[AL78]

This one came up yesterday evening:

---

Your call?

[pescetom]

4D. Seems fairly obvious to me, although I wonder what partner holds.

[DavidKok]

It's a bit of a blind guess. With extras partner might have raised our 3♥ to 4, though perhaps partner is worried we have a 4-card suit and lack the playing strength for game. On most hands with club shortage partner could have raised instead, notably with a 4=3=5=1 strong hand. Without agreements to the contrary partner might also hold a huge (semi)balanced hand, i.e. a 20-count or so. I think the second double shows that hand type, and we should probably pass (contracting for 19 or more total tricks after partner failed to raise our only long suit doesn't seem great, especially if we have a balanced hand facing a balanced hand).
On this auction I think it is important for partner to realise that there's always going to be some blind guessing over 4♣, and partner should show initiative with club shortage and heart support. So whatever this second double is, it is not that.
I don't think 4♦ has merit.

[pescetom]

I just find it hard to envision a hand that can hold North to 8 or less tricks in clubs, but not raise hearts or bid a pointy suit. 4D is flexible and might convince her to bid 4H on AK or whatever.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

4H.

3H did not promise a 5th heart, and 4D does not implicitly show this either, but the 2nd X should show add. strength.
I am tempted to pass and see how 4C ends, and this may well be my reaction on the table, ..., it would help to know the
North player, but 4H is the sane option.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[AL78]

At the table I decided it was a choice between pass and 4♥. I thought partner had a good hand for the double with three hearts and two clubs (with a singleton South would have raised to 4 or 5 clubs at relativistic speed). I am unfamiliar with the North player but the South player is notorious for wild bidding.

I decided to pass on the basis that 4♥ might struggle with my flat shape and because on principle North deserves to go for a number bidding like that. The full deal:

---

For once the bridge Gods were on my side and we took this two down for +300 and a top. The full traveller:

3♥ W 9 -140
2NT W 6 100
4♠X E 7 500
3♣X N 9 470
3♥ W 9 -140
4♣X N 8 -300

As you can see it is a bit of a train wreck. Despite the combined 25 HCP there is no game on.

[DavidKok]

Very nice. I agree with most of your analysis, but wouldn't read too much into "on principle North deserves to go for a number bidding like that". While true, the main advantage is that you got two shots to make a winning call. Unfortunately that does not mean that 4♣X is correct - merely that you have more information than others.

With balanced facing balanced it pays to be slightly conservative. If your 3♥ didn't excite partner, probably no other suit will.
Despite working out beautifully this time I do not like partner's second double much. The hand has extras, but not a ton of them. Also 3♥ has a range of approximately 0-8. Even if we pass, partner gets another chance to make a winning call.

[pescetom]

A nice hand, but as I expected neither N nor E really had their second round call.

[AL78]

 DavidKok, on 2023-July-21, 14:31, said:

Very nice. I agree with most of your analysis, but wouldn't read too much into "on principle North deserves to go for a number bidding like that"...

I thought/said that more out of frustration. I've lost count of the number of times opps have made wild or sub-optimal bids that happen to work on the deal and I end up with a bad score. It is getting to the point where I am not enjoying bridge anymore because the gameplay seems to be marred by randomness.

[apollo1201]

 AL78, on 2023-July-21, 15:49, said:

I thought/said that more out of frustration. I've lost count of the number of times opps have made wild or sub-optimal bids that happen to work on the deal and I end up with a bad score. It is getting to the point where I am not enjoying bridge anymore because the gameplay seems to be marred by randomness.

Where you play, it definitely seems so.

The small number of tables and the rather weak plays we could witness through most of all your posts make that usual odds don’t apply there.

You might consider switching to X imps to even out a little. Or introduce a few prepared and illustrative deals (let’s say 4 to 6 out of 20 soemething) but that raises suspicions all the time. Or, play pre-scored deals where you compare not to just 2 other tables but hundreds si the randomness created locally is less significant.

[Gilithin]

 pescetom, on 2023-July-21, 05:52, said:

4D. Seems fairly obvious to me, although I wonder what partner holds.

If Doubler had a pure takeout hand they would have raised hearts, so they should by rights have a flexible hand type. If they had a hand with 5 diamonds (4351, 4252, etc) they would have bid 4♦. So Doubler ought to have a flexible hand with 5 spades (5341, 5242, etc), that would have bid 3♠ without the 4♣ call. I would not assume this with a PUP, only with someone that I trusted to think in this way.