[bd71]

---

Mainstream 2/1.

Spades break and ♦K is onside.

Result: 4C-3/+150 vs. 4S=/-620, lose 10

[SteveMoe]

East!
But South should double. Whether you collect 620 or 500 is up to North.

[aguahombre]

I thought North should double in the passout to show he has some cards above the minimum response, and then South would convert with the 4-card spade support.. South did well to not act over 4C, not knowing responder's strength yet.

[rmnka447]

North gets the blame on this hand.

Why?

North knows that their side has more than the balance of the points something South cannot know.

As happened here, East's preempt has made it impossible for South to support North's ♠s because it is unknown with exactly how many points North responded. West passed but possibly could hold about opening values and ♦s making it impossible to compete. If South bids 4 ♠ and finds that to be the case (i.e. North responded with just a few points), then it could be a telephone number set for E/W. So South is stuck passing and awaiting further developments.

North has to make a card showing double -- showing at least 10 or 11 HCP and no clear direction what to do. Here North with a 2 1/2 QT 11 pointer is on the edge of an opener. South then should bid the VUL game because at IMPs the scoring says you should bid game on anything close to game. Note that if South held a ♣ stack instead of ♠s, the double could be passed and might produce a number set for N/S.

[sfi]

I'm not sure how to vote - I want to choose the first two options. On the auction game isn't a bargain, but North really needs to take further action in the passout seat, and double looks normal. This might lead to N-S going down in a contract, but it might also collect a nice penalty or find a game in either spades or diamonds. None of this can happen if North doesn't show that they have a good hand here.

[Endymion77]

North can't pass this out. After North doubles which is obvious, it's more interesting if South should sit or bid 4♠ but with AKxx spades and virtually no defense outside I think South bids.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't want to be in game, I do want to collect a penalty out of 4♣. It's a vulnerable game, a 3-2 spade break and a finesse is about borderline for this under normal circumstances, but with the preempt, I think the odds of spades 3-2 has dropped significantly.

I think N has to do something, and that means X (opposite a 4 card diamond, could bid 4♦ which S will convert to 4♠), then S has a problem, and will almost certainly bid 4♠.

[kenberg]

I see the pass by South, over 4♣, as totally correct. His partner, so far, has shown four spades and enough values to bid at the 1 level over 1D. At this point there is no reason to think he can make 4♠ and no reason to think he can beat 4♣. So he passes. This is one of those things that I do not have an open mind about.

Now to North: He has two aces and a Q, his partner has opened the bidding. He doesn't think the odds heavily favor beating 4♣? Sure it's imps, and maybe once in a blue moon there will be a freak 4♣ bid that makes here, but I think a double is clear. Doubling here doesn't tell partner to pull, it just announces enough extra values to not sell to 4♣ undoubled.

Back to South, after the double. I would probably go with 4♠. I have AKxx in partner's suit. If partner has as little as QTxx, or maybe even Q9xx, I have a shot at surviving a 4-1 split. Bidding 4♠ may or may not be right, and South may or may not make the right choice for the hand as the cards lie, that's life, but he should have been given the opportunity to try.

If 4♠ goes down, maybe North should be congratulated for his pass but to my mind it's the wrong call.

[P_Marlowe]

North.

If you want to be in game, is besides the point, doubled undertricks also bring in money,
and letting them play undoubled, when we have 25+HCP cant be good.

North has an inv.+ hand, he showed 6+, he should show some live, South has a min opening
hand, he passes. Making some noise should show some live.

Hence North has to move, and he should double, and South can decide, if goes plus, or tries
to for gold by bidding game.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ggwhiz]

I voted all north. Perhaps they didn't see easts initial pass.

[gwnn]

ggwhiz, on 2014-February-17, 08:21, said:

I voted all north. Perhaps they didn't see easts initial pass their own cards (e.g. their numerous aces).

Fixed your post.

[ArtK78]

North must have been playing some other game. Doubling with the North hand is 110% obvious. I give North 110% of the blame on this one.

Suggesting that South should double 4♣ is mindboggling. He has an opening bid (which he showed), a fit with partner and no club cards. Are you really suggesting that the double of 4♣ is for takeout????

[gwnn]

ArtK78, on 2014-February-17, 08:39, said:

Suggesting that South should double 4♣ is mindboggling. He has an opening bid (which he showed), a fit with partner and no club cards. Are you really suggesting that the double of 4♣ is for takeout????

Of course it is for takeout but this hand is way way too weak for it.

[wank]

ArtK78, on 2014-February-17, 08:39, said:

Are you really suggesting that the double of 4♣ is for takeout????

well yes....but south has a crap hand and wrong shape so it's moot

[aguahombre]

On further consideration, I conclude that Steve, in post #2, accidentally reversed the positions North and South and doesn't really believe South should Double.

[mikeh]

The notion that S should do anything other than pass 4♣ is bizarre. The notion that a double by him is takeout strikes me as even more bizarre. If we have enough values to compete at the 4-level, which is what a takeout double says, and we hold AKxx in partner's major, wtf are we doing making a takeout double???? Why not bid what's under our nose.....not to mention that when partner is deciding what to do over the takeout double, he won't be playing us for AKxx in his suit.

N clearly has the job of defending the plus score that his hand suggests belongs to N-S, even allowing for the 3rd seat opener.

To me, the only question for N is whether he should double or bid 4♦. I think double is the better call because partner might have only 4 diamonds (2=4=4=3/3=4=4=2). He should, imo, be passing with all flat hands lacking 4♠.

As for what he should do with the given hand over a reopening double, I think it very close. Single dummy we want to be defending because while the diamond hook works, the odds of a bad trump break are significant, but I doubt I'd find that call: I think I'd bid 4♠ as South.

[billw55]

mikeh, on 2014-February-17, 10:11, said:

N clearly has the job of defending the plus score that his hand suggests belongs to N-S, even allowing for the 3rd seat opener.

Agree, but I don't see a 3rd seat opener.

Shall we spend any effort evaluating east's peculiar sequence? Assuming he knows what he is doing, he must have a flaw that stopped him preempting on his first turn. A major suit holding is likely, and hence 7-4 (or more) shape. This also argues for south bidding, rather than defending, after north's mandatory protection double.

[wank]

mikeh, on 2014-February-17, 10:11, said:

The notion that a double by him is takeout strikes me as even more bizarre.

what would you bid on AKx Akxx Kqtxx x or Ak Akxx KQ10xxx x etc etc in your takeout double free world?

[MrAce]

wank, on 2014-February-17, 10:34, said:

what would you bid on AKx Akxx Kqtxx x or Ak Akxx KQ10xxx x etc etc in your takeout double free world?

I voted % 100 N long time ago.

But anyway, i am surprised that i disagree with Mike strongly on something. The meaning of double of 4♣ by S in this case. To me it is as clear t/o double as it can be.

What is ironic to me is that North American players (in this case Arty and Mike) seems to not play it negative and they play in a zone where preempts are way too solid/conservative insanely if you compare it to the ones in some other zones of the world. Even if i was a believer of this double to be used as penalty or anything other than take out, i would never play it in North America. The preempt style and conservatism (in USA for example) makes employment of penalty double very unattractive imo.

This country is full of JEC, Al Roth and The Hog type of players, and i am not saying this in any negative way to offend them. This is their style and they have advantages and disadvantages just like we all do. But they are prepared for this. They build their style and exactly prepared incase they may be doubled. You can not hurt them with penalty doubles. They would not even make a preempt w/o proper spot cards when everything else is fine, go back and dig the past posts and you will see it.

I can even cross the line and suggest that "do not preempt over preempt" rule should not apply vs this type of players, let alone penalty double. It is futile. (This part is joke of course )

mikeh, on 2014-February-17, 10:11, said:

The notion that a double by him is takeout strikes me as even more bizarre. If we have enough values to compete at the 4-level, which is what a takeout double says, and we hold AKxx in partner's major, wtf are we doing making a takeout double???? Why not bid what's under our nose.....not to mention that when partner is deciding what to do over the takeout double, he won't be playing us for AKxx in his suit.

I may be wrong, but perhaps all Mike wanted to say was " using negative double when holding AKxx support in pd's suit is bizzare" (which i agree) and he would use negative double in the hands you constructed Wank ?

[mikeh]

wank, on 2014-February-17, 10:34, said:

what would you bid on AKx Akxx Kqtxx x or Ak Akxx KQ10xxx x etc etc in your takeout double free world?

We may be arguing semantics. In particular, you may wish to expand your lexicon of doubles.

I would double with your example hands, and with many more besides, including very strong notrump hands.

My doubles in this sequence are not 'takeout' any more than they are 'penalty'.

They announce hand ownership. Aka 'card-showing', aka 'do something intelligent' aka 'transferable values'.

Partner will normally pass (which is why they are not 'takeout'), but is free to bid with any good reason, usually shape (which is why they are not 'penalty'...one can pull penalty doubles but it is the truly exceptional hand where that is permitted. Pulling a hand ownership double is done well less than half the time but far more frequently than very rarely).

If I held hand ownership at the 4-level with AKxx in partner's major, doubling to show 'cards' is imbecilic imo.