[Chamaco]

Team match
We are NV vs VULN.

You are dealt, 1st seat:

KJxx-T-Txxx-Axxx


YOU....LHO.....PARD......RHO

Pass...1C......Pass........1H
Pass...2H......Pass.........Pass
?

Do you balance or not ?

[cherdano]

I do.

[luis]

I balance too.
And I'm going to say that whoever says he will pass I bet $25c that he wouldn't pass at the table.
This looks like a typical redemption post where you did something normal as balancing here, and something terrible happened.

[Chamaco]

Alright, I did double.

Pard passed with:

T93-KQ74-Qxx-KT3

We could have set the contract by 1, but I made a mistake defending that allowed to make.

However, I felt the contract was way too close to defend it Xed at IMPS, and I was wondering whether my balancing double should have promised more strength than the hand I actually had

i always thought that in such a sequence (I was a passed hand), a double in the bal seat could come as well from my sort of hand.

My doubt were augmented by the fact I was playing with a real expert: e.g. , a player who has had national achievements in Italy and is regular partner of an ex world champion.

Hence I posted here just to have some feedback on wheher my assessment about the suitability for balancing double here should be reconsidered...

[luis]

Chamaco, on Feb 10 2006, 04:54 PM, said:

Alright, I did double.

Pard passed with:

T93-KQ74-Qxx-KT3

We could have set the contract by 1, but I made a mistake defending that allowed to make.

However, I felt the contract was way too close to defend it Xed at IMPS, and I was wondering whether my balancing double should have promised more than my hand.

i always thought that in such a sequence (I was a passed hand), a double in the bal seat could come as well from my sort of hand.

My doubt were augmented by the fact I was playing with a real expert: e.g. , a player who has had national achievements in Italy and is regular partner of an ex world champion

I think your pd's pass was bad.
I have a partnership rule that there is no hand that can pass a balancing double of a supported 1M-2M major, since in order to make the double effective that hand would have overcalled 1NT before.
So in this hand your pd can try 2NT or 2♠ I'm not sure which call is better but passing and punishing pd for balancing is in my view terrible. In the best scenario you will make pd sweat and suffer to get +100.

[MickyB]

Your double is clearcut. If you had more HCP, your partner would probably have fewer.

[cherdano]

Agree with everything Luis wrote, except I wouldn't consider 2NT with partner's hand, as that would be scrambling with both minors for me.

Arend

[FrancesHinden]

Well, you are going to tell me this is hindsightitis, but I wouldn't double on that hand at IMPs.

[Al_U_Card]

Did your side lead a trump?

[Blofeld]

I would double on your hand.

I don't think pass on your partner's hand is totally unreasonable (best chance for a positive score). I want to say it depends on the state of the match, but IIRC this was board 2 ...

[Sigi_BC84]

FrancesHinden, on Feb 10 2006, 06:55 PM, said:

Well, you are going to tell me this is hindsightitis, but I wouldn't double on that hand at IMPs.

I'm not going to suppose hindsightedness, but would you explain why you would not balance with this hand?

IMO the hand comes quite close to a textbook example for balancing (could be a tad stronger maybe).

--Sigi

[Al_U_Card]

This is typical of the "who's got what?" decision. Since pard did not make a t/o double of 1C (you have length) and did not overcall a D, he has less than a good hand to balance into or he has a better hand with 13-14 hcp with C values. Once you hear the auction, it is much more likely that he has the poorer hand. You will take the tap in a spade contract and it is unlikely that you will go for less than 100. I think it unlikely that they would double 2S or bid 3H so what are their chances of making 2H? The bet is a poor one with the downside being way worse than the upside. Sell to 2H and try your best to beat it.

[mikestar]

Double is resonable, but doubling 1♥ as a passed hand is much better--partner won't be tempted to leave it in at the one level, he will know you have some values and good shape and can push them with the right hand and sell to 2♥ undoubled with the wrong hand.

[kenberg]

I have a partner who says I don't balance enough. I balance less often than I used to, but I think I still balance too much. Since we know the result, I won't try to say what I would have done, but let me suggest a few reasons for caution:

Partner most likely has 4 hearts. There is little reason to think he has another four card suit.

The opponents having 22 high card points is certainly consistent with their auction, in fact they might have 23 (split 14-9).

If partner has a second four card suit it may well be diamonds so we play at the three level.

If he has 3-4-3-3 we will be playing in a 4-3 with the first ruff to be taken in the long hand.

It might not help even if we survive. They may go on to 3H and, with the added distributional information supplied by our intervention, play it one trick better than they would have.

As I say, I balance less often lately, but I think I still end up regretting the balance more often than I regret the pass.


For whatever it's worth, I am aware that this is not the dominant view.

Ken

[Chamaco]

Al_U_Card, on Feb 10 2006, 06:32 PM, said:

Did your side lead a trump?

Yes I lead a trump.

[Chamaco]

mikestar, on Feb 10 2006, 07:29 PM, said:

Double is resonable, but doubling 1♥ as a passed hand is much better--partner won't be tempted to leave it in at the one level, he will know you have some values and good shape and can push them with the right hand and sell to 2♥ undoubled with the wrong hand.

Mike,
after my Mike Lawrence readings on doubles, overcalls and balancing, I thought that doubling immeddiatley 1H would be MORE dangerous than the actual action I did:

my reasoning is: after the 1H response, both opps are unlimited, and I can be sandwiched easily. True, that would happen at the 1 level but still, sticking the nose in an unlimited auction without a long, good suit seems risky to me.

Instead, when a simple raise is getting passed out at the 2-level, opps are limited, and chances are that they won't be able to penalize us (sadly, this is not always true LOL).

And indeed, I was always taught that it's losing bridge (= doouble partscore swings, etc etc), even at IMPS, to give up on 2-level partscores battles when the shape and vulnerability allows us to compete


But, I am here on this forum to listen and learn from you folks, so I'll appreciate any further comments...

[mikeh]

I would double the second time, not the first. But I am close to Frances' view because there are a lot of danger signs here.

There is an excellent chance that we are going to catch partner with the shape he had (if not the values/honour location he had). But passing will all too often lose a partscore battle. I would pass if vulnerable.

Having passed twice (I agree with the second pass at imps), partner should be under no illusions as to my defensive power.

His pass of 2♥ is explicable only if he was tired, or taking a shot. I think he should bid a quiet, confident 2♠. They are unlikely to double, for the same reason that he ought not to be passing your balance.

[han]

I'm certain that I would also have double.

[luke warm]

i would not double at imps... i would at MPs

[pigpenz]

yes i would balance