It's bridge, Jim, but not as we know it.
#1
Posted 2008-November-06, 03:19
AQ xxx xxx AQ10xx
1♥ pass 4♥ pass
pass dbl pass
Partner's double is for takeout, suggesting a three-suiter with insufficient strength to act immediately over 1♥. You can assume that he's void in hearts and doesn't have five spades.
What would you do?
#2
Posted 2008-November-06, 03:25
Nice spot, I bought 5♣.
#3
Posted 2008-November-06, 03:29
#4
Posted 2008-November-06, 07:53
Our prospects against 4♥ are dependent on pard's honor location. I'm expecting two big card (possibly K-K-K too) and maybe some bits and pieces.
Kxxx void Axxxx Jxxx. We are beating 4♥; RHO's 4♥ call could have been based on short clubs, so the fate of 5♣ depends on the club J. I would take the dough and pass.
xxxx, void, AKxxx, Jxxx. Short diamonds on my right? 4♥ looks like its making or -1 max. 5♣ looks touch and go. I'm a bidder here.
Kxxx void AQxxx, xxxx. I like my chances in 5♣ here. On a good day we'll make 6.
5♣ for me.
#5
Posted 2008-November-06, 08:47
#6
Posted 2008-November-06, 08:52
helene_t, on Nov 6 2008, 06:47 AM, said:
No. But IMO its best.
#7
Posted 2008-November-06, 09:18
helene_t, on Nov 6 2008, 03:47 PM, said:
I think it's standard to play it as barking mad.
#8
Posted 2008-November-06, 09:54
- hrothgar
#9
Posted 2008-November-06, 21:55
#10
Posted 2008-November-06, 21:59
Still, it seems to have worked this time. 5♣.
#11
Posted 2008-November-06, 22:19
you canna change the laws of bidding, laws of bidding, jim...
5♣
#12
Posted 2008-November-06, 22:31
#13
Posted 2008-November-06, 23:23
maggieb, on Nov 6 2008, 11:31 PM, said:
Can't say I know for sure but I think you're mistaken. Maybe at favorable this action will work out more. I'd say it's more 50/50. If partner can't bid 4S then we can still be making 8 tricks and lose the board.
And unless you're playing against some big clubbers partner does not have a heart stack.
#14
Posted 2008-November-07, 00:28
2) partner cannot have a heart stack
3) partner cannot have great one suit hand but less thanopening hand or opening hand and other.
4) partner did not bid weak michaels or wk unusual nt.
5) If we do not bid 5c now we never do.
#15
Posted 2008-November-07, 00:44
(5♣ is sort of obvious. I'd think this is from an appeal but who was appealing what?)
George Carlin
#16
Posted 2008-November-07, 03:31
gnasher, on Nov 6 2008, 04:18 PM, said:
helene_t, on Nov 6 2008, 03:47 PM, said:
I think it's standard to play it as barking mad.
It's standard to play it as penalties.
This auction came up once in the BW MSC. About 2/3 of the panel learnedly bid some suit or other, explaining that partner had a void in their suit, and was showing a 4045 8-count or whatever.... and for once the full hand was revealed; the opening was a psyche and partner had a monster penalty double.
#17
Posted 2008-November-07, 04:33
maggieb, on Nov 7 2008, 05:31 AM, said:
There's another possibility: they were about to go down in 4♥ until we told them how to play the hand.
Most takeout doubles have one more potential benefit (probably the largest), which is that we find a contract that we can make. In this situation that is unlikely, making this takeout double less attractive than usual.
#18
Posted 2008-November-07, 04:53
- They're not my methods; one of my teammates faced this problem.
- It wasn't a ruling question, but just what seemed a close, and interesting, decision.
- On the actual hand, the double was right in theory, in that there was a better score available than 4♥ undoubled. However, advancer's actual action led to a worse score.
- The title of the thread was someone else's joke. I merely plagiarised it.
#19
Posted 2008-November-07, 10:25
As the actual X'er here people seem to have been diverted from the two interesting points on to the subsidiary issue of if the X is standard or not.
The points of interests are:
Firstly, if this was a clear 5♣ call or not.
Secondly, if the X is best used as take out or two way.
For me yes 5♣ and two way X is the clear option and I have never played against somebody smart enough to put me in a position where I have been compromised in this position although I do grant you it is theoretically possible.
#20
Posted 2008-November-07, 14:59
Say the auction goes 1♥-P-4♥-P-P-X-P and you are looking at a singleton heart. It could easily be that:
(1) The opponents have eleven or even twelve hearts, partner has singleton or void, double was takeout.
(2) The opponents have eight hearts, the raise was a "to play" raise on three, double was penalty with four strong trumps and an ace.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit

Help
