[eagles123]

imps all pairs acol ATB

---

i was pretty annoyed with myself on this, but interested on forum concensus of blame

thanks

eagles

[trevahound]

eagles123, on 2014-June-24, 15:43, said:

imps all pairs acol ATB

---

i was pretty annoyed with myself on this, but interested on forum concensus of blame

thanks

eagles

I would not suggest defending in front of partner in a forcing pass situation with the North hand. My K of d's is likely working, and I fear a double fit. I think if N passes the decision (forcing) to S, south in this case will do the right thing. If you reverse N's hearts and clubs, I think it's a different decision.

When my opps double here, both black suits are 2-2 and I'm once again down sticks and wheels.

[Cyberyeti]

What's your style ? does 1♠ suggest 5 of them ? What is 2♠ over 1♦ ?

I'd be bidding 3♠ with the S hand over 2♦.

The problem is that you have not articulated the double fit, there are several ways of doing it, but I don't know what you have available. If you've bid 2♠ first time (fit) then X over 5♦ is right to suggest 5224 with a diamond card. If you haven't yet shown the club fit, you can't afford to double.

[MrAce]

South has more than just 2♠ raise imo. Especially when they bid diamond and diamond forever at these colors that ♦ K pd holds is a surprise.

[eagles123]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-24, 16:08, said:

What's your style ? does 1♠ suggest 5 of them ? What is 2♠ over 1♦ ?

I'd be bidding 3♠ with the S hand over 2♦.

The problem is that you have not articulated the double fit, there are several ways of doing it, but I don't know what you have available. If you've bid 2♠ first time (fit) then X over 5♦ is right to suggest 5224 with a diamond card. If you haven't yet shown the club fit, you can't afford to double.

no complex agreements just acol 3 wk etc etc.

4M4m32 opening outside NT range not discussed
support doubles not discussed

[neilkaz]

South may have been concerned with weak trump but at least he holds 4 pieces and, IMHO, has too much playing strength for a single raise to 2♠.

[gszes]

100% south for horridly weak 2s underbid which makes slam seem really
far fetched from the north side. There are plenty of simple 2s bids to
be found xxxx AQx Axx Kxx nice simple no wasted values 2s raise the
problem hand Jxxx Axx x AKQxx appears to be close to 2 tricks better
(if not more) but since a 3s will ask p to bid game with a couple of
aces 3s should be more than sufficient since game is unlikely unless
responder can produce at least that much.

South must have felt at least some pangs of guilt about their original
underbid when north bid 4s and it borders on criminal to pass the x knowing
you have a very offensively oriented hand with extra values. Passing 5d with
the first example hand I gave is fine but really poor hand evaluation with the
hand given in the problem.

100% south for leaving the very reasonable x in.

[whereagles]

At this vulnerability I wouldn't oppose doubling 5♦. In fact, it seems normal.

2♠ was indeed a bit of an underbid, but it does show 5 clubs (3♠ would be right on values, but could be done on strong NT type hand - system is ACOL). I think you'd have to stretch and splinterize 4♦. Then North can perhaps bid 5♠ easily due to the double fit.

But what happened? only 1 down?

[Trinidad]

whereagles, on 2014-June-25, 02:04, said:

But what happened? only 1 down?

I would say that missing the good slam is what happened.

For me most of the blame goes to South for bidding only 2♠. But North is not free of blame either. The only defensive tricks he has are the ♦K and the ♠A, he knows of the double fit in the black suits (most likely 2x9), can see that the opponents are likely to have a double fit in the red suits (8-10 or 9-9), and he chooses unilaterally to defend. The very least he could have done is ask his partner for his opinion.

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

gszes, on 2014-June-24, 19:27, said:

100% south for horridly weak 2s underbid which makes slam seem really
far fetched from the north side. There are plenty of simple 2s bids to
be found xxxx AQx Axx Kxx nice simple no wasted values 2s raise the
problem hand Jxxx Axx x AKQxx appears to be close to 2 tricks better
(if not more) but since a 3s will ask p to bid game with a couple of
aces 3s should be more than sufficient since game is unlikely unless
responder can produce at least that much.

South must have felt at least some pangs of guilt about their original
underbid when north bid 4s and it borders on criminal to pass the x knowing
you have a very offensively oriented hand with extra values. Passing 5d with
the first example hand I gave is fine but really poor hand evaluation with the
hand given in the problem.

100% south for leaving the very reasonable x in.

OP is playing Acol, he may well be playing a weak NT so your 2♠ raise may not be possible. S's problem is that he doesn't know about the double fit, N could be looking at KJxxx, KJxx, KQ, xx where you're potentially taking a small fortune out of 5♦ but are struggling to make 5♠.

[NickRW]

Concur with the sentiments about South's 2♠ rebid. But if North is going to bid 4♠, nothing would have been lost with a 4♣ bid surely to alert South about the double fit

[Cyberyeti]

NickRW, on 2014-June-25, 04:17, said:

Concur with the sentiments about South's 2♠ rebid. But if North is going to bid 4♠, nothing would have been lost with a 4♣ bid surely to alert South about the double fit

I thought about that, but isn't partner with AQxxx now going to think the suit is solid ?

[eagles123]

Trinidad, on 2014-June-25, 02:22, said:

I would say that missing the good slam is what happened.

For me most of the blame goes to South for bidding only 2♠. But North is not free of blame either. The only defensive tricks he has are the ♦K and the ♠A, he knows of the double fit in the black suits (most likely 2x9), can see that the opponents are likely to have a double fit in the red suits (8-10 or 9-9), and he chooses unilaterally to defend. The very least he could have done is ask his partner for his opinion.

Rik

would pass over 5D have been forcing?

[Cyberyeti]

eagles123, on 2014-June-25, 04:48, said:

would pass over 5D have been forcing?

Not in my book and I play more FP than most people. If 3♠ was bid by S, or N had done something stronger than just bid 4♠ it would be for me.

[Trinidad]

eagles123, on 2014-June-25, 04:48, said:

would pass over 5D have been forcing?

For this NS pair it certainly should. But there are pairs where 4♠ doesn't set up a forcing pass (because 4♠ basically shows a lot of spades and not necessarily much else).

If pass isn't forcing for the OP, then North should not have bid 4♠, but instead should have made a bid that set up a forcing pass situation. He certainly has a hand that wants to set up a forcing pass.

So, let me rephrase from "the double of 5♦ is wrong" to "either the double of 5♦ is wrong, or (in case pass wasn't forcing) 4♠ was wrong".

Rik

[helene_t]

2♠ may be an underbid but not quite as much of an underbid as it would have been for a strong-NT pair. Playing weak NT, the single raise is done on balanced 15-16 counts and unbalanced 11-14 counts (the latter will obviously often be short in opps' suit).

[gszes]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-25, 02:36, said:

OP is playing Acol, he may well be playing a weak NT so your 2♠ raise may not be possible. S's problem is that he doesn't know about the double fit, N could be looking at KJxxx, KJxx, KQ, xx where you're potentially taking a small fortune out of 5♦ but are struggling to make 5♠.

Bridge is a game of % the more time we have to show stuff the more accurate our bidding. We
did not have that much time here so we must guess more. How often is poor partner going to
be looking at KQ of diamonds when the opps have 9/10 of them. My "guess" is not often at all
and it is not a failure of imagination but a knowledgeable guess that would make south continue
on to 5s (especially after the simple 2s rebid). Sure once in a while the guess is wrong but
in the long run this is one guess that will probably be right well over 85% of the time.

[Cyberyeti]

gszes, on 2014-June-25, 05:48, said:

Bridge is a game of % the more time we have to show stuff the more accurate our bidding. We
did not have that much time here so we must guess more. How often is poor partner going to
be looking at KQ of diamonds when the opps have 9/10 of them. My "guess" is not often at all
and it is not a failure of imagination but a knowledgeable guess that would make south continue
on to 5s (especially after the simple 2s rebid). Sure once in a while the guess is wrong but
in the long run this is one guess that will probably be right well over 85% of the time.

He doesn't need the Q to achieve the same thing most of the time, it's probably not a trick, I just added it to give more points.

I said I would bid 3♠ but I think it's marginal, in weak NT acol you have 4 way more often for a 2♠ raise than you do playing strong NT so some pairs would just bid 2♠ here. 5♠ is potentially asking for all sorts of trouble, KQJxx, Jxxx, Kx, Jx is another example where you just aren't making 5♠ on any sensible defence barring a miracle, but even if you get that miracle, you'd probably have been better off defending 5♦X.

This is why I like 2♠ fit from N, now both know about the double fit and bidding on is trivial.

[billw55]

edit: nonsense

[Trinidad]

helene_t, on 2014-June-25, 05:47, said:

2♠ may be an underbid but not quite as much of an underbid as it would have been for a strong-NT pair. Playing weak NT, the single raise is done on balanced 15-16 counts and unbalanced 11-14 counts (the latter will obviously often be short in opps' suit).

That is all true. But I think that the South hand (with 13 HCP) is worth quite a bit more than 11-14. That is not because it is unbalanced, but because it has all the right high cards. (You could view it as 1 ace in hearts and 3 aces in clubs = 16+ points.) ♠AJxx ♥KJx ♦Q ♣Kxxxx has the same shape and an extra HCP, but now 2♠ would be correct (certainly in a weak 1NT context, but probably even in a strong 1NT context).

Rik