[jillybean]

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ 6 ♥ AKQ2 ♦ QJ9752 ♣ 72

West North East South

 -     Pass  Pass  1♦
 1♠    Dbl   Pass  2♥
 2♠    4♥    Pass  Pass
 4♠    Dbl   Pass  ?


These are the decisions that quickly make, or break my games. Make the wrong decision and you hear "the 5 level belongs to the opponents”. How true is that and how do you decide what to do here?

[JLOL]

I would pass here, we aren't really involved and we have no idea what partner has.

[mtvesuvius]

We are not in control of the auction here. I think that although we have 2(3) extra ♦ that we haven't shown, this is not a situation for us to be making the decision. Partner made a judgement call, if it's wrong oh well. If it's right, then I would feel awfully silly pulling. I think this is a comfortable pass.

[Lobowolf]

I'd be tempted to bid on with what looks like a more offensive than defensive hand (based on the distribution, for instance; the potential for a lot of diamond tricks on offense, but not on defense). I'd fight the temptation and pass, though. One idea I try to bear in mind that might be helpful. Can't remember for sure where I got it...maybe Jeff Rubens? Frequently in making a high level decision, the opponents' trump suit is divided unequally, as it is here, with our having a singleton spade. When that's the case, other things being equal, it's usually the partner with the long trump who is best placed to make the high level competitive decision. He can infer our shortness, and if he has long BAD cards in the opponent's suit, he can upgrade his hand offensively, in the same way that you might evaluate a hand after a splinter; his good cards are working in our long suits, and his worthless cards in our short suit can be ruffed. Conversely, if his length includes honors (particularly secondary honors, e.g. KJx or something), they could be wasted on offense, but particularly helpful on defense. My hand's certainly more shapeley and offensively oriented than partner knows about, but he's got the long spades, and he's got them behind the spade bidder. I'll let him make this call. Wouldn't surprise me to be wrong any particular time, but on balance, I think it's preferable.

[quiddity]

I guess my judgment here is way off; I would definitely have bid 5H. Surely LHO is short in hearts for his bid and outside of that suit we can't contribute a single defensive trick. Meanwhile on offense we have a singleton spade, beautiful trumps, a very offensively-oriented 6-card side suit, we're vul vs not...

Also since partner did not have a forcing pass I would tend to play the double as showing extra values, with aces etc, not as pure penalty. I don't expect him to have a spade stack and nothing else. If he had wanted to set up a forcing pass he could have cuebid 3S instead of jumping to 4H.

"The five level belongs to the opponents" - that refers to a situation where you have already pushed the opponents to the 5 level and are considering bidding (for example) 5S over 5H. Here, WE are the "opponents"; the 5 level belongs to us.

[eyhung]

And you are not listening to your partner. Your partner has jumped to 4H without cue-bidding and then doubled an unsupported 4S. He didn't pass. He doubled, expressing an opinion that 4S is going down. You have no call to override that opinion -- you have your 2 quick tricks and you have more offense, but not so much more that you can try for 11 tricks with your trump suit instead of 4 with theirs. So what if declarer ruffs a heart, you can use hearts as "surrogate trumps" to force him and make him lose control.

This is not an auction or hand for you to stick your oar in. Partner knows more about your hand that you know about his -- trust his judgement!
Maybe he was overbidding (he is vul at IMP after all) and is glad to take any plus. Maybe he has them set in hand with AQJT of spades. It's IMPs: +500 vs. +650 is not the end of the world. and +100/300 vs. nothing is huge. I will be happy to bet that neither 4S nor 5H are making -- i certainly cannot imagine a hand that passes as dealer, jumps to 4H, and doubles 4S has good play for 5H. I expect partner to have a hand like KQxx Jxxx x Axxx -- this is consistent with the bidding, and both contracts are going down.

[jdonn]

It's very relevant to notice that LHO bid 1 2 4 all on his own. This would be very different to me if RHO had raised any of the spade bids. That's why I think pass is easy.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

A good question to ask yourself is, what have I promised /
shown?
And is the holding I have, a holding partner needs to expect?

You have shown a min. opener with 4diamonds and 4 hearts,
you have 2 defensive tricks, assuming AK of hearts cash.
Youd did not show the 6-4 pattern, but a 6-4 pattern is not a
unlikely freak, so Pass.

Partners double is penalty, since he is a passed hand, pass by
him would be nonforcing.
The reason why partner made the double are not 100% clear,
one possible option is, that he wants to prevent you from bidding
5H, so just follow his advice.

With kind regards
Marlowe.

PS: "The 5 level belongs to opponents" is usually used, if you have
to decide, if you gbid 5 over 5, not 5 over 4.

[marcD]

I would have bid 3♥ to show an unbalanced hand before . That would give partner a better chance to make the right decision. Now I have to guess and I guess pass

[Lobowolf]

Yeah, the "5-Level" quotation refers to the notion that it's usually a mistake for the second side to make a 5-level bid in a competitive auction. It definitely does not follow from that that it's not a mistake for the first side to make a 5-level bid, too.

[keylime]

Pard's a passed hand, and is smacking it around. I'm passing this, easily.

[neilkaz]

I also pass here. I basically have bid my hand (OK I have some extra offence due to long ♦). PD has expressed the opinion that he felt 4♥ was the correct bid last turn and now he thinks 4♠x is correct. He shouldn't be X'ing 4♠ just bcuz he thinks that we might set it one trick on a good day.

.. neilkaz ..

[whereagles]

How much can you trust pard here, Kathryn? If it's a pick-up, I might very well pull this to 5♥. Opposite a good pard, this should go down.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Apr 1 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

How much can you trust pard here, Kathryn? If it's a pick-up, I might very well pull this to 5♥. Opposite a good pard, this should go down.

My advice: always act as if partner can be trusted. Sometimes, you will be mistaken. So what? You will be developing good habits and a good reputation as a reliable partner. You will become easier to play with.

If this partner is someone you may want to play with again, it is imperative that you pass, and, if need be, point them later to this thread, so that they realize that they cannot expect you to save them from a bad double.

Even if you have no intention of playing with this partner, you should always strive to make the proper call.... when partner has a real double, and you pull, you will feel badly and your partner and everyone at the table will doubt your reliability, including you! OTOH, if partner made a mistake, it's partner's mistake and not yours. What I am trying to say is NEVER make your calls on the assumption, not based on any evidence, that partner has erred.

[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     Pass  Pass  1♦
 1♠    Dbl   Pass  2♥
 2♠    4♥    Pass  Pass
 4♠    Dbl   Pass  5♦
 Pass  Pass  Pass  


This was all my mess, although 5♦ did make.
If partner had passed rather than doubled it would have been ok for me to bid - this would be a forcing pass , correct?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

No, Pass over 4S would be nonforcing.

The simple reason is, that the 4H bidder is a passed hand,
i.e. it is not clear, how confident he is bidding 4H.
If 4S reaches you, it is not clear, if you should bid on,
I think it is either Pass or X (only justified, by the way, how
4S was bid), I would go with Pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

another....pass?

Dealer: West Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ QT96532 ♥ JT ♦ KJ7 ♣ T

West North East South

 Pass  2NT   Pass  3♥
 Pass  4♠    Pass  Pass
 5♥    Dbl   Pass  ?

[eyhung]

Some mess -- 4S is down 4 on a diamond lead. That's double-dummy, but in real life, down 3 for +500 should not be hard to achieve (Heart, spade), win a return, two hearts and club ruff. In fact, you are unlucky that North does not have the Ten of spades, which would be another trick. And bidders are fortunate partner has a diamond fit instead of a misfit -- swap North's minor-suit holdings (North could easily have ♦A and ♣ KTx) and 5H is down off the top with 4S still going down.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Apr 1 2009, 08:02 PM, said:

My advice: always act as if partner can be trusted. Sometimes, you will be mistaken. So what? You will be developing good habits and a good reputation as a reliable partner. You will become easier to play with.

If this partner is someone you may want to play with again, it is imperative that you pass, and, if need be, point them later to this thread, so that they realize that they cannot expect you to save them from a bad double.

Even if you have no intention of playing with this partner, you should always strive to make the proper call.... when partner has a real double, and you pull, you will feel badly and your partner and everyone at the table will doubt your reliability, including you! OTOH, if partner made a mistake, it's partner's mistake and not yours. What I am trying to say is NEVER make your calls on the assumption, not based on any evidence, that partner has erred.

Mike, with all due respect, that sounds like unlucky expert talk to me

There's a time to trust partner and a time to trust opponents. Even the all-time great, Bob Hamman, says that. Remember his one of his rules? "If everybody is bidding the heck out, trust opponents, not Bob"

Sure, trusting pard is, in theory, the right thing. It certainly is at the beginner level. To do it blindly, even when there are clear signs pard might be misjudging, can win you the post-mortem, but that's not where battles are won.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Apr 3 2009, 05:11 AM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 1 2009, 08:02 PM, said:

My advice: always act as if partner can be trusted. Sometimes, you will be mistaken. So what? You will be developing good habits and a good reputation as a reliable partner. You will become easier to play with.

If this partner is someone you may want to play with again, it is imperative that you pass, and, if need be, point them later to this thread, so that they realize that they cannot expect you to save them from a bad double.

Even if you have no intention of playing with this partner, you should always strive to make the proper call.... when partner has a real double, and you pull, you will feel badly and your partner and everyone at the table will doubt your reliability, including you! OTOH, if partner made a mistake, it's partner's mistake and not yours. What I am trying to say is NEVER make your calls on the assumption, not based on any evidence, that partner has erred.

Mike, with all due respect, that sounds like unlucky expert talk to me

There's a time to trust partner and a time to trust opponents. Even the all-time great, Bob Hamman, says that. Remember his one of his rules? "If everybody is bidding the heck out, trust opponents, not Bob"

Sure, trusting pard is, in theory, the right thing. It certainly is at the beginner level. To do it blindly, even when there are clear signs pard might be misjudging, can win you the post-mortem, but that's not where battles are won.

Your post doesn't surprise me, since you are a consistent masterminder, but as an expert, lucky or otherwise, I have long since learned not to mastermind. Hamman's advice is irrelevant to the situation under discussion... it pertains to situations in which you have to draw inferences as to whether partner has his values in an ambiguous auction... in the given scenario, partner made an unambiguous penalty double.

Had partner passed 4♠, we would not be in a fp scenario (as a ph, partner could have established a fp in several ways) and we would perhaps have a close decision.. what Hamman says (as I understand it) is that if he were the 4♥ bidder, we should, as his partner, place him with a minimum holding for the call and make our decision based on that assumption...and this is good advice playing with virtually all experts at imps.