[OleBerg]

Scoring: IMP

---

2♣   -    (Pass) - 2♦ - 4♠
Pass* - (Pass) - X* - Pass
5♥?

* = Substantial huddles.

2♣ = GF or 22+ bal.
2♦ = 0-1 control. (Aces = 2, kings = 1)

EW summons TD. 5♥ was -1, but 4♠(X) = 10

TD inquires about NS bids and agreements.

North said the first double was made as the auction was forcing.

South claimed that North double was for take-out, they cannot double for penalty, once South has passed 4♠. NS couldn't explain what the difference would be betweem a direct 5♥ and a pass and pull. He mentioned that partner might pass.

NS brought system notes. On paragraph of interest said: "General agreements about T/O-doubles" which stated:"We play T/O doubles almost everywhere". Another paragraph: "When we have forced to game, like 4M, passes are forcing, typically warning or with lenght in opponents suit." South claimed that the first paragraph was obviously the one in effect here, as the second referred to auctions with fit.

Your ruling?

Edit: Level of players: At the level where it is certain that the concept of forcing pass is known, but that the claim of no agreement about the pass-pull is plausible.

[Pict]

Slight mess, but IMO result stands.

We will hear that North denied good spades with his pause and South should have passed the double.

I just don't buy any of it. High level auction, tough decisions. I am (fairly) tired of hearing that people can't play Bridge because their partner chooses to think in a thinking game.

[campboy]

I don't believe a word of what N/S are telling us, but I don't think pass is an LA after you have decided to open this hand 2♣.

[peachy]

If in South's judgment, this was a 2C opener, then North cannot pass. If in NS agreements, this and maybe weaker hands are 2C openers, then I'd like a deeper look into their agreements what to do with strong hands versus mere tricktaking ones. But I suspect nothing will be found (Sorry if this assumption is not true). As it is, nothing further to investigate. Result stands.

[ggwhiz]

Pass is not a LA and the tank was likely a result of not knowing (or having) an agreement on pass and pull situations.

Given the risk (marginally) of 4♠ going float or partner raising 5♥ to 6, I am inclined to let this result stand.

[Phil]

I would bid 5♥ even if partner took a month to x. Result stands.

Seems North was playing a FP here and South was not.

[PeterE]

With partner (North) having at most one King, pass can't be an LA for South.
But this is all I'm going to believe from them. The South hand is _not_ a GF and the story of all doubles (possibly from both sides) being for T/O against 4♠ is nonsens too. What if opener had a real GF or strong NT ???

[axman]

PeterE, on Jun 7 2010, 01:12 AM, said:

With partner (North) having at most one King, pass can't be an LA for South.
But this is all I'm going to believe from them. The South hand is _not_ a GF and the story of all doubles (possibly from both sides) being for T/O against 4♠ is nonsens too. What if opener had a real GF or strong NT ???

Your side has half the deck and they have half the deck. You have no confidence that 5H makes [since you didn't bid it earlier]. Pard has suggested that 4S does not make- so to take out to 5H is to turn a plus into a minus.

If responder had wanted to play at the 5 level he would have competed with 4N, (which was suggested from the inference [of uncertainty whether to bid or X] that accompanied the pause after 4S).

As responder had unauthorized inferences** that opener was long he would thus be reluctant to X [a call likely to be left in if made big fat and happy] unless he made opener aware that he wasn't particularly happy about it.

I should think that it is straight forward to believe that pass [for a putative plus] is the superior action; and that 5H [for a minus] was demonstrably suggested by the unauthorized inferences, and since opener did not pass he infracted L16.

It looks like OBM to me and the sooner these people stop it the sooner they can become skillful.

** Actually, opener's pause is much more telling. THe reluctance suggests that his values were substandard. And being substandard suggests that to comtemplate game it would be in a major because a minor needs an additional trick. Hence once the OC is made [opener's suit wasn't spades] the pause infers the bidding was based upon a strong and long heart suit.

[campboy]

Partner has only suggested that 4♠ doesn't make on the assumption that you have a 2♣ opener, which you don't.

[mycroft]

So, while I realize that South doesn't think that this is a forcing pass auction (because he thinks this is a 2C opener), what do they play pass-and-pull in forcing pass auctions as?

If they play it weaker than direct action (sound, but susceptible to partner's hesitations, see here), then this is the right way to show his hand after deciding it is a 2C (strong weak 2 in any suit?) opener.

If they play it as stronger than direct action (less sound, but much safer in these auctions), then he "should have bid" 5H last round, and now we have to look at North's hand and the length of the time to call over 4S vs 4Sx. Of course, South didn't think it was FP, so he was trying to show a hand that was happy to give -420 after a 2C opening, but not -590. So I guess he though that 5Hx was going for 3 tricks - which, granted, is what he can see in his hand. There's a chance that North has a control that's a trick (say the CK), so the logic is (-2 or +3 vs 0) against (-2 or +3 vs -5) - assuming 4S can make, which it probably can.

And *this*, students, is why you don't open 2C on heavy preempts...

[OleBerg]

mycroft, on Jun 7 2010, 05:56 PM, said:

So, while I realize that South doesn't think that this is a forcing pass auction (because he thinks this is a 2C opener), what do they play pass-and-pull in forcing pass auctions as?

If they play it weaker than direct action (sound, but susceptible to partner's hesitations, see here), then this is the right way to show his hand after deciding it is a 2C (strong weak 2 in any suit?) opener.

If they play it as stronger than direct action (less sound, but much safer in these auctions), then he "should have bid" 5H last round, and now we have to look at North's hand and the length of the time to call over 4S vs 4Sx. Of course, South didn't think it was FP, so he was trying to show a hand that was happy to give -420 after a 2C opening, but not -590. So I guess he though that 5Hx was going for 3 tricks - which, granted, is what he can see in his hand. There's a chance that North has a control that's a trick (say the CK), so the logic is (-2 or +3 vs 0) against (-2 or +3 vs -5) - assuming 4S can make, which it probably can.

And *this*, students, is why you don't open 2C on heavy preempts...

I know the original post is somewhat messy, but somewhere in it, you will see, that NS had no agreement about the difference betweem a direct 5♥ and a pass and pull.

[axman]

campboy, on Jun 7 2010, 10:31 AM, said:

Partner has only suggested that 4♠ doesn't make on the assumption that you have a 2♣ opener, which you don't.

As explained, responder's huddle inferred that he was not happy to X- suggesting he had some hearts and there were not many H winners to be had. WIthout the huddle responder could have been stiff or void in hearts and 4SX would go down handily.

To illustrate I ran across a story that went something like this. Dealer picked up a round 8-5: 7H in hand and wanted to declare 7HXX so he walked the dog, got to 7HXX but wasn't allow to declare so in a fit of rage he defended 7SX- losing not only his slam bonus but when he didn't lead Hs [expecting a H void], he didn't take his two setting H tricks either.


Opener created and acted upon UI. Responder's bidding did not preclude the values to for the partnership to set 4S except for the UI created by responder.

[campboy]

axman, on Jun 7 2010, 06:20 PM, said:

campboy, on Jun 7 2010, 10:31 AM, said:

Partner has only suggested that 4♠ doesn't make on the assumption that you have a 2♣ opener, which you don't.

As explained, responder's huddle inferred that he was not happy to X- suggesting he had some hearts and there were not many H winners to be had. WIthout the huddle responder could have been stiff or void in hearts and 4SX would go down handily.

How does responder know that having two or three hearts is bad? It's not like you've bid the suit or anything.