[ArcLight]

IMPs, Favorable
Pard is not a super light opener, their opening bids are consider sound.

You are East and hold:
♠J 9 x
♥J 9 8 7 6 5
♦A K x x
♣ void

bidding goes:

S . W . N . E
p 1♣ 2♣* 2♥
2♠ 3♥ 4♦ ?

* = alerted as a natural club suit and not Michaels. This si a pick up game so you suspect LHO may think this is Michaels (5-5 in the majors)

(Any disagreement with the 2♥ bid?)

What do you bid now after 4♦?
- DBL (penalty)
- Pass (give pard the final choice)
- 4♥

[mike777]

1) agree 2h
2) double loud!

[foo]

1= agree with the 2♥ bid

2=
a= If playing Support X's, then Opener very likely has raised on 4 card support, giving Us a 10 card ♥ fit.
b= Defending with a void is often not fun (see Mike Lawrence and others on this topic).
c= You have a 7 loser hand opposite a sound opening bid and at least a 9 card, likely a 10 card, card trump fit.

The percentage action seems to be to Bid 4♥.
(if They bid "5 over 4", X Them. You rate to have at least 4 defensive tricks between you. -1 X'd is not better than your game. -2 X'd is.)

[han]

In my experience defending with a void is often fun.

[jdonn]

foo, mike lawrence and others might have written about defending with a void IN THE TRUMP SUIT

[whereagles]

2♥ was ok. 4♥ now.

[skjaeran]

2♥ is fine with me. Minimum with regard to high card strength, but there's more to hand evaluation than that.

Why should I double 4♦ now? I'd never expect that to be natural in this sequence. And I'd like partner to lead a ♣ if we defend some ♠ contract. 4♥ it is now.

[han]

jdonn, on Nov 18 2007, 02:14 PM, said:

foo, mike lawrence and others might have written about defending with a void IN THE TRUMP SUIT

LOL, so true.

[foo]

jdonn, on Nov 18 2007, 02:14 PM, said:

foo, mike lawrence and others might have written about defending with a void IN THE TRUMP SUIT

Any void is a potential communication problem. Given that the defense usually has fewer values than Declarer to provide communication, additional communication problems can make the Defense's task much more difficult.

Yes, being able to get a ruff is nice. But the Defense's goal is not to take one trick, the goal is to take enough tricks to set the contract.

[mike777]

Wow...I found the comments here very surprising.
Interesting.

[gwnn]

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 03:23 AM, said:

jdonn, on Nov 18 2007, 02:14 PM, said:

foo, mike lawrence and others might have written about defending with a void IN THE TRUMP SUIT

Any void is a potential communication problem. Given that the defense usually has fewer values than Declarer to provide communication, additional communication problems can make the Defense's task much more difficult.

Yes, being able to get a ruff is nice. But the Defense's goal is not to take one trick, the goal is to take enough tricks to set the contract.

foo: defending with a void is bad, for example Mike Lawrence said so.
jdonn: Mike Lawrence did not say that.
foo: defending with a void is bad

[foo]

I would not say defending with a void is "bad". That's far too rigid for something that is so situation dependent. I'd say defending with a void is often more difficult that defending w/o one, and therefore one should tend to lean away from defense and towards play when you have what could be a good void for play and a bad void for defense.

The point I was trying to make is that successful defense, like successful Declarer play, is often hampered if there are communication problems between the two hands.

I wish there was a simple rule here, but there isn't.

[keylime]

I'm taking insurance here. 4♥. I think doubling doesn't help us, and since they are confused potentially, let 'em guess last.

[awm]

I'd double here, opponents could be in real trouble.

Sure, much of the time they will go back to 5♣. But I think my double of 4♦ helps partner more than my bidding 4♥ would in this auction. Partner knows I have diamonds locked up, probably nothing in clubs, and will double/compete appropriately.

If they do sit for 4♦X, we're sure to beat it (I have two tricks plus a ruff, all I need is for my partner with an opening bid to take a trick in order to set). It's quite possible that with the awful club break they will go down a lot in 4♦ or 5♣, and there is no guarantee that we were even making 4♥.

[mikeh]

I'm bidding 4♥, and I hope I do so in tempo.

It sounds to me as if RHO is going to want to bid again, especially if I did not appear to be weighing a double of 4♦. His primary suit is clubs, and he bid 4♦.... which shows a willingness to play 5♣ where I come from. So I don't expect to get to defend 4♦ doubled very often.

And when I may be defending 4♦ if I doubled, I may be defending 5♦ if I bid.

OTOH, if we are to defend 5♣, I want partner's double to be real and not merely a double because once I hammer 4♦, they ought not to be allowed to play 5♣ undoubled. I don't think that my 4♥ at favourable establishes a FP (altho I may be kidding myself). And if RHO is at all sane, I can't be sure we can beat 5♣. Imagine partner with KQxx AKxx xx xxx. The opps hold xx void QJ10xx AKQ10xx opposite Axxx xxxx x Jxxx (I hope I haven't duplicated any holding or dealt more than 13 cards in a suit)

As foo says, defending with a void is no fun

[bid_em_up]

Quote

Any void is a potential communication problem. Given that the defense usually has fewer values than Declarer to provide communication, additional communication problems can make the Defense's task much more difficult.

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 01:18 PM, said:

The point I was trying to make is that successful defense, like successful Declarer play, is often hampered if there are communication problems between the two hands.

Are you really trying to claim that a void in the OPPONENTS trump suit presents a communication problem for the defending side? Exactly how many times do you expect to be crossing to and from hands using their trump suit?

If anything, a void in their trump suit is a good thing for the defending side, under many circumstances, as it means that partner may well have a trump stack (unless the auction has indicated they have a huge fit). And even if he doesn't have a huge trump stack, he may well have at least four trumps, which means declarer may need to draw several rounds of trumps, leaving him with fewer to score seperately.

[jugarul]

2♥ok
4♥now...I am sure it will be a good contract...X sounds much worse...

[neilkaz]

awm, on Nov 19 2007, 05:43 PM, said:

I'd double here, opponents could be in real trouble.

Sure, much of the time they will go back to 5♣. But I think my double of 4♦ helps partner more than my bidding 4♥ would in this auction. Partner knows I have diamonds locked up, probably nothing in clubs, and will double/compete appropriately.

If they do sit for 4♦X, we're sure to beat it (I have two tricks plus a ruff, all I need is for my partner with an opening bid to take a trick in order to set). It's quite possible that with the awful club break they will go down a lot in 4♦ or 5♣, and there is no guarantee that we were even making 4♥.

I suspect we are probably making 4♥ but no guarantee and we could lose a ♥ or two and maybe 3♠.

I also think the opps may be in trouble and we can probably set 4♦x two tricks for +500.

I'll go head hunting here with an X at favorable vul.

[ArcLight]

4♥ was making, a spard had 4 hearts to the KQ. His club suit ws Q J T 9.

Declarer played poorly and 4♦X went for -800.

But I think I should have bid game, withb a known 9+ card trump suit.
My concern was the ratty spades, and pards wasted values in clubs.
But the advantage of bidding game is maybe the opps bid one more and then they can be doubled.