[wank]

How do you think these 2 hands should be bid given the opps' bidding?

This is what actually happened for -990. There's KQxx spades offside but 4S or 5S is still a cheap sacrifice - you probably make 9 tricks in spades.

Double of 2H was just support.

Scoring: IMP

---

1♣ - pass - 1♠ - 2♥
DBL - pass - 2♠ - pass
3♣ - 4♥ - pass - pass
DBL - end

[bluecalm]

I fail to understand the double over their 4♥. N's hand is weak and responder's hand is weak (2♠). N also doesn't have a trump stack. What the hell?
Just pass and try to beat it. It doesn't look like we have profitable sacrifice.

[peachy]

I don't like the Dbl on 4H with a void in their suit; I assume it was meant as penalty (?), but responder has dug his own grave by responding with subminimum values. Assume 1C was not forcing. I might chicken out and pull the Dbl with S hand, but if pulling turned out wrong, I would be the one to blame for whatever happened, typucally turning a plus into a minus. 1S is not a clearcut error, it sometimes works.

[jdonn]

If north feels he must bid again but doesn't want to double due to good offense and bad defense, then obviously he should balance 4♠, showing the same 3 spades he showed but with lots of offense.

Responder's 1♠ bid is utterly automatic.

[dake50]

I don't 1S on 5xS to109, 3hcp and only short is partner's bid suit. Now later auction becomes clearly 4S sacrifice decision. That works. And partner doesn't hope 1-2DT.

[gnasher]

The auction looks normal up to 4♥.

North's hand looks perfect for an action double, saying "I want to bid, but if you think we should defend, that's fine." The trouble with this sort of double is that nobody knows when they should apply (maybe Kokish could write a book about them?)

Facing such a double, I suppose South should bid - the singleton club isn't enough of a defensive value to leave it in. I suspect that the main problem was that he thought that the double was for penalties. That's what I would have thought too.