[jillybean]

MP NV

---

[hrothgar]

jillybean, on 2011-April-21, 09:15, said:

MP NV

---

Hi Kathryn

I think double is clear
(Watch me get proven wrong)

[mr1303]

Agree with hrothgar. Stop me if I'm wrong, but likely 19 total tricks?

[JLOGIC]

Lol stop using total tricks for analyzing whether to bid 5 over 5. When they have 8-4 or a 9 card suit, I think that's some total trick adjustments! Also, I believe Larry Cohen even wrote that total tricks does not work for high level decisions. I mean, it's common sense here.

[quiddity]

If this is a common-sense double, then how much stronger would the hand have to be (with this shape) before it's too strong to double? What if we were r/w?
It seems like partner will pass with any balanced minimum and at some point we rate to have a game or slam and can't settle for 500 or whatever defending 5C-X.
But I'm not sure where that line is. I'm not even sure what my assumptions should be - a lot depends on whether partner has the club king or queen.

At this vul it seems right to double and hope for +500. If partner pulls should we raise to 6?

[JLOGIC]

I didn't mean it's common sense to X or bid 5D. I meant it should be common sense that the law of total tricks is a bad way to analyze high level decisions. It is much more useful for "should I bid 3 over 3" or 3 over 2, or 4 over 3. It is for partscores.

[jillybean]

---

Here's the full hand, I should have doubled but didn't.
However, I got away with this one and made the unmakeable contract for a 70% board.

[Gerben42]

To bid 5-over-5 you need a shapely hand. 4441 just isn't it. This hand is one of many proofs.

[Fluffy]

I don't like te 4441 shape for doubling, partner will normally think we have longer hearts and there is a risk of playing 5♥ on stupid hands. Still I'd double on this board cos it has not enough ODR to bid on.

[ahydra]

5H looks stone cold on that... what am I missing? Ah, the diamond ruff... otherwise it's a very good contract.

ahydra

[han]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-22, 04:35, said:

I don't like te 4441 shape for doubling, partner will normally think we have longer hearts and there is a risk of playing 5♥ on stupid hands. Still I'd double on this board cos it has not enough ODR to bid on.

What do you do with 15 HCP and a more defensive hand?

[han]

ahydra, on 2011-April-22, 06:18, said:

5H looks stone cold on that... what am I missing? Ah, the diamond ruff... otherwise it's a very good contract.

ahydra

A very good contract? Seems like a terrible contract to me, but 5CX is a very good contract!

North was a bit nuts on this hand.

[Quantumcat]

Since this is a beginner's forum, I would say to them, never bid 5-over-5 unless you want to invite slam.

Don't bother trying to land on pinheads. Exactly the same as the advice, don't try to improve the partscore (if you know game is not a possibility, just accept the semi-fit instead of digging yourself even deeper into holes).

In this case, West has a lovely slam invitation holding four-card support and only one club loser, but East says no thanks. Perfectly stopped (shame about missing the ace of diamonds, can't have everything. Good on North for pushing them to 5).

[cherdano]

Quantumcat, on 2011-April-26, 03:00, said:

Since this is a beginner's forum, I would say to them, never bid 5-over-5 unless you want to invite slam.

(...)

In this case, West has a lovely slam invitation holding four-card support and only one club loser, but East says no thanks. Perfectly stopped (shame about missing the ace of diamonds, can't have everything. Good on North for pushing them to 5).

I disagree with this advice. You need shape to bid 5-5, not a slam invitation. Yes, most of the time you should have a reason to hope you can make the contract, but having asking for a slam invitation is really going too far.

Likewise, on the actual hand, West seems to have a double rather than a 5♦ bid, 4441 isn't shapely enough to bid 5-5. Stopping in 5♥ isn't "perfectly stopped" when you had a much better score expectation available and reachable against 5♣X.

(I also don't understand why the advice would be different in the B/I forum than in the A/E forum. 5/5 decisions are difficult for all of us, but the principle is easy to explain and understand for anyone.)

[JLOGIC]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-22, 04:35, said:

I don't like te 4441 shape for doubling, partner will normally think we have longer hearts and there is a risk of playing 5♥ on stupid hands. Still I'd double on this board cos it has not enough ODR to bid on.

You think partner will bid 5H on a 3 card suit? That is pretty ridiculous. You have to double 5C when you have ownership of the hand, it's not a takeout double. Partner might bid with a good 6-4 or something, but he needs shape to bid at the 5 level just like we do (as well as a fit!).

[pooltuna]

JLOGIC, on 2011-April-26, 11:48, said:

You think partner will bid 5H on a 3 card suit? That is pretty ridiculous. You have to double 5C when you have ownership of the hand, it's not a takeout double. Partner might bid with a good 6-4 or something, but he needs shape to bid at the 5 level just like we do (as well as a fit!).

Since when are your eponymic actions allowed on this forum?

[Fluffy]

han, on 2011-April-24, 04:28, said:

What do you do with 15 HCP and a more defensive hand?

Double also, but the question is what will partner do with an offensive hand with 3 hearts over it. He might think 5♥ will outscore 5♦.

[han]

Get a new partner Gonzalo.