[jdonn]

So we have "hate double because partner will pull" and "hate double because partner will pass". Maybe like in politics that is a good sign. Anyway I still like double a lot, by far the most.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Mar 16 2010, 01:06 PM, said:

So we have "hate double because partner will pull" and "hate double because partner will pass". Maybe like in politics that is a good sign. Anyway I still like double a lot, by far the most.

No: I hate double because he will (usually) pass: if he pulls....it may work out, it may not....but if I knew he would probably pull, I'd be far happier with double, even tho he may well be 'wrong'. Any action has huge downsides...the downside of his pulling may be large, but the upside is also large. I don't see the same upside to defending 5♣ doubled.

Put it this way: if I knew he'd almost always pull unless he has a decent defensive hand (ie my double was STRONGLY takeout) I'd double notwithstanding the obvious risks....it is more flexible than bidding and has more upside and the same downside. But a 5-level double is not, in my books, strongly takeout....a good rule of thumb (imo) is to take it as showing more or less the equivalent of a strong notrump, altho with no implication of a club trick. It may be less, it may be more....but I want partner to make a decision based on some expectation and that's my 'rule' for the expectation I want him to have.

This hand has the strength but not the defensive value suggested by the rule.....heck, we can't even be sure we can beat grand.

[wclass___]

Pass.

[MFA]

I agree with mikeh.

[mikeh]

benlessard, on Mar 15 2010, 04:27 PM, said:

Double is clearly better than 5H (not close IMO) , but i prefer pass. I have no reason to think 5C is a good spot for them.

The fact that the vulnerable opponents voluntarily contracted for 11 tricks and that you don't hold 3 (or indeed even any) sure tricks on defence may be a clue

[benlessard]

Over 4C he might stretch pretty hard to bid a vulnerable game, add to that he might make an advance save.

I think its not that unlikely that opener has a 7-4 and partner is stuck with 2 clubs, or that hes got only 2H and wont manage to ruff a clubs after a H lead. (5251, 6241,4261)

[jdonn]

Weird my thinking is still opposite, I double because I think they are down a lot and I don't expect partner to pull very often. If I thought he was going to pull much I would pass.

[pooltuna]

gnasher, on Mar 15 2010, 03:46 AM, said:

KQx AKQJxx xx xx

Scoring: IMP

4♣ pass 5♣

---

Those who instinctually double are deluding themselves into believing they are too strong for the opponents to make (their values are too concentrated for them to be so certain) and too balanced to make anything themselves(completely ignoring partner's possible holdings and shortages). In reality you have no clue of exactly what is happening and no real hope of ever being sure at this point in the auction. You can be fairly certain that the premptor probably expects to take 7 tricks for his call and his partner expects to take either 9 or 11+ tricks. If you double what tricks are you (not your partner) realistically expecting to take? A ♠ and a ♥ are reasonable but not certain. In fact it is easy to create layouts where the opponents can take all 13 tricks and where the 5♣ call was a dog walk. The alternative to risking -1150 is to just take insurance in the form of a 5♥ call which has a range of values from 2210(the auction doesn't necessarily end) to -1100. Consequently there is no "right" call. Certainly double could work out well but it could also backfire in your face no matter how verbose it's endorsers become at insisting it is the only correct call.

[cloa513]

Absolutely.　To raise to 5♣ could even be A♠,AK♦ and no clubs.

[whereagles]

good. mikeh has spoken, so now I can make my choice: double

[phil_20686]

gwnn, on Mar 15 2010, 02:28 PM, said:

phil_20686, on Mar 15 2010, 02:32 PM, said:

dunno about your %, but i think that a lot of hands that bid 5c are just strong balanced hands with a stiff club, partner should have a chunky suit for 1st in vul preempt. Alternatively, he could have Kx clubs asnd cashing dfiamonds, and just bet on making a ton of tricks on thei right lead.

We have the following cards missing (assuming RHO indeed has a small singleton club):
♠AJ
♦AKQJ

Are you trying to say that "a lot of" RHO's hands are like:

AJxx
xxx
AQxxx
x

?

Do you think this strategy is profitable? Do you bid like this or do you just mean to say that people in general bid like this?

Alternatively

xxxx
x
AKQJxx
Kx

I mean yes sure this is possible but wouldn't you agree that the single most likely scenario is RHO has 3 or 4 clubs and some shape and some points?

I guess i really meant, "which may even have a stiff club",

Certianly with 4 tricks i would raise a vul 4 level preempt to game with a stiff trump. Something like

Axxx
xxxx
AKQx
x

Hoping to hit partner with a stiff heart or to get a spade lead planning on 7 clubs + 4 tricks. In my expereince partners rarely open 4c first in vul without a decent 8 card suit.

I would bid 5c with all of the following hands:

Axxx Axxx Axxxx Axxx
xxxx x - -
AQxx Axxxx Axxxx xxxxxxx
K kxx xxx Kxx


The point is, its really possible that 5hx could lose 2 clubs two diamonds and a spade for 800 when you could be beating 5c.

[mikeh]

phil....lho could be 1=3=1=8 with rho Axx 10xx AKQxx Kx

5♥x'd goes 1100: 1♣, 1♠ and 2 ruffs, 2♦'s and a trump switch to kill the club ruff in dummy. Meanwhile a heart lead beats 5♣.

However, thinking that the glass is half empty is not the way the modern expert game is played....it is for good reason that bridge is known as a bidder's game.

800 is a live possibility but, I think, usually against 600 or 620 (even if 5♣ could be beaten, it may require a lead partner will not make)...not a disaster at imps, while the chances of 5♥ being a phantom seem small, and the chances of 5♥ hitting a home run are reasonable.

This is a problem that we all tend to solve based on our unconsciously remembered experiences and personalities. And these auctions arise rarely, so most of us have limited information on which to base our impressions. Your experiences will be other than mine, and thus your intuition will lead you to a different conclusion....without either of us being able to 'prove' that we are right.

A simulation would be nice, but I doubt that we'd find much agreement on the constraints. My guess is that if I ran off 100 hands that I felt matched the parameters....advance save or bidding to make....and ran them by 10 of the better posters, we might end up with 30 or 40 where 9 or 10 agreed, maybe 80 or so where most agreed and so on. And everyone would want to include some of the hands I rejected on enroute to the 100..but there would be no unaminity about which ones

The actual outcome is largely irrelevant: it is only one data point in a field where we'd probably want hundreds of data points in order to draw a reliable conclusion...nevertheless: Andy, what happened?

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on Mar 18 2010, 04:08 PM, said:

This is a problem that we all tend to solve based on our unconsciously remembered experiences and personalities. And these auctions arise rarely, so most of us have limited information on which to base our impressions. Your experiences will be other than mine, and thus your intuition will lead you to a different conclusion....

Heck, that's what we use BBF for!, my judgement on competition has improved exponentially since I joined years ago.

But 5 level close decisions are often like finese slams, you make a decision, and the key card can be onside or not. Last serios championship I played, we losed 3 swings of 1 down doubled at each table adding up for 7-9 IMPs at the 4/5 level. Move a couple of cards and they would had been double swings for us...

It is hard to get experience from high variance decisions.

[hanp]

mikeh, on Mar 18 2010, 11:08 AM, said:

However, thinking that the glass is half empty is not the way the modern expert game is played....it is for good reason that bridge is known as a bidder's game.

I would add to this: the 5-level belongs to the opponents and eight ever, nine never.

[gnasher]

It was something like this:

Scoring: IMP

---

I can't remember exactly how the club honours were distributed between the EW hands.

I was North. My partner doubled and I left it in and led a diamond. Mercifully West decided to play safe for one overtrick by going up with the ace. I don't know what the auction was at the other table, but teamates were in game, not doubled.

5♥ appears to be going for 800, but it's not clear that they'd have doubled. Maybe that possibility is another reason for bidding 5♥.

[hanp]

1100 on a diamond lead?

I agree that 5H could be right even when it is wrong. I thought the discussion was very interesting, and the hand was indeed horrible.

[gwnn]

phil_20686, on Mar 18 2010, 03:48 PM, said:

Certianly with 4 tricks i would raise a vul 4 level preempt to game with a stiff trump. Something like

Axxx
xxxx
AKQx
x

I just wanted to say that given our hand, RHO will rarely have just 1 club since it would imply that he possesses almost all missing HCP (your example lacks only the ♠J) and that is very unlikely. It is much more likely that he has a few clubs, so we have a little more security, in particular the probability of both contracts going down is sensibly less than your average 6322 would have.

Anyway, I agree with your statement, it's possible to go for 800 against air, I just don't think it's "really possible".

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Mar 18 2010, 02:46 PM, said:

5♥ appears to be going for 800, but it's not clear that they'd have doubled.

Really?

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Mar 19 2010, 06:17 PM, said:

gnasher, on Mar 18 2010, 02:46 PM, said:

5♥ appears to be going for 800, but it's not clear that they'd have doubled.

Really?

It's not clear to me. Which opponent do you think would clearly double?

[Pict]

Win or lose I'm always doubling as East. You just can't lie down to it in the game these days IMHO.