ambitious :/ - I hoped for something like Kx Jxxx Qxx AQxx. I asked partner if he'd considered the penalty X instead since the hearts are far more useful cards on defence, to which he said that 4C looked like a better choice as I'm no doubt holding some shape. CY and rmnka's 3NT would have also been a winner and isn't a bad shout with the big club fit and two heart stops.

For an expert, mikeh is incredibly naive about the standard of bidding here in NZ, even in an A-point tourney Clearly West's bidding is complete nonsense and IMNSHO quite deserved to be whacked for the 500* on offer. Ah well, a complete bottom on this board notwithstanding, we still won the first session and finished 6th overall.

ahydra

* 800 is there double-dummy, of course

[apollo1201]

ahydra, on 2019-March-17, 23:05, said:

Ding ding ding!

[hv=pc=n&s=sq7654h6dakckt953&w=sak8haj872dqt2cq8&n=sjthkq4dj975ca762&e=s932ht953d8643cj4&d=s&v=b&b=23&a=1sdr2d3c3h4cp5cdppp]399|300[/hv

I shouldn’t have read this after breakfast...but still wondering which bid between S and W is the most 🤢 😉

[Cyberyeti]

ahydra, on 2019-March-17, 23:05, said:

---

* 800 is there double-dummy, of course

Can you not get 1100, you appear to have the tricks (2 diamonds and a diamond ruff, 2 clubs, 2 trumps and a slow spade), but may get endplayed

[mikeh]

ahydra, on 2019-March-17, 23:05, said:

Ding ding ding!

---

OP was partner's decision. Maybe my 5C was somewhat ambitious :/ - I hoped for something like Kx Jxxx Qxx AQxx. I asked partner if he'd considered the penalty X instead since the hearts are far more useful cards on defence, to which he said that 4C looked like a better choice as I'm no doubt holding some shape. CY and rmnka's 3NT would have also been a winner and isn't a bad shout with the big club fit and two heart stops.

For an expert, mikeh is incredibly naive about the standard of bidding here in NZ, even in an A-point tourney Clearly West's bidding is complete nonsense and IMNSHO quite deserved to be whacked for the 500* on offer. Ah well, a complete bottom on this board notwithstanding, we still won the first session and finished 6th overall.

ahydra

* 800 is there double-dummy, of course

This is posted in the intermediate/advanced forum. The bidding by S, W, and E bears no relationship to their hands. When one posts a poll asking for input, one should assume at least some basic level of competence or else disclose the level of the game in which this arose. I have played a lot of club-level bridge (tho not for years now), and have seen a lot of terrible bridge. However, one soon learns how to take advantage of it, since one learns who is utterly incompetent.

Don’t post problems as if they involve real bridge without disclosing the level of play.

[nige1]

Ahydra writes 'OP was partner's decision. Maybe my 5C was somewhat ambitious :/ - I hoped for something like Kx Jxxx Qxx AQxx. I asked partner if he'd considered the penalty X instead since the hearts are far more useful cards on defence, to which he said that 4C looked like a better choice as I'm no doubt holding some shape. CY and rmnka's 3NT would have also been a winner and isn't a bad shout with the big club fit and two heart stops ... Clearly West's bidding is complete nonsense and IMNSHO quite deserved to be whacked for the 500 (800 double dummy) on offer. Ah well, a complete bottom on this board notwithstanding, we still won the first session and finished 6th overall.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Interesting decisions, Ahydra. IMO The result was bad but the auction wasn't mad...
- As East, I prefer 2♥ to 2♦ but bidding is reasonable for pairs who play that pass of the redouble suggests penalties (I like that treatment).
- As South, I prefer pass to 3♣ which for me shows a shapely hand but weaker.-
- I agree that West's 3♥ is foolhardy.
- II can understand North's 4♣ given that South has shown a weak shapely hand with values in the black suits -- but I prefer pass.
- South has a bit extra for his bidding so 5♣ seems OK.
- Defending 3♥X, Ahydra would lead a ♠ and have no problem taking 1 x ♠, 2 x ♥, 2 X ♦ and 2♣ for -800.
- Cyberyeti seems right that, even if East suffers a ♦ ruff, he still can avoid -1100 at double-dummy.

---

[Tramticket]

nige1, on 2019-March-18, 09:15, said:

- As East, I prefer 2♥ to 2♦ but bidding is reasonable for pairs who play that pass of the redouble suggests penalties (I like that treatment).
- As South, I prefer pass to 3♣ which for me shows a shapely hand but weaker.-
- I agree that West's 3♥ is foolhardy.
- II can understand North's 4♣ given that South has shown a weak shapely hand with values in the black suits
- South has a bit extra for his bidding so 5♣ seems OK.
- Defending 3♥X, Ahydra would lead a ♠ and have no problem taking 1 x ♠, 2 x ♥, 2 X ♦ and 2♣ for -800.
- Cyberyeti seems right that, even if East suffers a ♦ ruff, he still can avoid -1100 at double-dummy.[/hv]

The worst bid was the initial double, when a 1NT over-call would be obvious to most, a 2♥ over-call would be a distant 2nd choice and a double would not be considered.

[HardVector]

Wow. I was surprised when I cast my vote and found out I was the only one to double. It seemed clear to me that west was either overbidding or clueless.

[ahydra]

mikeh, on 2019-March-18, 07:31, said:

This is posted in the intermediate/advanced forum. The bidding by S, W, and E bears no relationship to their hands. When one posts a poll asking for input, one should assume at least some basic level of competence or else disclose the level of the game in which this arose. I have played a lot of club-level bridge (tho not for years now), and have seen a lot of terrible bridge. However, one soon learns how to take advantage of it, since one learns who is utterly incompetent.

Don’t post problems as if they involve real bridge without disclosing the level of play.

It was an A-point tourney, I think you Americans call that a sectional. (County-level tournament in the UK.) So I/A was about the standard. It was certainly not "terrible" bridge.

I was South and consider myself to be an advanced player, on the way to expert level (but still quite some way off!). What would you have done differently with my hand over 2D? People are suggesting 3C should be weaker with more shape - but the given hand is also minimum with shape and high ODR, as much as one might prefer the diamond honours to be in the black suits.

Also I'm not sure I understand the complaint about 2D. You want to run and partner can be 3=4 reds just as much as she can be 4=3. Perhaps you're suggesting E should pass suggesting no preference, which is fair enough, if you have that agreement - I don't know if EW did.

People here seem to have been taught that you can X-then-bid with as little as 16 points :/, hence West's bidding. Yes 1NT is certainly a much more sensible option, when I asked someone else what they had done on this board they said W had overcalled 1NT and then they finished in 2C by NS (not entirely sure how, surely North doubles and EW run to 2H after which you will end up in at least 3C)

ahydra

[sfi]

ahydra, on 2019-March-18, 21:36, said:

IWhat would you have done differently with my hand over 2D? People are suggesting 3C should be weaker with more shape - but the given hand is also minimum with shape and high ODR, as much as one might prefer the diamond honours to be in the black suits.

"People" are right. You take away partner's chance to double 2D for penalty when you bid 3C, which you should only do to show a strongly two-suited hand. You have no reason to want to deny partner this chance on the actual hand, so IMO pass (or double if it is takeout and assuming partner knows not to get too excited in hearts) is the standout option. Your ODR changes enormously if you move your diamond honours into the black suits - there really isn't much comparison.

You can always bid clubs later.

[sfi]

ahydra, on 2019-March-18, 21:36, said:

People here seem to have been taught that you can X-then-bid with as little as 16 points :/, hence West's bidding.

"People" here are wrong (surely the teachers are not the same people as earlier). Points don't take tricks, and a double and bid hand needs tricks. Tramticket nailed it with the analysis of what to do over 1S.

[HardVector]

Doubling then bidding a suit originally promised 17-21. People recognized, however, that good 16 (even 15) point hands could qualify for this. The hand in question technically does have 16, but in no way is it good. Additionally, the level you have to bid at matters. There is a big difference in a hand that is intending to bid like; (1c)-X-(P)-1d/1h-(P)-1s here you are at the one level, and this sequence; (1s)-X-(P)-2d/2h-(P)-3c. In the second sequence you have a REALLY good hand, especially vulnerable.

IMO, the west hand doesn't have a X then bid a suit hand at all, much less X then bid a suit at the 3 level.

[mikeh]

ahydra, on 2019-March-18, 21:36, said:

It was an A-point tourney, I think you Americans call that a sectional. (County-level tournament in the UK.) So I/A was about the standard. It was certainly not "terrible" bridge.

I was South and consider myself to be an advanced player, on the way to expert level (but still quite some way off!). What would you have done differently with my hand over 2D? People are suggesting 3C should be weaker with more shape - but the given hand is also minimum with shape and high ODR, as much as one might prefer the diamond honours to be in the black suits.

Also I'm not sure I understand the complaint about 2D. You want to run and partner can be 3=4 reds just as much as she can be 4=3. Perhaps you're suggesting E should pass suggesting no preference, which is fair enough, if you have that agreement - I don't know if EW did.

People here seem to have been taught that you can X-then-bid with as little as 16 points :/, hence West's bidding. Yes 1NT is certainly a much more sensible option, when I asked someone else what they had done on this board they said W had overcalled 1NT and then they finished in 2C by NS (not entirely sure how, surely North doubles and EW run to 2H after which you will end up in at least 3C)

ahydra

I would pass 2D. While I doubt that partner would double (although on this hand he would...but that is because the opps have committed gross errors), I don't want to stand in the way should that happen. More importantly, bidding 3C should convey the message that I hold a real 2-suiter, with good suits. LHO has at the least suggested that he has some clubs, although he might hold the double and bid hearts hand that he later pretended he had. I don't have any problem with the shape, but I gave as an example AQxxx xx x KQJxx. Note that partner may well be 2=4=4=3 with a 9-10 count (I really don't like that agreement, but my preferences over takeout doubles are non-standard, tho not completely idiosyncratic. I very much prefer to have transfers here, starting with redouble).

So 3C is a significant misdescription of the playing values of the hand.

As for 2D: firstly, I have played that a pass of the redouble is penalty, but that was a long time ago, and I think it came up precisely once. So I prefer that pass simply deny a reason to bid.

However, if I was systemically forced to bid, I would bid 2H rather than 2D. It is, imo, useful to play that takeout doubles of a major are heavily favoured to hold 4 cards in the other major. Obviously one sometimes has to double on, say, 2=3=4=4 or 1=3=4=5, etc, but when and if one is marginal in strength for the double, I suggest considering a pass rather than a double if one lacks 4 card support for the other major.

It is commonplace for partner to bid a 4 card major, when advancing the double, even with a 5 card minor.

Give me say Qxxx xxx Kxxxx x and partner doubles 1H....I and, I think, the vast majority of experienced players, would bid 1S before bidding 2D.

The less said about West's bidding the better. I still see a lot of players, especially on those rare occasions where I play in a weak field (not because I usually play in a strong field but because I rarely play at all), with CC's on which they note their overcall range as, say, 7-15. I don't have to know anything more about them to know that they aren't very good.

I am, not surprisingly given that I am Canadian, a proponent of Kokish's approach to overcalls and doubles. I won't double, even with 17 or 18 hcp, if I can't handle partner jumping or competing in a major. I want my partners to trust that I have support, or such a huge hand that I can override the major without creating a disaster. But even for non-Kokish adherents, only a poor bidder would consider double with that hand. What would I do? I am pretty sure that at the table I would choose 1N. Of course that gets hammered.

In my regular partnerships, we have rescues here, but even absent such rescues, West should run to 2H, which will make East feel a little better about the fiasco that 1N threatened to create.