[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

P - (P) - 1♣* - (2♠!)
P - (3♠!) - P - (P)
X - (P) - 4♣ - (4♠!)
?

---

*16+ any shape

Playing in a team match against expert opponents who are capable of psyching, but rarely do (i.e. both are over 40), you come across this strange auction. At the table I decided to trap pass in the hopes the auction wouldn't die and it didn't. It lead to a couple of interesting discussions.

1) Would you start with a trap pass or 2NT (GF in our methods)?

2) What is your fourth call going to be?

[joker_gib]

Well, is the dbl of 3♠ not already penalty ?

I would have doubled 2♠ for take out before, wouldn't I ? (I don't play precision but that seems logical)

Alain

[Echognome]

Double of 3♠ was for penalty. Partner pulled. That is the idea.

[mr1303]

Presumably partner heard me double 3S. Therefore I can pass 4S and leave the final decision up to him. To double again looks masterminding, and if he wants to bid something else my hand looks relatively suitable.

[joker_gib]

mr1303, on Feb 28 2006, 11:26 AM, said:

Presumably partner heard me double 3S. Therefore I can pass 4S and leave the final decision up to him. To double again looks masterminding, and if he wants to bid something else my hand looks relatively suitable.

Agree

[coyot]

Partner is marked with a spade void, therefore we have at least 25 of the outstanding HCP in remaining suits. I would close my eyes and bid 6♣ (expecting partner to bid 7 with something extra).

If I were sure that 4NT would be asking for four aces and club king, it would be a possibility, but I don't see how would I find out about the red queens that would seem to be necessary for the grand... So just bid 6♣, expecting to find partner with 0346 or similar shape. 55 is out of question because he would definitely start with the higher suit . Not sure how would be behave with 0445, but I think that 4♠ would be the most appropriate bid by then (showing the shortness and letting me to pick a minor as I'm definitely not interested in his four hearts, not having doubled negatively).

[hrothgar]

Matt presented this problem to me last night. For what its worth, I replicated the start of the auction (Trap pass over 2♠ and business double over 3♠)

Once partner has bid 4♣, he's pretty much marked with a Spade void. Accordingly, he has an offensively oriented hand with long clubs. More important, the opponents are sitting on the AKQ of Spades and these aren't pulling any weight on defense.

To me, the critical question is whether this hand makes 6 or 7 clubs.
I'm bidding 5♦ and giving us a chance to investigate a grand.

[MickyB]

Agree that a club slam is the way to go.

What else could you have held for your pass? Am thinking partner has to be a little light on high cards to not be able to bid over 3♠ despite holding a void.

[luke warm]

i can't imagine doubling again.. and i don't know how partner would take any other bid (even 5S)... i'd have to bid 6C

[cherdano]

As a side note, Matt, I don't understand how you can give this problem without giving the spade spots, unless you were really ♠J5432.

I agree with all Justin said, I think trying for a grand is an overbid. I expect a 4-0 trump break on this auction, which can be a big problem in case we have to ruff diamonds.

Arend

[Echognome]

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 05:33 PM, said:

As a side note, Matt, I don't understand how you can give this problem without giving the spade spots, unless you were really ♠J5432.

I agree with all Justin said, I think trying for a grand is an overbid. I expect a 4-0 trump break on this auction, which can be a big problem in case we have to ruff diamonds.

Arend

I didn't think the spade spots were that relevant to be honest. I definitely would have included the 10.

I pretty much agree with the general view here, although only Justin said he wouldn't have trap passed to begin with.

The view in the post mortem at the pub is to bid 2NT immediately and then let partner decide where to go. That would have worked nicely on this hand.

[cherdano]

Echognome, on Feb 28 2006, 07:38 PM, said:

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 05:33 PM, said:

As a side note, Matt, I don't understand how you can give this problem without giving the spade spots, unless you were really ♠J5432.

I didn't think the spade spots were that relevant to be honest. I definitely would have included the 10.

Well, the ♠8 has quite a reasonable chance of becoming a natural second trump trick (assume a random 6-5-1-1 split), even the ♠7 could become a trick via a trump promotion, or ♠6 via an overruff.

[joshs]

Echognome, on Feb 28 2006, 05:05 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

P - (P) - 1♣* - (2♠!)
P - (3♠!) - P - (P)
X - (P) - 4♣ - (4♠!)
?

---

*16+ any shape

Playing in a team match against expert opponents who are capable of psyching, but rarely do (i.e. both are over 40), you come across this strange auction. At the table I decided to trap pass in the hopes the auction wouldn't die and it didn't. It lead to a couple of interesting discussions.

1) Would you start with a trap pass or 2NT (GF in our methods)?

2) What is your fourth call going to be?

Over 2S I would pass and wait. I am not sure if I want to defend or declare, and I don't want to suggest NT with only 1 point "wasted" in their suits.
After partner pulls your penalty x of 3S to 4C, even after not bidding 4C directly you have a huge hand. Opposite - Axx Axxx AKxxxx and a red Q you have play for 7. Having passed before I don't expect both red queens, or 1 red Q and a 7'th club, so I think bidding 6C here is enough.

[Echognome]

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 06:03 PM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 28 2006, 07:38 PM, said:

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 05:33 PM, said:

As a side note, Matt, I don't understand how you can give this problem without giving the spade spots, unless you were really ♠J5432.

I didn't think the spade spots were that relevant to be honest. I definitely would have included the 10.

Well, the ♠8 has quite a reasonable chance of becoming a natural second trump trick (assume a random 6-5-1-1 split), even the ♠7 could become a trick via a trump promotion, or ♠6 via an overruff.

Assuming a "random" 6-5-1-1 split seems pretty odd given LHO raised spades. Spades were 5-5-3-0 around the table, and I'm pretty sure was fairly marked on the bidding. The only other possible option would have been 6-5-2-0 with the raiser have Hx or HH. You're gonna make your small spades anyway as declarer will surely be forced.

[cherdano]

Echognome, on Mar 1 2006, 01:11 AM, said:

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 06:03 PM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 28 2006, 07:38 PM, said:

cherdano, on Feb 28 2006, 05:33 PM, said:

As a side note, Matt, I don't understand how you can give this problem without giving the spade spots, unless you were really ♠J5432.

I didn't think the spade spots were that relevant to be honest. I definitely would have included the 10.

Well, the ♠8 has quite a reasonable chance of becoming a natural second trump trick (assume a random 6-5-1-1 split), even the ♠7 could become a trick via a trump promotion, or ♠6 via an overruff.

Assuming a "random" 6-5-1-1 split seems pretty odd given LHO raised spades. Spades were 5-5-3-0 around the table, and I'm pretty sure was fairly marked on the bidding. The only other possible option would have been 6-5-2-0 with the raiser have Hx or HH. You're gonna make your small spades anyway as declarer will surely be forced.

Of course after the 4♠ raise you know that, but when you decide whether to trap pass, I think a 6-5-1-1 split is what you should expect. (Yes at 4♠ the spade spots don't matter any more.)

Arend

[civill]

Echognome,now you take a trap pass at red vs white,then you should know how to deal with your trap.
At the 4th round,a grand Club slam may be lost.

[pclayton]

I think we can make 6♣, but 7 seems out of the question. Assuming your pass of 2♠ was weak or trap, pard didn't have the hand to venture out to the 4 level alone. Pard also couldn't make a TOx of 3♠, so I'm not expecting a 3 suiter.

Seems pard has along the likes of: ---, Axx, AQxx, AJxxxx, which seems like a hand that upgrades from a 2♣ opener. 6♣ looks like it has a decent play so I'll bid it.

[han]

Agree with 6C, the trap pass actually worked out quite nicely as it gives you a fairly good picture of partner's hand. What happened at the table Matt?

[Echognome]

Hannie, on Mar 1 2006, 07:59 PM, said:

Agree with 6C, the trap pass actually worked out quite nicely as it gives you a fairly good picture of partner's hand. What happened at the table Matt?

Oh sorry. I forgot to mention. I made the (now absolutely clear) mistake of doubling again. We took 4♠ for 800 and gained a few imps on the board vs 5♣+1 at the other table. However, as Han said, the opponents bidding and the trap pass have actually helped matter and we should find 6♣.