[Fluffy]

Scoring: IMP

W - N - E - S
1♥-ps-3♦*-X
4♥-ps-ps-ps

---

3♦* = 7-9, 4 card support

Lead was a club, to the ♣J and Ace, next came a heart to the jack and ace, and instead of returning a club I tried ♦A first wich obviously was not a success.

-420 when +620 is avaible is not a great score certainly.

[655321]

What was the double of 3♦?

If it was takeout of hearts (my choice), North has an easy 4♠ bid.

If it asked for a diamond lead, something strange is happening. Has declarer really opened 1♥ with AKQTxx clubs on the side, or is declarer 5-5 in the reds, leaving partner void in diamonds, but with improbable length in the black suits. Would partner lead the 8 from QT98x? If not, then I guess you need to play for the actual layout.

[whereagles]

Dbl 4♥ to show extras. Seems enough to me.

[gnasher]

I always seem to be disenfranchised in these polls. How about including a "something else" option next time?

Regarding the bidding, I think it best to play the double of 3♦ as a takeout double of hearts, but from North's subsequent silence I assume that double just showed diamonds.

The next best meaning is to show diamonds and a desire to compete. If it meant that, North should have bid 4♠, which obviously shows a diamond fit.

If the double just asked for a diamond lead, blame your methods.

If you hadn't bother to discuss what the double meant, blame yourselves.

Regarding the play, I agree with 655321.

[andy_h]

Agree with 655321

[helene_t]

I think North can bid 4♠ even if he doesn't know what the dbl means.

If dbl is t/o, 4♠ is obvious.
If dbl shows diamonds, 5♦ should be an acceptable contract and South will understand that North's must have diamonds for his 4♠ bid, so South will bid 5♦ if he hasn't spade support.

[Codo]

No matter what the double shows, North owes South at least one bid.
Even if the double was for a lead, it does not show a shortness and even AKJ in Diamonds and out is a nice fit to norths hand.
I agree that he should bid 4 Spade as COG opposite a double that shows diamonds and 4 Spade to play opposite a t/o double.

For the play: I had never ever read the eight as a singelton and returned that suit immideately.
I don´t know your methods, but I bet that "singelton" was not the only possible holding for your partner in clubs.

Okay, he does not have KQ8x but maybe he can have one honour? Or a doubelton? He SURELY does not have 5-2-5-1 where you need to shift now. He had bid different, hadn`t he?

[whereagles]

Codo, on Mar 31 2008, 11:02 AM, said:

No matter what the double shows, North owes South at least one bid.

I don't think it's fair to insist that the WEAK hand should bid. Weak hands should only bid if they're strong on the context. In the present hand, unless you explicitly agreed that dbl to 3♦ is a take-out of hearts, North has every right to think dbl = diamonds, in which case the most he can do is to bid 5 DIAMS.

[MFA]

I find it very superior to play X of 3♦ as takeout of hearts.
If X shows diamonds, south has an easy double of 4♥ on the second round.

(Hopefully ) no partner will lead a doubleton club with a singleton trump when we have X'ed 3♦ to show diamonds. So south has a good shot on working out the position in the defense.

[Cascade]

Fluffy, on Mar 31 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

W - N - E - S
1♥-ps-3♦*-X
4♥-ps-ps-ps

---

3♦* = 7-9, 4 card support

Lead was a club, to the ♣J and Ace, next came a heart to the jack and ace, and instead of returning a club I tried ♦A first wich obviously was not a success.

-420 when +620 is avaible is not a great score certainly.

A second double depends how much the first double shows as does whether north should bid over the first double.

At this vulnerability I would play that the first double shows a pretty decent hand and takeout of hearts (not lead directional). I would expect north to bid opposite this sort of double.

[benlessard]

Quote

South has not played enough high level bridge, you have to X the second time around in these spots. Sometimes they make but they can and will routinely bid 4H with any hand that has 6 hearts, any hand that is 5-5, probably most hands that are 5431 if it's a stiff spade, etc. You can pass against little old ladies but there is just way too much risk to pass against a modern expert. Hopefully this hand will teach south.

Disagree. Having 3S and 2H is a big drawback for Xing again. For me south has a clear pass & its not close.

Why north didnt bid 4S is something i just dont understand. The X of 3D is at least suggesting that 3S or 4m can make (remember NS are red so south wont put his head out just for the fun of it).

QJxxx
xx
Qtxxx
x

... what more do you want ? I mean usually you will have complete garbage in this situation.. You have points + a 5-5 and there is good chance partner has a stiff H.

100% blame to north. 0% blame to south. Not close at all.

[Yogeshdg]

South 's pass is very normal.I would say North hasnt played any bridge at all. He/she should bid 4♠!. Why pass?

x of 3♦ isnt wrong and perfectly normal.

By the way if south xes again (as some ppl recommend) i doubt a north player who couldnt bid 4♠ the first time will do it now LOL .

For all double dummy guys who claim 4♠ is -1 on ♦ lead who is going to lead ♦ when west didnt open 1♣ and jump in ♥ showing a two suiter?Hehe.

Oh by the way A♦ is normal at trick 2. Who is gonna lead ♣ back unless he can see all 4 hands?(Again did west show his 2 suiter? If u c an read that ♣8 opening lead as a singleton you are probably some bridge god. So what do we have here?

4♥ making non vul while 4♠ vul is making.

[mikeh]

benlessard, on Apr 1 2008, 04:08 AM, said:

Quote

South has not played enough high level bridge, you have to X the second time around in these spots. Sometimes they make but they can and will routinely bid 4H with any hand that has 6 hearts, any hand that is 5-5, probably most hands that are 5431 if it's a stiff spade, etc. You can pass against little old ladies but there is just way too much risk to pass against a modern expert. Hopefully this hand will teach south.

Disagree. Having 3S and 2H is a big drawback for Xing again. For me south has a clear pass & its not close.

Why north didnt bid 4S is something i just dont understand. The X of 3D is at least suggesting that 3S or 4m can make (remember NS are red so south wont put his head out just for the fun of it).

QJxxx
xx
Qtxxx
x

... what more do you want ? I mean usually you will have complete garbage in this situation.. You have points + a 5-5 and there is good chance partner has a stiff H.

100% blame to north. 0% blame to south. Not close at all.

I agree entirely with Justin.

Any good player, sitting west, will bid 4♥ on hands on which he has power and hands on which he has shape. While I don't know the statistics in terms of which is more frequent, my feeling is that the latter is at least as probable as the former.

And when he has bid on shape, he is out stealing.. and when you pass 4♥ you are letting him get away with it.

You simply have to double. This is obviously not free of risk, but good bridge entails taking risks (so does bad bridge, of course)

Your hand is such that the chances of a redouble, when bid on power, is low. The chances of an overtrick are very low. The chances that we have game or +300, when partner can't bid, are high. In the modern pressure game, we simply have to accept that the opps will sometimes 'get' us... because, if we don't, they will 'get' us by stealing our board.

BTW, while I understand the criticisms of North's pass over 4♥, I think the criticism is ill-founded.

In my view, as with many others, the best use of double of Bergen raises (certainly of the constructive variety) is takeout, not 'natural'. But it appears that either the partnership played it as natural, or they had not discussed it.

If it is merely: I have good, long diamonds.. then bidding either 4♠ or 5♦ red v white is extremely dangerous... what is there about N's hand that says that he can take 10 tricks in diamonds opposite some 2=2=6=3 hand with AKJxxx in diamonds?

And bidding 4♠ 'on the way' will accurately say I have long spades and diamonds and a hand too weak to overcall after 1♥... but it is a huge gamble. You'd want to bid that way if partner has spades, but you surely don't want to bid that way when he doesn't.

OTOH, after a second double, 4♠ is clear, regardless of what the first double meant... now partner has power and, if he runs from spades, maybe we'll make diamonds. But I'd expect him to have tolerance for spades. And partner's power makes it highly probable that opener is bidding on shape, and thus I'd expect a stiff heart in dummy, or, as here, that opener has a second suit, which has to be clubs... either way, partner has some spades.

[benlessard]

Quote

I agree entirely with Justin.

Any good player, sitting west, will bid 4♥ on hands on which he has power and hands on which he has shape. While I don't know the statistics in terms of which is more frequent, my feeling is that the latter is at least as probable as the former.

And when he has bid on shape, he is out stealing.. and when you pass 4♥ you are letting him get away with it.

???? this make no sense for me. Bidding 4H encourage opps to bid 4S, is that what you call a steal ?
(1H)---P----(3D!)----X
(3H)---???
My bid is 4S and not 3S but im not 100% convinced about it. But once west bid 4H then 4S is 100% clear cut. Its easier for north to bid 4S
1- because its more likely south has a stiff H
2- because its might turn out to be a save.
Not bidding 4S over 4H at imps when both game have chance to make is beyond salvation. This is LOTT 101 with 19 trumps (wich im not a big adept by the way).

A--(3H)------X
B--(3H)------P------(p)-------X

C--(1H)---P----(3H!)----X... (here lets assume both 3D & 3H have the same meaning)
D--(1H)---P----(3D!)----X

Its obvious that B is safer then A and that D is much safer then C. But does that mean D could be much weaker then C. Not really because in both case you are showing enough strength to suggest that you can make a partscore on your side. The difference is in the ODR ratio doubling 3D can be bid with less defensive strenght but more shapes like a 4054 wich normally are too dangerous to X 3H with.

Some will play that X 3D is lead directing and that 3H is take-out of H but im not sure its worthwhile in imps.

edited if
(1H)---P----(3D!)----X
(3H)---P----(P)------???
do you feel you are strong enough to X again ?
yes but its marginal.

[mikeh]

Ben, I think you missed a very important point underlying Justin's posting.. certainly a point underlying my agreement with him.

It seems obvious (to me, at least) that North either understood, by agreement, that the double of 3♦ showed diamonds or that NS had no agreement (I am leaving aside the idea that NS had an agreement that the double was takeout, and that North forgot... and no-one with a pulse would have passed 4♥ as north if they both knew and remembered that the double was takeout).

It is in that context that S has to double again... because he has NOT shown his power, and because to pass is to allow the opps to rob him blind.

And it is in that context that an immediate 4♠ by north over 4♥ is ill-advised.. it might work, but if the double of 3♦ could be on AKJxx and out, then it will end up looking silly.

And bidding 4♥ over a lead-directing or ambiguous double is hardly a 'transfer to 4♠'. You are taking that dictum completely out of context. This is white v red, with the opps NOT HAVING SHOWN spades and when our hand could be very big.

Consider: [2♥] P [4♥] ?

Is this auction a transfer to 4♠??? if not, why is the posted auction such a transfer..... when the first double said nothing at all about spades?

[benlessard]

Ok i see, just that everybody who posted thought the X was take-out.

So its a "guess what the agreement is ?" problem that wasnt mentionned in the first place.

I mean its not so tough to put "we had no agreement concerning the X".

Still in imps ill make the safety bid of 4S. im willing to go -800 vs a game just to avoid a stupid double game swing. But passing is reasonnable.

In doubt of the meaning of the X south should have bid 3H.