[mtvesuvius]

Your call?

---

Spots are exact BTW.

This post has been edited by mtvesuvius: 2010-December-16, 22:25

[inquiry]

Two Clubs

[matmat]

xx, for rescue.

[Hanoi5]

Inquiry took the bid out of my bidding box.

[kayin801]

Pass, at least they're not in game. Yes I think they're making, but not many overs, and no I don't think we're making much our way. -160 every once in a while builds character.

[Fluffy]

we have the same strenght and about the same number of trumps, but partner is sitting behind their values and we have a couple of entries I don't think they are gonna make as much as you suggest kayin. More like 50-50

Game our way doesn't look promising, so passing its a fair shot.

[the hog]

kayin801, on 2010-December-16, 22:18, said:

Pass, at least they're not in game. Yes I think they're making, but not many overs, and no I don't think we're making much our way. -160 every once in a while builds character.

This is a ridiculous answer. Why pass, when you may well make 2C?

[Flameous]

Or you may go three down in your 3-3 fit. I'll pass too, I think we are beating this occasionally and when we aren't I usually don't like the contracts where we would be. There is even the best case scenario where opener opts to bid again with 5-5 or so.

[gwnn]

I'll try to pass, I'm not so sure they will make. I'm not so happy with bidding a 3 card fragment when I have a perfectly good 6 card major. Sure I would do it with worse spots and I'm sure it's a close one as it is.

[mikeh]

a confident 2♣ for me. well, I hope it came across as confident. I've held worse: J1076532 xx xx xx same auction at imps both red.

[mikeh]

Flameous, on 2010-December-17, 07:50, said:

Or you may go three down in your 3-3 fit. I'll pass too, I think we are beating this occasionally and when we aren't I usually don't like the contracts where we would be. There is even the best case scenario where opener opts to bid again with 5-5 or so.

He's more likely to bid again on his 5-5 over 2♣ than over pass, unless his 2nd suit is clubs, of course

[kayin801]

the hog, on 2010-December-17, 04:37, said:

This is a ridiculous answer. Why pass, when you may well make 2C?

This is a ridiculous answer. Why bid 2♣ when you can go for 500 or 800 in your 3-3 or 4-3 fit? What evidence do we have that we're making 2♣? Bidding 2♣ seems like it will be +90, +110, -100, -500, or -800, while passing looks like -160 or +100 most of the time. I like the minus scores on the second one a lot better.

[mikeh]

kayin801, on 2010-December-17, 11:24, said:

This is a ridiculous answer. Why bid 2♣ when you can go for 500 or 800 in your 3-3 or 4-3 fit? What evidence do we have that we're making 2♣? Bidding 2♣ seems like it will be +90, +110, -100, -500, or -800, while passing looks like -160 or +100 most of the time. I like the minus scores on the second one a lot better.

I don't think passing the takeout double is ridiculous, tho it's not my choice, but I do think that doing so out of a fear of going -500 or 800 is silly.

Partner is unlimited.....and may in fact have clubs! Even on the bad days when he is 1=4=5=3 or the like, who is going to double? Even if RHO holds a club stack, is he going to risk you running to, say, diamonds? Or being able to play the hand double dummy after he gives the show away? No, the odds are that he's going to sit there and hope to go +200 on a hand where he knows his side can't make anything.

I don't think the form of scoring was specified....at imps -200 against your feared -160 is no big deal.

Oh.....I suspect that for most the 'evidence' that we may (not: will) make 2♣ is to be found in partner's takeout double combined with our spade A, club honours and shortness in 2 red suits!

[mtvesuvius]

The scoring was IMPs, although I think the problem at MPs is much tougher.

[mikeh]

mtvesuvius, on 2010-December-17, 11:45, said:

The scoring was IMPs, although I think the problem at MPs is much tougher.

agreed...at mps I would pass...I tend to assume imps unless otherwise specified....combining the chances of going plus on defence and the risks of -200 undoubled on offence, and the fact that missing an improbable game when partner is big is only a board, and unlikely, would persuade me to pass at mps.

[kayin801]

mikeh, on 2010-December-17, 11:43, said:

I don't think passing the takeout double is ridiculous, tho it's not my choice, but I do think that doing so out of a fear of going -500 or 800 is silly.

Partner is unlimited.....and may in fact have clubs! Even on the bad days when he is 1=4=5=3 or the like, who is going to double? Even if RHO holds a club stack, is he going to risk you running to, say, diamonds? Or being able to play the hand double dummy after he gives the show away? No, the odds are that he's going to sit there and hope to go +200 on a hand where he knows his side can't make anything.

I don't think the form of scoring was specified....at imps -200 against your feared -160 is no big deal.

Oh.....I suspect that for most the 'evidence' that we may (not: will) make 2♣ is to be found in partner's takeout double combined with our spade A, club honours and shortness in 2 red suits!

And I don't think bidding 2♣ is ridiculous, and your arguments are fine (thank you for actually making them), and its a clear 2nd choice outside the XX card accidentally hitting the table. And I agree that partner will usually have 4 clubs, though rarely 5 of them. But either partner or opener has extras and it seems to me that we're going to take a lot more damage when we bid and its wrong than when we pass and its wrong, as opposed to the gain when each is right, and I don't know if weighting towards 2♣ being right more often makes up for the damage. BTW I envisioned opener making a takeout double of our 2♣ bid and that being passed out, and then having a bunch of spade overruffs coming our way.

I don't really want to think about this at MP

[JLOGIC]

I like 2C but I went back and fourth about it. There is too much risk partner has a double and bid some suit and/or a spade void imo, and we just don't have enough defense. But usually partner has like QT doubleton of spades or something and I feel dumb.

[Phil]

I'd pass. If LHO has a second suit missing a spade honor, he might run. In many cases, I'm rooting for -160 when 2♣ is -200. In most cases, I think we can nip it a trick and +100 is beating our 90 and +300 is awesome. So I think the upside of passing is greater than the upside of bidding (unless we have a unlikely 3N)and the downside of passing is way better than the downside of bidding. Its just a few situations where we are -160/+90 or +100/+110 that 2♣ is demonstrably better to me.

I had a partner pass a balancing double last week with AJxxx of trump and out. I thought it was a questionable call, but in this case, I was marked with a moose (dealer didn't take a 2nd call and her LHO passed a 1 bid) and it worked out great.

I do think its close, but I wouldn't be surprised if a sim said bidding > passing, just on matters of frequency.

[Bbradley62]

I pass, but 1NT is my second choice.

[JLOGIC]

Phil, on 2010-December-17, 16:20, said:

I'd pass. If LHO has a second suit missing a spade honor, he might run. In many cases, I'm rooting for -160 when 2♣ is -200. In most cases, I think we can nip it a trick and +100 is beating our 90 and +300 is awesome. So I think the upside of passing is greater than the upside of bidding (unless we have a unlikely 3N)and the downside of passing is way better than the downside of bidding. Its just a few situations where we are -160/+90 or +100/+110 that 2♣ is demonstrably better to me.

Quote

The scoring was IMPs