[CSGibson]

Free, on May 21 2008, 11:30 PM, said:

Why did I pass the previous round?

Now 3♣, as I would've played without opps intervening (2NT was puppet). Let's hope it's enough to keep them out of their ♠ contract.

You passed because partner did not open a strong no trump and because 2♣ is conventional. Any bid except pass is a distortion of your hand.

[Free]

CSGibson, on May 22 2008, 03:15 PM, said:

Free, on May 21 2008, 11:30 PM, said:

Why did I pass the previous round?

Now 3♣, as I would've played without opps intervening (2NT was puppet).  Let's hope it's enough to keep them out of their ♠ contract.

You passed because partner did not open a strong no trump and because 2♣ is conventional. Any bid except pass is a distortion of your hand.

You have no way of signing off in ♣??? Even if it's at 3-level, I think it's better than passing 1NT!

[gnasher]

I hadn't noticed that LHO was a passed hand either. In that case I assume that a penalty double is impossible, but I don't see why he shouldn't have a takeout double. With Q10xx x KQJxx xxx are you really forced to either act over 1♠ or pass throughout?

[655321]

Free, on May 22 2008, 09:18 AM, said:

You have no way of signing off in ♣???    Even if it's at 3-level, I think it's better than passing 1NT!

If I could bid 2♣ to play after 1NT, I would never do it.

We have a balanced hand opposite a weak NT, and not only should 1NT be a good contract, but we will probably get to play it. If we bid 2♣, the most likely outcome is that we will have to choose between defending a cold 2♠, and going down in 3♣.

[Free]

655321, on May 22 2008, 03:23 PM, said:

~snip~ and not only should 1NT be a good contract, but we will probably get to play it. ~snip~

You live in a dream

[gnasher]

The_Hog, on May 22 2008, 02:53 PM, said:

Yes Gnasher its standard in France, so i am told, but have the french been known for system's innovations? I think not.

Perhaps not; my point was that rebidding 1♠ with 4333 is not so much old-fashioned as un-American, or possibly un-Anglophone. If the French do it, I suspect that the same applies to a number of other countries.

[FrancesHinden]

Jlall, on May 22 2008, 02:40 PM, said:

helene_t, on May 22 2008, 08:37 AM, said:

Jlall, on May 22 2008, 02:31 PM, said:

TimG, on May 22 2008, 07:40 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on May 22 2008, 03:38 AM, said:

Why do you think double was takeout?  Most good players play this as a penalty double (I've both gone for and taken some juicy penalties on this auction).

What does a penalty double look like on this auction?

Good hearts and a good hand.

It was a passed hand. Isn't it somewhat speculative to double on a 10-count even with good hearts? Opps could have 14+10 HCPs between them.

Good point, I didn't see it was a passed hand sorry. Then I don't think this double would exist lol, thats the weirdest thing ever.

Neither had I. I agree with Justin.

p.s. and of course I would have doubled 1H with Q10xx xx KQJxx xx as a passed hand, what more do you want?

[gnasher]

Jlall, on May 22 2008, 03:28 PM, said:

gnasher, on May 22 2008, 09:23 AM, said:

With Q10xx x KQJxx xxx are you really forced to either act over 1♠ or pass throughout?

You really wouldn't X 1H with this hand? What are you waiting for, you're a passed hand already!

edit: I would even X 1H with this hand if one of the diamonds was a heart lol.

Maybe that example was a bit too good, but regardless of where you draw the line, are you really saying that there is no hand where you'd pass over 1♠ but then want to make a takeout double when 1NT comes around to you?

[skjaeran]

The_Hog, on May 22 2008, 11:34 AM, said:

benlessard, on May 22 2008, 04:01 PM, said:

Easy pass.

Its quite rare that i bypass a 4 card suit after 1H. We are not in a Walsh situation.

1C---1H
1S that show an unbalanced hand is really not standard.

For me by default a XX is sos when we have showned no game aspiration.

1453 would be my perfect shape to XX  but that would give opps 9S. so a XX probably show a 2443 shape.

Well Ben, I'd argue that these days bidding 1S on a 4-3-3-3 is not standard, unless you are playing some versions of Polish Club or a very old fashioned style. I think you'll find that most like to treat a balanced hand as a balanced hand. Anyway it is a moot point. I am still passing

It may not be standard in US, but I'd say rebidding 1♠ on 4333 over 1♥ is pretty standard over here.

Playing T-walsh, pretty light opening style and quite a lot of transfers I'd be far away from putting me in any old-fashioned camp.

[gnasher]

Jlall, on May 22 2008, 03:51 PM, said:

gnasher, on May 22 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

Maybe that example was a bit too good, but regardless of where you draw the line, are you really saying that there is no hand where you'd pass over 1♠ but then want to make a takeout double when 1NT comes around to you?

Yes, I am definitely saying that. To me it would be like balancing with 2S on this auction (you keep saying 1S btw but they bid 1H, just to clarify). As a PH I already have free reign to X with a lot of hands I couldn't if I was an UPH, and I have the upside that it's totally safe as well (when getting in over 1H).

You surprise me. There are some hands where you know that, facing a hand that couldn't bid over 1♣, you're unlikely to compete beyond the two level. On such a hand I can't see any benefit to bidding immediately. You can pass, planning to double if they stop in 1NT, 2♣ or 2♥, and expect to reach the same contract.

There are at least two disadvantages to a first-round double:
- It acts as a sort of reverse preempt, by giving LHO two calls that he wouldn't have had otherwise.
- If the opponents bid game, it may tell them how to play the hand.

I don't understand your point about safety. It's true that doubling 1♥ means that you can play in 1♠ if things turn nasty, and the opponents will have exchanged less information before deciding whether to double you. Against that, however, you haven't heard the auction either. By passing over 1♥, I avoid getting caught when LHO was about to rebid 1♠ or 2NT, or when RHO was about to move opposite a minimum rebid.

[mike777]

CSGibson, on May 22 2008, 01:51 AM, said:

The situation is thus:  You are in the middle of the pack in a Sunday swiss, fourth of 6 rounds, and the previous four boards have all been 1N or 2 of a minor hands; in other words, no real swings.  Then the following hand comes up.

Scoring: IMP

(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥,
(P)-1N-(P)-P,
(X)-P-(P)-?

---

RHO seems uncomfortable when he passes his partner's double.  Would you XX, bid 2 clubs, or pass it out?  Would your decision change if you were vul?  How about if they were vul?

I know I play this x as conventional(modified DONT, long minor or both majors) as other players do. I just wonder if it is possible someone forgot to alert?

In any case I pass, what else?

[nige1]

CSGibson, on May 22 2008, 01:51 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥,
(P)-1N-(P)-_P,
(X)-_P-(P)-??
The situation is thus:  You are in the middle of the pack in a Sunday swiss, fourth of 6 rounds, and the previous four boards have all been 1N or 2 of a minor hands; in other words, no real swings.  Then the following hand comes up.

RHO seems uncomfortable when he passes his partner's double.  Would you XX, bid 2 clubs, or pass it out?  Would your decision change if you were vul?  How about if they were vul?

---

IMO 2♣ = 10, _P = 9, XX (Psychic) = 4.
Whatever the vulnerability or scoring, LHO has a perfectly routine double with say
♠ QJxx ♥ KQJx ♦ QJxx ♣ x
How else can they land in ♥ if that is their only fit?
If. systemically, this is 1 opener as dealer, then knock off a knave or two.
1N may be safest because bad breaks are likely.

[ArtK78]

nige1, on May 22 2008, 03:03 PM, said:

CSGibson, on May 22 2008, 01:51 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥,
(P)-1N-(P)-_P,
(X)-_P-(P)-??
The situation is thus:  You are in the middle of the pack in a Sunday swiss, fourth of 6 rounds, and the previous four boards have all been 1N or 2 of a minor hands; in other words, no real swings.  Then the following hand comes up.

RHO seems uncomfortable when he passes his partner's double.  Would you XX, bid 2 clubs, or pass it out?  Would your decision change if you were vul?  How about if they were vul?

---

IMO 2♣ = 10, _P = 9, XX (Psychic) = 4.
Whatever the vulnerability or scoring, LHO has a perfectly routine double with say
♠ QJxx ♥ KQJx ♦ QJxx ♣ x
How else can they land in ♥ if that is their only fit?
If. systemically, this is 1 opener as dealer, then knock off a knave or two.
1N may be safest because bad breaks are likely.

Wow! I can't imagine passing that hand or anything close to it. Maybe if you remove both jacks I wouldn't open.

[655321]

Free, on May 22 2008, 09:36 AM, said:

655321, on May 22 2008, 03:23 PM, said:

~snip~ and not only should 1NT be a good contract, but we will probably get to play it.  ~snip~

You live in a dream

Perhaps, but you live in a nightmare.

To clarify, the auction was:

(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥
(P)-1NT-(P)-?

I maintain that if you pass 1NT you are extremely likely to play there. Justin has said (elsewhere in the thread) that there is no hand in the passout seat he could hold where he would double now, because he would have acted earlier. I agree with this sentiment.

You claim you need to bid 3♣ to keep the opponents from bidding spades, after they have passed four (4!) times between them:

Free, on May 22 2008, 02:30 AM, said:

Why did I pass the previous round?

Now 3♣, as I would've played without opps intervening (2NT was puppet).  Let's hope it's enough to keep them out of their ♠ contract.

[nige1]

CSGibson, on May 22 2008, 01:51 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥,
(P)-1N-(P)-_P,
(X)-_P-(P)-??
The situation is thus:  You are in the middle of the pack in a Sunday swiss, fourth of 6 rounds, and the previous four boards have all been 1N or 2 of a minor hands; in other words, no real swings.  Then the following hand comes up. RHO seems uncomfortable when he passes his partner's double.  Would you XX, bid 2 clubs, or pass it out?  Would your decision change if you were vul?  How about if they were vul?

---

nige1, on May 22 2008, 03:03 PM, said:

IMO 2♣ = 10, _P = 9, XX (Psychic) = 4.
Whatever the vulnerability or scoring, LHO has a perfectly routine double with say
♠ QJxx ♥ KQJx ♦ QJxx ♣ x
How else can they land in ♥ if that is their only fit?
If. systemically, this is 1 opener as dealer, then knock off a knave or two.
1N may be safest because bad breaks are likely.

ArtK78, on May 22 2008, 04:06 PM, said:

Wow!  I can't imagine passing that hand or anything close to it.  Maybe if you remove both jacks I wouldn't open.

Some don't stretch to open on 4441s but the example also caters for systemic preferences like ArtK78's
Had the auction instead gone ...
(P)-1♣-(P)-1♥,
(X)
Then, without an alert, I would expect a maximum pass with

• Either a 3-suiter, similar to the hand above but short in ♥.
  
• Or just ♠ and ♦

[gnasher]

Jlall, on May 23 2008, 03:33 AM, said:

I guess this is where I disagree, they never get you even if LHO was about to rebid one of those things, or if RHO has a good hand. People play support XXs and bid 1S or 2N rather than trap passing anyways, and RHO will bid 2N or whatever as well. I think that you get caught a LOT more when they've stopped in 1N and you reopen than when you just X 1H so I much prefer doing that. Maybe my opps just suck.

Or your opponents suck on the second round of the auction, but mine suck on the third?

This might be something to do with the prevalence of support redoubles in North America - they're rather less common here. On the other hand, if that were the explanation Frances would be agreeing with me. Maybe I'm just out of step with the rest of the world.

[hotShot]

(1)-1♣-(P)-1♥
(2)-1N-(P)-_P
(X)-_P-(P)-??

LHO could open (1), bid a 5 card ♠ (1♠ at 2), bid 4-4 in ♠ and ♦ below opening strength (dbl at 2). If he has 4441 than he's short in ♠ or ♦.

RHO could bid any 5 card suit except ♣ on 1-level or dbl if strong enough.

Partner could SOS redbl or do we not have that tool in use? Partner could run to 2♥ with 3 cards, if he feels 1NT is a bad contract and he could run to 2♣, if he holds 5 of them.

I have a balanced hand, a solid stopper in my suit, 3 of the top 5 cards in partners first bid suit and ♦T may be useful. Why would I want to run, if my partner feels comfortable in 1NTX (thinking I could hold minimum values)?
I haven't seen a single reason for doing that up to now.