[bd71]

Please assess the blame, or whether blame exists.

---

Playing relatively standard 2/1. Pairs.

6♥ is a great contract. 5♦ is a nightmare when diamonds split 5-1.

[ArtK78]

bd71, on 2013-May-22, 05:33, said:

Please assess the blame, or whether blame exists.

---

Playing relatively standard 2/1. Pairs.

6♥ is a great contract. 5♦ is a nightmare when diamonds split 5-1.

Saying that 6♥ is a great contract is an overbid. If the opps don't start with two top spades, you need to find the ♥Q and find hearts 3-2 (or find the ♥Q singleton). If the opps do start with two top spades, you need to find the ♥Q coming down singleton or doubleton.

I would blame South. His hand is not worth a double followed by a 5♦ call. He should just bid 4♦ over 3♠ and then pass when North bids 4♥.

South 100%.

[Lord Molyb]

5♦ is almost a better contract than 6♥ imo, all you need is 3-3 diamonds.
North's first call- P = 10, 3♥ = 4
South's first call- 4♦ = 10, 5♦ = 8, X = 5, 4NT = 3
North's second call- 4♥ = 10, 5♥ = 1
South's second call- P = 10, 5♦ = 7, 4NT = 4
North's third call, P = 10, 5♥ = 2

I blame south.

[helene_t]

I am ok with South's bidding although it is a bit aggresive.

North should correct to 5♥ or 6♥. South must have some heart tolerance, otherwise he would have bid 5♦ directly.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2013-May-22, 06:19, said:

I am ok with South's bidding although it is a bit aggresive.

North should correct to 5♥ or 6♥. South must have some heart tolerance, otherwise he would have bid 5♦ directly.

Not necessarily, can he not have the same hand with the majors reversed ?

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2013-May-22, 06:19, said:

I am ok with South's bidding although it is a bit aggresive.

North should correct to 5♥ or 6♥. South must have some heart tolerance, otherwise he would have bid 5♦ directly.

Agreed, except that North is not worth 6♥.
South bidding is blameless and he is strong enough with 3.5 losers, good distribution and a control rich hand to double first in my book.
If North holds something like ♠xxx ♥xxx ♦xx ♣QJxxx an immediate 4♦ risks playing there when 6♣ is excellent.

100% to North

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-May-22, 06:32, said:

Not necessarily, can he not have the same hand with the majors reversed ?

Doubling with a singleton in an unbid major is just too risky.
I prefer 5♦ then.

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

rhm, on 2013-May-22, 06:47, said:

Doubling with a singleton in an unbid major is just too risky.
I prefer 5♦ then.

Rainer Herrmann

Partner always has 6 clubs and no diamonds when I do that and we go off in 5♦ with 6♣ rigid.

[rhm]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-May-22, 06:52, said:

Partner always has 6 clubs and no diamonds when I do that and we go off in 5♦ with 6♣ rigid.

True, I am not happy having to suppress the clubs, but if you double partner is more likely to insist on hearts rather than having clubs.
You could bid 4NT instead of 5♦ or DBL, but this has other drawbacks.
Preempts work (at least in this case).

Rainer Herrmann

[ggwhiz]

I would NEVER double with a stiff heart.

I don't mind 4♦ or double (pre-empts work) but after double I think you have to suck it up and pass 4♥ or you are just switching horses from your first choice.

Opposite KQJT and some minor suit filler it's a dream and opposite the right minor suit fillers you might arrange to lose a spade and a couple of hearts to their long trump hand when they have run out of spades.

Yes, I could easily miss a minor suit slam but thems the breaks.

ps. I voted south 100% to blame but that's not right as North should clearly bid 5♥ which South may even be raising with a bit better hand.

[eagles123]

interesting one, I think North to blame, surely he's too strong to pass it out??

[Cyberyeti]

rhm, on 2013-May-22, 07:03, said:

True, I am not happy having to suppress the clubs, but if you double partner is more likely to insist on hearts rather than having clubs.
You could bid 4NT instead of 5♦ or DBL, but this has other drawbacks.
Preempts work (at least in this case).

Rainer Herrmann

Is it too much fantasy to say:

If I was big one suited with a minor I'd have bid 4/5m
If I was 5-5 in the minors I'd have bid 4N

So X then 5♣ is 6♣/4♦ or similar
and X then 4N is 6♦/4♣

X then 4♠ asks aces in hearts ?

[wyman]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-May-22, 12:29, said:

Is it too much fantasy to say:

If I was big one suited with a minor I'd have bid 4/5m
If I was 5-5 in the minors I'd have bid 4N

So X then 5♣ is 6♣/4♦ or similar
and X then 4N is 6♦/4♣

X then 4♠ asks aces in hearts ?

My thoughts exactly. 4N should really show exactly this hand imo.

[wank]

eagles123, on 2013-May-22, 09:49, said:

interesting one, I think North to blame, surely he's too strong to pass it out??

you're misunderstanding the nature of double followed by a new suit over a pre-empt - it doesn't show a hand too strong to overcall, as it would at the 1-level. Rather it shows the values to bid at the end-level, i.e. 5D but with a more flexible shape than a direct 5D call would suggest. This is basically what south has.

Anyway, north with 2 more hearts than he'll often have should go back to hearts.

[eagles123]

wank, on 2013-May-22, 12:36, said:

you're misunderstanding the nature of double followed by a new suit over a pre-empt - it doesn't show a hand too strong to overcall, as it would at the 1-level. Rather it shows the values to bid at the end-level, i.e. 5D but with a more flexible shape than a direct 5D call would suggest. This is basically what south has.

Anyway, north with 2 more hearts than he'll often have should go back to hearts.

thanks