[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

---

P-(2♦)-DBL-(P)
What do you bid?

[mike777]

I am partner of dbl, yes? If so I wish I opened 1D.

2NT

Of course 3d is very reasonable.

If partner of 2d bidder than 3D

[inquiry]

3♠ - if it is a splinter (i am always mis-sorting my hands... got a LOT more clubs than it looks like here).... of course, if i have done this before with this partner, then 3S is out.

If 3♠ is something other than splinter (like fit jump), then a simple 3♦ is enough, don't give lho opponents a chance to differnetiate between a 2♥ bid and a 3♥ bid by passing. If you bid 3♦, lho 3♥ might be a stretch or might be full valued 3♥ jump if you passed. Force them to guess. At this vul, and iwth this defense, i am not taking a 5♦ save over 4♥.

[Double !]

Ben:
Is it possible that you mis-read the bidding? (or else I did, so shut my mouth) As I read it, your partner dbl'd lho's 2 diamond bid, rho passed, and now it's our bid?

My plan is to first bid 2NT, unlikely to be leb, (it really doesn't matter, I have the values) Even if P interprets it as leb, that's all good. I can then bid 3D over P's expected 3C bid, asking him for his better major), and then bid/correct to 3S if he bids 3H. Hopefully P will get the message of a near opener with wasted diamond values and only 4 spades. With 5 spades it's just possible that I might have responded 3 spades initially. (BTW: I personally wouldn't open this hand one diamond even though i can rebid 1S. In addition, only 24 zars if I got count correct.)

[hrothgar]

I'm passing. Given the crap that folks preempt on these days, converting doubles for penalties is becoming increasingly more attractive.

White versus white is a great time time to defend.
+500 is a very attractive score.

Feel better about passing at Match Points.

For what its worth, X should definitely be Lebensohl...

[beatrix45]

This looks to me like a hand with no more than 16 trumps - eight ♦ and eight ♠ - and it might be less. My ♦ holding tells me it's probably a 15 trick hand, AND the cards (other than ♦) look like they are sitting well for us. My black suit honours are behind the dummy. Indeed, if partner is:

Q952
AQ105
8
AJ92

they may not have any tricks outside of ♦ with no way to get to dummy to lead trumps.

According to my arithmetic, if we have ten tricks in ♠, they would likely have only five tricks in ♦ (+500 vs +420) - say, four ♦ and a heart or five ♦ period. If we have nine tricks in ♠, they should have six in ♦ (+300 vs +140).

On a really good day partner will hold:

Q85
AKJ4
82
A1086

and we will get +500 versus +110 or -50 at the other table.

I PASS.

[Walddk]

Tough one. I may hit partner with 3-4-1-5, and then we will never get to notrump if I jump to 3♠. Maybe it's not that bad after all actually. 2NT (if natural) of 3♠, both could be right.

I do not pass although that could be the winning call too (the shape above). I will go for 3♠ after some thought. And mind you, that is not UI for my partner. I could have thought about anything, just like I did here before I decided to bid 3♠.

Roland

[kgr]

Double !, on Apr 30 2005, 06:19 PM, said:

Ben:
Is it possible that you mis-read the bidding? (or else I did, so shut my mouth) As I read it, your partner dbl'd lho's 2 diamond bid, rho passed, and now it's our bid?

Yes. That was the question.

I did bid 3♠. Partner did have a minimum dbl with 2-card ♠ and passed the 3♠. He complained that I had only 4-card. I should minimal have 5 he said.
I was not wondering that he was right. I just said 'sp'
But I wondered it is maybe better to bid 2NT first and bid ♠ if partner bids e.g 3♥.
Bidding 3♠ gives problem if partner only has 3-card (or 2-card, but with minimu hand he should at least have 3 or have passed otherwise) and no ♦ stopper.
....but I least took the expert choice (Roland and Jlall choose 3♠ as I, so they are the experts for now

[inquiry]

Double !, on Apr 30 2005, 02:19 PM, said:

Ben:
Is it possible that you mis-read the bidding?

Yes, i did misread the bidding.. we really need those bidding format thing, but I plead total lack of sleep.

Ok, now i let one of my good psyches out of the bag... dang. I thought it very clever to pose it in the question....

I bid 3♠ again, for a differnet reason...

Ben

[Walddk]

kgr, on Apr 30 2005, 07:00 PM, said:

I did bid 3♠. Partner did have a minimum dbl with 2-card ♠ and passed the 3♠. He complained that I had only 4-card. I should minimal have 5 he said.

Could you perhaps, politely of course, tell your partner next time you see him that tabling a doubleton spade is an insult to a serious bridge player like you? And while you are at it, maybe tell him that you didn't ask for unsolicited lessons?

A jump in a major as a response to a TO double doesn't promise more than 4 cards. He can get that in writing and High Court if he wants.

Did he have a 2425 shape and a minimum? If yes, maybe he should think about passing 2♦ next time he gets a hand like this.

Roland

[beatrix45]

Jlall, on Apr 30 2005, 07:26 PM, said:

As for the opps having 5 tricks if you have 10, that is very optimistic. If declarer has 1 side suit trick and 5 trump tricks thats already 6 tricks. The LOTT does not work very well when they have AKT9xx of trumps and are able to take alot of tricks regardless of fit. Even assuming your calculations are accurate and when you make 420 you get 500, thats not much of a difference (2 imps). Likewise 140 and 300 is only 4 imps. What about when our dear pard is 4405 and we go -180 vs our +420? That is alot of imps.

/end rant about LOTT

Gosh, I don't want to start a Holy War here. I would never say the case for passing was in any way ironclad. If partner is void in diamonds, passing loses big time. Also, when declarer has a good six bagger - as she very well might on this auction - that adds roughly one to the total trick count. I was counting on just one trump trick (five for declarer). There is only one chance in nine that my partner has the ten of diamonds, plus another, roughly, ten percent chance that declarer won't have a dummy entry - the ♠ king or the ♣ queen won't do.

Placing the opponents with A and K of ♦, there are another 22 HCP outstanding. Partner is marked with (I think it is fair to say) 12 HCP or more. With partner having 12-15 HCP, I don't want to be in game - this is, after all, a bit of a misfit hand. In these cases, I would settle for any plus score. So, how can 9 or 10 HCP translate into three tricks for the opponents (and a bad-for-us, but non-ruinous +180 [would that be 2, 3 or 4 IMPs??] for the opposition)?

♥ AKQ
♥ AK and QJ of ♣
♥ AQ onside (i.e. in dummy) and the ♠ K with the 2 ♦ opener
♥ AQJ onside (i.e. in dummy)

There are some other winning cases for the opponents, but do you see my point? My AJ of ♠ figures to be over the ♠ K or Q in the dummy and I believe this reduces the opponents winning cases to a distinct minority.

With no long suit and a QJ wasted in ♦, it takes a lot for our side to make a game on this hand even with a ♠ fit.

KQxx
AQJx
x
A10xx

is still well short of a lock. On defense, we figure to get two ♠, one ♥ or two if the opening 2♦ bidder has the K (a 25 to 33 % chance??), one natural ♦, two ♣ and a ♥ ruff on defense. Passing is either +2 IMPs or -3 IMPs assuming game is bid and made at the other table.

Finally, we have the slam hand.

KQxx
AKJxx
x
AQx

This will hold declarer to four tricks. +800 versus +980 if you get there (lose 5) or +800 versus +420 if you don't (win 9).

[pclayton]

2♠ for now.

If Im reading the problem right, that is.

If its MP's I'll pass I guess.

[kgr]

Walddk, on May 1 2005, 03:50 AM, said:

kgr, on Apr 30 2005, 07:00 PM, said:

I did bid 3♠. Partner did have a minimum dbl with 2-card ♠ and passed the 3♠. He complained that I had only 4-card. I should minimal have 5 he said.

Could you perhaps, politely of course, tell your partner next time you see him that tabling a doubleton spade is an insult to a serious bridge player like you?

I would have tried if he was a beginner. An self-declared advanced player should know this or will never know it. (btw: he didn't play very bad otherwise)

Quote

And while you are at it, maybe tell him that you didn't ask for unsolicited lessons?

My profile says "free lessons welcome" (In fact I did add it because I never know I could once play with you ). I just said 'sorry partner'. That looked like the best reaction

Quote

A jump in a major as a response to a TO double doesn't promise more than 4 cards. He can get that in writing and High Court if he wants.

By this I got both: In writing from the High Court (or is that rather Fred than you?).

Quote

Did he have a 2425 shape and a minimum? If yes, maybe he should think about passing 2♦ next time he gets a hand like this.

If I remember well he had 2434, with Axx in ♦. As said before they preempt with less these days. 2♦ opener had something like KT9xx (Only 5-card).

[kgr]

                                                                                        

Scoring: IMP

P-(2D)-DBL-(P)-
3S-All Pass

---

 
This is the complete hand. As you can see I had only 3-card ♦. So 3♠ is even more clear then 2NT or Pass now.

[Walddk]

kgr, on May 1 2005, 03:34 AM, said:

                                                                                        

Scoring: IMP

P-(2D)-DBL-(P)-
3S-All Pass

---

 
This is the complete hand. As you can see I had only 3-card ♦. So 3♠ is even more clear then 2NT or Pass now.

Your partner's take-out double is hrmpfg! (any other appropriate word in this context will get me in court for defamation I suspect).

Roland

[Fluffy]

3♦ followed by 3NT or 4♠ seems the proper auction to me.

[luke warm]

i would have passed with your partner's hand, and would have bid 3♠ over his double... a t/o double should be prepared to pass any bid, raise any bid, name a new suit, or bid some number of nt, each promising different strengths