[Stephen Tu]

Scoring: IMP

---

LHO opens
(4♣)-p-(p)-?

[awm]

I'd bid 4♥. Not happy about it, but my other options seem to be 4nt (which might be a winner, but I expect to make 4♥ a bit more often) or forcing beyond the four-level (and I include double as forcing beyond the four-level here, because partner always bids 4♠ when I double with this kind of hand and I can't imagine passing it).

[jdonn]

Funny Adam says that. I would double and pass 4♠ if that's what partner bids.

[gnasher]

4♥, because double is for takeout, and partner will take it out to 4♠ on five low or a strong four-card suit. Is it worth mentioning that we're not in the 1980s any more?

[cherdanno]

I pass at these colors.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Mar 2 2009, 03:29 AM, said:

4♥, because double is for takeout, and partner will take it out to 4♠ on five low or a strong four-card suit. Is it worth mentioning that we're not in the 1980s any more?

Absolutely worth mentioning! Please show me the hand where partner bids 4♠ on a four card suit?

[655321]

I would bid 4NT.

Pretty sure I wouldn't have doubled at the table, although after reading Josh's reply double does make sense - if partner does have 5 small spades and not much else, perhaps 4♠ is the only making game. And I suppose there is also the (very small) chance that partner will pass our takeout double.

Almost talked myself into doubling...

Or maybe cherdanno's Pass is best... after all, I don't expect them to make, so passing looks to be netting us somewhere between 100 and 300 with no chance of a minus score... and after all even if we are cold for slam, we are unlikely to be able to bid it...

I think I will stick with a decisive 4NT.

Good problem!

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Mar 2 2009, 09:42 AM, said:

Please show me the hand where partner bids 4♠ on a four card suit?

How about QJ10x xxxx xxxx x ? With 10 or 11 clubs already accounted for, it would hardly be a surprise to find partner with short clubs. Is he supposed to leave the double in with a singleton and no defence, or are you hoping he'll bid 4♥ so as to keep the bidding low?

Or KQJx xxx Jxxxx x. Now he bids 4♠ because opposite a takeout double he expects to make game, and opposite a takeout double he doesn't expect to get rich from 4♣.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I would go with X, but I wont be happy, if I hear 4S,
if this happens I will regret not to have bid 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

Opponents are VULNERABLE?. Oh my god, this is so amazing. If LHO is serious I don't expect a single suit to breack evenly, he seems to be 8-4 for the bid.

Can we just yell DOUBLE!? .

I wouldn't be surprised if Arend's pass was the winner in the long run. But I can't help myself and try to double to maybe find partner with a random 4432 who passes.

[whereagles]

Suck it up and bid 4♥.

[mtvesuvius]

I'll Double then pull to 5♥ over partner's 4♠, this should show a really big hand. X leaves us with options open and if partner bids 4♥... Well maybe I'll stab at slam

Good Problem... Solution: Boot LHO from the table and ask for a redeal

[eyhung]

I may be prejudiced by knowing the actual hand (I held the preemptor's cards at the other table), but I think PASS has a lot more going for it than what has been stated so far.

On surface PASS looks ridiculous. We have 23 excellent HCP and a good unbid 5-card major. But what are the upsides of bidding?

If we bid 4H, it's unlikely we'll be able to get to slam -- partner is unlikely to be able to move given our excessive strength. There are plenty of hands which do make 4H, but opposite most of them, we are going +200 or better against 4C (lose 6). But there are also plenty of hands that don't make 4H -- you only have 5 hearts, after all. If partner is short in hearts, or broke, or there are bad breaks, passing will probably win 4-9 IMPs (4C is not going to make very often when 4H is making!)

If we double, there's no guarantee we'll get to a making spot -- we'll frequently end up in spades when that's wrong, or in a tenuous diamond game that could be wrecked by bad distribution, or at too high a level in hearts. The fact that the preemptor lacks the AK of his suit indicates to me that preemptor probably has the controls we seek for slam -- preemptor is not going to have QJT-eighth and out at this vul -- and that will bode badly for our offensive chances.

4NT looks like a good call, except that you run the risk of partner misinterpreting it. I do think this to be the best of the bidding options if partner reads it as natural and can muster a pass with his 4-count, but that might be quite a parlay in practice. (In practice partner had KT9xxx x xxxx Jx...all contracts go down, but 4NT goes down less than the others.)

So I think the upside of bidding is +420/450 vs. +200 on defense, and the downside is going minus when you reach the wrong strain or the cards are foul (as they frequently are after a 4-level preempt).

Given the extreme conditions (opponents unfavorable, and IMP scoring), and the unlikelihood of reaching a good slam via bidding, pass seems to have better upside than downside. The downside from passing rates to be 6 IMPs at most [+200 vs. +450, with 3-4 IMPs from +300 vs +420/450 also in the picture] The upside of passing rates to be 7-9 IMPs when you beat up their 4C at 100/trick and the other table goes minus in the wrong game or in an unfortunate slam. If those are the correct odds, then passing doesn't have to be right a majority of the time -- just a significant minority of the time, sort of like bidding a vulnerable game. And it doesn't seem to me like bidding is going to lead to a large plus score often enough when we have a practically certain nice plus waiting for us via PASS.

[whereagles]

eyhung, on Mar 4 2009, 01:12 AM, said:

(...) we have a practically certain nice plus waiting for us via PASS.

Just for the record, I've been in situations similar to this one and did try the pass"strategy.

It never came out as good as I hoped for.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

(In practice partner had KT9xxx x xxxx Jx...all contracts go down, but 4NT goes down less than the others.)

Actually partner had KT9xxx x Txxx Jx, 4nt is down 2, 4h down 2, 4s down 1. 4c probably down 3. Of course if we switch north and east, 4h is easy & 4c probably only down 2.

I finally got around to running a simulation, giving opener 8 clubs to QJ & < 11 hcp. Looking at the results it seems pass is not good. This is because just bidding 4h, partner passing blindly, makes nearly 90% of the time. Can't lose 5-7 imps that often and come out ahead. Bidding averages about 3.5 imps/board more than passing. 4nt seems to be roughly equivalent to 4h. If partner is allowed to correct to long solidish spade suits with singleton/void heart, knowing your bid is under pressure, I imagine that may work better but didn't study that extensively.

Double is hard to model because it seems there are no universal criteria for when partner pulls vs. leaving it in. I don't like it, personally, I think you get to spades when it's wrong more often than just bidding 4h.

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Mar 9 2009, 05:11 PM, said:

Double is hard to model because it seems there are no universal criteria for when partner pulls vs. leaving it in. I don't like it, personally, I think you get to spades when it's wrong more often than just bidding 4h.

Assuming you mean double gets to spades wrongly more often than bidding 4♥ gets to hearts wrongly, I agree, but of course there is much more than that to consider.

- If partner has a doubleton club he may be able to pass for penalty, which is sure to be a bonanza.
- If partner bids 4♦ then you can follow with 4♥ anyway, which is certainly a better description than a direct 4♥.
- We may simply belong in diamonds, it doesn't have to be spades.

I agree that double is hard to model though. I would expect some disagreement about what partner does with 4-4 in the majors, as well as whether he ever passes with a singleton club.

[eyhung]

Good simulation. You've convinced me that PASS is not the correct call (vs 4H). Too bad, it would have been cool to see a situation where it was correct to never bid with a good 23 HCP hand.

[mike777]

Stephen Tu, on Mar 2 2009, 12:33 AM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> E/W </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> Ax </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> KQJxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> AQx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AKx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

LHO opens
(4♣)-p-(p)-?

x whatever it means......blame me..


x blame partner .....x is clear....

how can x be wrong ..later in the bar....