BBO Discussion Forums: balancing against a weak NT - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

balancing against a weak NT

#41 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,576
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2011-April-21, 09:45

View Postquiddity, on 2011-April-14, 01:42, said:



Matchpoints.
A couple of questions about this situation:

1. What range do you expect for the balancing double? Is this hand good enough? What if the colors were reversed?
2. How much does North need to pass for penalties?
3. Should South invite? (Double by either North or South over 2 would be takeout).


One thing that seems to be missing here is the inference that N has already shown a
tolerance for playing 1N X and rho has shown a lack of tolerance for the same with the
2c bid. IMO p has shown they are not broke and we assuredly have over half the deck.

There seems to be zero good reason to use X (by south) for takeout when it can be use much more effectively for penalty. S original x pretty much showed a balanced type hand (or a stronger 1 suiter) so playing x here as takeout behind the club bidder seems give up way too much for almost zero gain. All s has to do is pass 2c and that works effectivly as TOX.

Since we have zero idea how the bidding would have gone if S was capable of a penalty x of
2c we have to look at our hand and see if it has improved or not after p bids 2h.
The club K is now a certain trick either via position or length so it improves. The
three top heart honors (in p long weak suit) are golden assets virtually assuring no
penalty x from opps if we get to a hopeless game. The only card that might have lost value is the spade Q. There are many great things about this hand plus virtually any finesses we might need are pretty much guaranteed to work. I would be more than willing to bid 3h here. At IMPS I would consider the 3h bid mandatory but MP you might already be
ahead of the game just not allowing opps to play 1n undoubled so it is a bit more
speculative to bid 3h.

To answer the questions
1. QJx QJx QJx QJxx is probably minimum for to in po seat
2. N should be happy to pass with any reasonable balanced 6 count
3. raise to 3h since your hand is around a K better than minimum with virtually
no degradation of point count due to position and superb trumps.
0

#42 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,663
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2011-April-21, 13:06

View Postgszes, on 2011-April-21, 09:45, said:

There seems to be zero good reason to use X (by south) for takeout when it can be use much more effectively for penalty.

Quite alot of expert pairs play double as take-out here. Pass is obviously forcing and therefore denies a shortage. You still get your penalties since partner will double after you pass if they would have passed a penalty double.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users