[gszes]

South 100%. hard to imagine what s is thinking with 3s X.
W is short in hearts and bid 2s on a suit headed at best
QT. If w had 1 heart surely they would have left 2h x in
rather than gamble on their putrid suit. It is pretty darn
easy for us to imagine W as void in hearts and after 2s gets
raised to 3s E probably has an extra distributional surprise
for NS. The heart K is completely useless in spades but hugely
useful in NT. There is a strong probability W has no hearts
and E having at most 1 side entry makes 3n the standout bid.

It is difficult to imagine too many hands where 3n wont have
decent play if w (as expected) is void in hearts.

[Free]

MrAce, on 2011-August-01, 12:05, said:

I find it interesting to see people blaming S. South has a decent hand, AKJx ♠, Kx ♥ behind 1♥ opener and much more. It is quite a view to think that he should just pass in peace here when pd made a free call, just because we know the result. Of course we may pass thinking that opponents may have hands like 6-5 and voids and avoid ever letting them make a dbled contract . We never play a % 45 session when everything goes wrong, but probably never play a % 65 session either with this logic. I will not blame North much either, but i would personally lift it.

It is also confusing to me that some decent players here think 2♥ DBL already showed South's hand.

Imo South hand isn't worth much extra. Yes he has ♥Kx behind the opener, but what will it do in a ♠ contract? It will just be ruffed. West bid 2♠, clearly indicating he doesn't have any ♥ (perhaps the only exception is if he has 7+♠-1♥, but then East wouldn't support on a doubleton).
His ♣ holding is also quite useless: Qxx opposite a 5 card or longer in partner's hand? How many tricks will that bring to the defense?
South can expect North not to hold any ♠s as well, so he can't lead trumps. Since South doesn't have a clear entry himself, how can he ever draw trumps? Dummy will be able to ruff, except if South somehow manages to gain the lead and draw trumps, and in doing so he gives away a ♠ trick.
His ♦ holding is ok, but again, it requires help from his partner or a favorable split to gain a trick. It's not at all unexpected that West has some ♦s (but it's unlucky that it's AQTxx ofcourse): West should have 6♠ and 0♥, that leaves 7 minor suit cards. It won't be a huge amount of ♣s because NS have 8+♣s together, therefore he'll have some ♦s.

I don't see an easy way to 5 tricks for NS from South's point of view. It's clear that South made a typical MP double, but here he needs all sorts of things to go right to get 5 tricks, and the splits we expect are against us. These sort of auctions usually bring an extra surprise, so South should've been careful and wait for another deal to make his MP double imo.

[Phil]

I was South.

We actually do play good/bad 2N, but my partner has been in Chile for the last three months for work, so our partnership is rusty. I couldn't rely on his remembering to be honest.

My double is a little aggressive, although the comments about that I was bidding my hand twice in this thread are bizarre to me. My original double does not suggest ♠AKJ8, sorry. I also think there is a good chance we are making 3♣, but not necessarily 4, so I felt we had some equity to protect which is why I doubled. Yes its close, and yes they are probably on a 6-3 fit, but dummy will have very limited entries, even though diamonds may be on my left, and this hand will play awkwardly for declarer. The diamond shortness, lack of heart wastage, and club honor are all big surprises.

Pard's final pass? This is a very offensive hand, but he has some heart losers to dispose of. He could also be worried that I am a little offshape, like 4=2=5=2, which makes 4♣ unappealing.

In the end, I don't think there is a clear error.

[mikeh]

I'm very late to this thread, but here is my two cents worth:

1. The first double is automatic. The major suit discrepancies are too much to warrant 2N.

2. 3♣ is a little conservative, but since partner will often hold only 3 clubs, and we have a lot of hearts to dispose of, I agree with the call. Btw, I don't play lebensohl here.....I think 2N for the minors is a better treatment...we can't use a responsive double here....double of 2♠ is needed as penalty if only to keep them honest. So to me it is more important that we are able to show one and 2 suiters, with the minors, than that we can distinguish between various strengths. Once the opps bid over the double, we don't have to bid with crap, so part of the justification for lebensohl evaporates anyway.

3. Double of 3♠ Seems automatic, and I am astounded at any poster who claims that the 2♠ call shows or even suggests a void in hearts....wow! Sure, we aren't guaranteed to go plus but just wtf else are we supposed to do? We have no more heart stoppers (for 3N) than we had when we properly, imo, chose to double 2♥. Our clubs are about as bad as partner expected for our double, and with so few Aces raising clubs seems wrong. Passing is insane...we are a full K and a bit over a minimum, and opposite partner's free bid, the hand rates to belong to us.....passing conveys exactly the opposite impression.

4. The final pass by North is a bit scary. Our hand will be a disappointment on defence, so I think we should bid 4♣, but it's tough to be objective.....this is one of those hands where, at imps, I'd be in the tank for several minutes and end up passing or bidding with no confidence in either choice.



So to the very limited extent that blame exists, it is imo 100% on North....not because N screwed up, but because I see nothing wrong with either of S's actions, and N was the only member of the partneship who had a real choice to make, and he went 'wrong', given the layout.

[xxhong]

Well, from your holding, you actually should strongly suspect that west should hold void in H because he pulls the double with Qxxxxx. I don't think any sane player would pull a red 2H to 2S with Qxxxxx x. Opener's raise should also really show 3 spades. So partner most likely holds a spade void and can only bid 3C. So he must have a rather weak hand with good distributions. With that in mind, the hand really defends badly in 3S double because you don't have a sure entry to draw trumps and the 2H opener is marked with shortness somewhere in minor suits. So it is a rather clear hand that one shouldn't double 3S.

mikeh, on 2011-August-02, 10:16, said:

I'm very late to this thread, but here is my two cents worth:

1. The first double is automatic. The major suit discrepancies are too much to warrant 2N.

2. 3♣ is a little conservative, but since partner will often hold only 3 clubs, and we have a lot of hearts to dispose of, I agree with the call. Btw, I don't play lebensohl here.....I think 2N for the minors is a better treatment...we can't use a responsive double here....double of 2♠ is needed as penalty if only to keep them honest. So to me it is more important that we are able to show one and 2 suiters, with the minors, than that we can distinguish between various strengths. Once the opps bid over the double, we don't have to bid with crap, so part of the justification for lebensohl evaporates anyway.

3. Double of 3♠ Seems automatic, and I am astounded at any poster who claims that the 2♠ call shows or even suggests a void in hearts....wow! Sure, we aren't guaranteed to go plus but just wtf else are we supposed to do? We have no more heart stoppers (for 3N) than we had when we properly, imo, chose to double 2♥. Our clubs are about as bad as partner expected for our double, and with so few Aces raising clubs seems wrong. Passing is insane...we are a full K and a bit over a minimum, and opposite partner's free bid, the hand rates to belong to us.....passing conveys exactly the opposite impression.

4. The final pass by North is a bit scary. Our hand will be a disappointment on defence, so I think we should bid 4♣, but it's tough to be objective.....this is one of those hands where, at imps, I'd be in the tank for several minutes and end up passing or bidding with no confidence in either choice.



So to the very limited extent that blame exists, it is imo 100% on North....not because N screwed up, but because I see nothing wrong with either of S's actions, and N was the only member of the partneship who had a real choice to make, and he went 'wrong', given the layout.

[mikeh]

xxhong, on 2011-August-02, 10:46, said:

Well, from your holding, you actually should strongly suspect that west should hold void in H because he pulls the double with Qxxxxx. I don't think any sane player would pull a red 2H to 2S with Qxxxxx x. Opener's raise should also really show 3 spades. So partner most likely holds a spade void and can only bid 3C. So he must have a rather weak hand with good distributions. With that in mind, the hand really defends badly in 3S double because you don't have a sure entry to draw trumps and the 2H opener is marked with shortness somewhere in minor suits. So it is a rather clear hand that one shouldn't double 3S.

I think our primary area of disagreement is the meaning of the 2♠ call.

While I suppose that it is possible to play this as a pure runout.....my spades suit will play better than your heart suit....I don't think this is standard. Consider that the double of 2♥ was takeout, not penalty, and for 4th seat to convert, they need to have decent hearts. While 4th seat will frequently have 5 hearts, they will often be unable to convert, and, even when they do, there is no reason to believe that their suit will play worse than yours. Look at the actual heart suit distribution on the given hand....is that weird? No...and the defence gets precisely 2 heart tricks....make opener 1=6=3=3, as is the most probable shape as of responder's decision to run, and running becomes questionable at best.

Now, maybe, as it happens, responder did intend to try to improve the contract, but (his success on this hand notwithstanding) I don't think that is the standard approach by good players. Of course, I may be wrong on that, and, if so, then your point about expecting a heart void gains strength.

[gnasher]

I don't think West "pulled" the double of 2♥, in the sense of running from a contract that he thought was going down. 2♠ here is normally played as a hand with some spades that wants to compete. In that case, he might well have one or even two hearts.

Having said that, as South, thinking that West had a heart void would make me more inclined to double, because that might mean that declarer was unable to get to dummy. One of the reasons for this disaster was the fact that East had a fast entry, so declarer could take a diamond finesse without letting South in to draw trumps.

I agree with Mike and others that double on the South hand looks normal, at matchpoints. This hand has significantly more defence than promised, and it's pessimistic to assume that the defenders have got it right in such a crowded auction.

I think North should pull though. At matchpoints, he expects South to double aggressively, so when he has such a poor hand for defence he should take it out. There's more reason to pass at IMPs, because South's double should be sounder.

[xxhong]

Actually the raise of 3S shows that the 2H opener likes his chance in 3S, so usually he shouldn't really have a lot of values in H, in which case he wouldn't mind defending 3C because partner shows H shortness. I think the key point of this hand is that once you know partner is very likely to hold a spade void and rather weak and distributional, you really should be very careful doubling without a sure entry to draw trumps.

gnasher, on 2011-August-02, 11:26, said:

I don't think West "pulled" the double of 2♥, in the sense of running from a contract that he thought was going down. 2♠ here is normally played as a hand with some spades that wants to compete. In that case, he might well have one or even two hearts.

Having said that, as South, thinking that West had a heart void would make me more inclined to double, because that might mean that declarer was unable to get to dummy. One of the reasons for this disaster was the fact that East had a fast entry, so declarer could take a diamond finesse without letting South in to draw trumps.

I agree with Mike and others that double on the South hand looks normal, at matchpoints. This hand has significantly more defence than promised, and it's pessimistic to assume that the defenders have got it right in such a crowded auction.

I think North should pull though. At matchpoints, he expects South to double aggressively, so when he has such a poor hand for defence he should take it out. There's more reason to pass at IMPs, because South's double should be sounder.

[jdeegan]

MrAce, on 2011-August-01, 12:05, said:

I find it interesting to see people blaming S. South has a decent hand, AKJx ♠, Kx ♥ behind 1♥ opener and much more. It is quite a view to think that he should just pass in peace here when pd made a free call, just because we know the result. Of course we may pass thinking that opponents may have hands like 6-5 and voids and avoid ever letting them make a dbled contract . We never play a % 45 session when everything goes wrong, but probably never play a % 65 session either with this logic. I will not blame North much either, but i would personally lift it.

It is also confusing to me that some decent players here think 2♥ DBL already showed South's hand.

My sentiments exactly. Nightmare hands do exist.