BBO Discussion Forums: Double - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Double I could be wrong here

#1 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,118
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2013-October-15, 14:34

I'll first give you partner's hand: It's a team game, imp scoring.



Your call? What's going on? What are the choices?

South, that's me, has an opening hand and the support double shows three card hear support. Presumably the pass of 2 shows nothing in particular except the lack of any clear action.

Me, I would bid one of the following: 2, 3 or 4. Given the vulnerability, a passable 3 seems to me to be an underbid. I think I go with 2.
Partner chose a double. I fail to see the logic in this.

rogerclee did these lectures on doubles but I can't find them Maybe he addresses this.

This is something of a shaggy dog story since we got a fine result. Both 4 and 3NT are makable but at the other table the contract was 4 off 1. Here are the two hands:

imps


East's only four card suit is Diamonds and he has all the missing high card points.

OK, a good result, but it never occurred to me that pard would have five hearts. I figured he had good values and wanted to play for penalties. Maybe he did mean it for penalties. Or am I supposed to bid 2? If he wants to play in hearts, why not bid hearts? If he wants to check for a spade fit, why not bid spades?
Ken
0

#2 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,249
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2013-October-15, 14:52

I think it would be odd to make a penalty double in front of the bidder, so I would take this double must be what we used to call a cooperative double - which is about right on the strength of that hand, anyway.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter.
0

#3 User is offline   Lorne50 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 2013-August-19

Posted 2013-October-15, 16:56

Double looks OK to me.

Firstly N should bid a round earlier if he thinks it is clear to declare the hand, but having passed and seen S pass (which is very likely to be a weak NT hand) N is looking at a reasonable 10 count but only an 8 card fit with a singleton in partners suit and 70% of his points in an oppo suit. Chances for game can't be that good but 2 2 or 3 off is a reasonable gamble.
0

#4 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,118
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2013-October-15, 20:35

View PostLorne50, on 2013-October-15, 16:56, said:

Double looks OK to me.

Firstly N should bid a round earlier if he thinks it is clear to declare the hand, but having passed and seen S pass (which is very likely to be a weak NT hand) N is looking at a reasonable 10 count but only an 8 card fit with a singleton in partners suit and 70% of his points in an oppo suit. Chances for game can't be that good but 2 2 or 3 off is a reasonable gamble.


If I understand you correctly, you also regard it as penalty oriented. Cooperative of course, but not for take-out? Maybe it was so intended. Doubling the opponents in 2 when we have a known eight card heart fit seems odd to me. But perhaps. And then with my hand, the South hand? I certainly have no reason to expect five hearts in partner's hand. So I pass, we set it 500. No complaints about the result (although 620 is better), but I still think I would bid 2 rather than X. And yes, now that you mention it, 1 a round earlier seems right. With an eight card fit in hearts I really don't think I would be looking to play for penalties at a low level.

As my subtitle says, I could be wrong here, and I do appreciate the opinions.
Ken
0

#5 User is offline   nigel_k 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,207
  • Joined: 2009-April-26
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wellington, NZ

Posted 2013-October-15, 21:40

If you are going to penalize them at a low level, at adverse vulnerability, when you have a known eight card major fit, you are going to want a trump stack and even then might not work out.

So I definitely disagree with double if it suggests penalties, and I don't understand it on this hand if not. I think 3 is enough. Partner can also see the vulnerability.
0

#6 User is offline   lowerline 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 553
  • Joined: 2004-March-29
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 2013-October-16, 06:19

Double would not have occurred to me... I would have bid 3 raised to 4 by partner. Not sure if I will win it though...


Steven
0

#7 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,475
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-October-16, 07:42

3H.

You have inv. strength, the shortage in partners suit and the xxx in
their suit is no plus value.

Opener will pass, he has a min opening bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#8 User is offline   ggwhiz 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Joined: 2008-June-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-October-16, 09:47

I don't play support doubles or like them much being from the strength first, find out where to play later school.

Key to me are the constraints on openers pass of 2. I assume a weak notrump? Do you open aggressively with 11?

While I don't agree with double I can understand it as a bit of a gambling action. If south has better clubs and only 2 spades kaching. It's not a stretch to think that the opponents best trump fit may be in clubs.
When a deaf person goes to court is it still called a hearing?
What is baby oil made of?
0

#9 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,118
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2013-October-16, 14:44

View PostP_Marlowe, on 2013-October-16, 07:42, said:

3H.

You have inv. strength, the shortage in partners suit and the xxx in
their suit is no plus value.

Opener will pass, he has a min opening bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe



Rightly or wrongly, I would have raised 3 to 4. It makes (although it was not made at the other table). Perhaps not surprisingly, since no one bid spades, that suit is 3-3. The AK of diamonds are well placed, as are the KQ of clubs. So various lines work. But of course if diamonds are 5-2 instead of 4-3, it can go AK and ruff, and then it is pretty hopeless. The Qxx of diamonds is certainly a warning sign.

Anyway, my judgment is as good or as bad as it is, but I am not at all sure what partner intended his double to be. This was maybe the fourth hand or so with someone I have never played with before. I see lots of doubles at the table such as this one, where I feel that a more descriptive call is available. Maybe he meant it as a cooperative try to play for penalties, or as the infamous do something intelligent call, but it is easier to do something intelligent if I know that partner has five rather than four hearts.

I singled out marlow for a response because of his thought that I would pass 3, but my comments fit in with other notes here as well.
Ken
0

#10 User is offline   mikestar13 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 624
  • Joined: 2010-October-27
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Bernardino, CA USA

Posted 2013-October-16, 19:58

3 for me. IMHO, North would have done better to make his choice of bids on the previous round. I could tolerate any of 2, 3, or 4 according to North's evaluation of the hand, but I don't like the pass of XX.
0

#11 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 20,455
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-October-17, 08:14

View Postkenberg, on 2013-October-16, 14:44, said:

Rightly or wrongly, I would have raised 3 to 4. It makes (although it was not made at the other table). Perhaps not surprisingly, since no one bid spades, that suit is 3-3. The AK of diamonds are well placed, as are the KQ of clubs. So various lines work. But of course if diamonds are 5-2 instead of 4-3, it can go AK and ruff, and then it is pretty hopeless. The Qxx of diamonds is certainly a warning sign.

It seems like East had a pretty unusual hand for his double, which is the only reason it makes. Typically that bid shows 4 spades and 4+ diamonds, so even if the AK are on side, you're likely to lose 2 spades. So it's not a good contract.

#12 User is offline   kenberg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,118
  • Joined: 2004-September-22
  • Location:Northern Maryland

Posted 2013-October-17, 12:41

View Postbarmar, on 2013-October-17, 08:14, said:

It seems like East had a pretty unusual hand for his double, which is the only reason it makes. Typically that bid shows 4 spades and 4+ diamonds, so even if the AK are on side, you're likely to lose 2 spades. So it's not a good contract.


I agree that 4 does not look like a great contract, although losing two spades is not really the prime problem. Even if the opening lead is a trump, as it was at the other table, the fourth spade could be ruffed if needed. But a spade ruff only brings you up to nine tricks and now the timing for developing the tenth could get tricky. Not impossible maybe, but definitely tricky if spades are 4-2. Develop and cash the diamond before getting the ruff would work, I think. If we place two hearts in the long spade hand along with AK of diamonds, maybe we can still get home. But the evidence is pretty fair that spades are 3-3. It is likely that the doubler has at least three, both because he doubled and because his partner did not bid spades over the XX. But now, after XX-Pass-pass, I would expect doubler to bid 1 if he had four. So, on the auction, three is likely. not certain, but likely.


At any rate, I agree that 4 is not a great contract, I was saying only that looking at my 14 count with the AKx of hears, I would have raised 3 to 4. To me, the biggest negative, if the auction after 2 had gone pas-pass-3-pass, is the Qxx of diamonds. A, K, small diamond ruffed sounds like a real threat.

As to the bidding by E, he does have all of the 16 missing high card points so while his call is a bit unusual, I can understand it. Doubling with a 3=3=4=3 sixteen count is heresy to some, automatic to others. I think I would have stayed quiet with that hand. To each his own. Suppose he stays out. We probably get an uncontested 1-1-1NT-2(nmf)-3 -4. It's true that the stiff club is not something to get overly excited about but it still seems to me that the auction would go in this manner. A vulnerable game on 24 highs, a good 5-3 fit, and a stiff. I have been in far worse places.
Ken
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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