[diana_eva]

All star team match on BBO. IMPs, all vul:

---

What would you bid?

[ArtK78]

5♣. Partner asked me to bid. I have some stuff. Not enough to go crazy, but some stuff. So I bid.

[mikeh]

I pass


I have nothing special on the auction. I have zero reason to expect to make 11 tricks opposite the usual minimum to middling takeout double, when the opps' defence rates to be sitting behind partner.

My pass, especially when made in tempo, hardly constitutes a bar of partner. If he has the sort of hand on which we can make 5♣ then most of the time he will reopen.

As for being in-tempo, it is a good idea to make close calls quickly in these situations, since tanking and then acting is on average, in my experience, as costly or more costly than making an in-tempo 'mistake', when the decision is close. Partner gets barred when we pass and when we bid, the opps can take a chunk out of us when they know that we weren't thinking of bidding more, but of passing.

As it happens, I think (with all respect to Art) that this is a wtp? pass.

[ArtK78]

mikeh, on 2014-December-30, 15:31, said:

As it happens, I think (with all respect to Art) that this is a wtp? pass.

You may be right. I have been getting a lot of these wrong lately.

[diana_eva]

Needless to say I got it wrong at the table But I have to figure out what went wrong with my judgement, so any replies and explanations appreciated, will help me finetune my reasoning in such situations.

[eagles123]

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

[mikeh]

diana_eva, on 2014-December-30, 15:48, said:

Needless to say I got it wrong at the table But I have to figure out what went wrong with my judgement, so any replies and explanations appreciated, will help me finetune my reasoning in such situations.

Imagine, quickly, good hands for partner, in terms of being able to make game. Don't over-reach: don't for example assume that he has a spade void. Assume a decent 4441 without enough to double a second time.

To me, x KQxx Axxx AKxx/ x KQxx AKxx Axxx, which are absolutely perfect fitters with 6 controls, are a second double, especially if I didn't break tempo.

So don't give him that.

Make the hand any worse and 5♣ has little play.

x Kxxx Axxx AKxx, for example, needs hearts 3-3 with the hook working. No thanks.

He'd pass 4♠ with that and we'd go quietly plus

x Kxxx AQxx Axxx: again, he'd pass with that, and again we'd avoid a near hopeless (on the auction) contract.

x KQxx AKQx xxxx

I think this is a wtp precisely because most good hands I construct fall into one of two camps. On the ones where we make, partner is bidding again. On the ones we fail, partner is passing. Now, I only construct a few hands and I am sure that with some work I could come up with a justification for bidding: the point is to be alive to the human tendency to construct hands that match what we want to do. Thus ignore hands on which he has a spade void...yes, they exist, but a stiff is far more probable and, again, with a void he may bid again anyway.

There are hands on which the decision is closer: give me xx AJx xx QJxxxx, now this hand rates to be worth a full winner more, and the question is whether it is a loser less

Now, x KQxx Axxx Axxx, with which he probably should pass 4♠ is enough, imo, to make 5♣ a good call. They may even make 4♠! Meanwhile, even with optimum defence, we have a play for 5♣ on some plausible layouts.

x KQxx AQxx Kxxx otoh leaves us very unlikely to make: we need the diamond K onside, which it rates not to be. Of course, LHO may lead a low spade and endplay rho, but that is improbable as well.

So with the 2=3=26 hand, I would imagine good and bad hands and try to be as objective as I can. I like to think I would bid with the example I gave, but it would be close and imo definitely not a wtp.


edit: all of the foregoing is going to look really silly if bidding was the winning action At least I can't be called for resulting on this!

[mikeh]

eagles123, on 2014-December-30, 16:08, said:

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

As I said in my last long post: construct 'good' hands where partner should pass: now see how many of them make game.

[eagles123]

mikeh, on 2014-December-30, 16:26, said:

As I said in my last long post: construct 'good' hands where partner should pass: now see how many of them make game.

well maybe we should x?

[Jinksy]

eagles123, on 2014-December-30, 16:08, said:

I'm so reluctant to pass. We've got a pretty reasonable hand and isn't it quite likely if we pass that it goes AP?

If so, it's quite likely that they're not making and neither are we. If I double, I'm not going to feel happy if P makes any call but 5♣.

[Fluffy]

I have enough to double, so I will do it, double shows a balanced hand, I don't expect him to pull often.

[steve2005]

I don't think 5♣ is going for 800, some chance to make. could be a good sacrifice even if doesn't make.

[PhilKing]

Pass >> double >>> 5♣

[wank]

i'd double. it might be screwing us but that's life

[whereagles]

pass. this can still be a 20-20 point split (making dbl risky), and I got no shape whatsoever for any bidding.

[SteveMoe]

Pass. My 9 losers won't make game unless partner has substantial extras. Partner needs 4-5 losers. Pass is the only way to find that out. Would consider a double IFF we need a top. Cannot find a double at IMPs.

[MrAce]

To be honest I do not see this as clear as Mike does. The points he made are all good points. But there is thing about good opponents when they open 3M and raise to game vulnerable....it usually either makes or goes down 1 at most. Maybe this is what my experiences taught me, perhaps coincidentally.

But look at the example hands Mike constructed, especially the ones he mentioned that we should not count because those hands will make a 2nd double and anything worse than that we will have a very little play in 5♣. Up to this point I agree. However, ironically if you make pd's hand any worse, our defense prospects are diminished also. Passers talk as if going plus is guaranteed, which is not even remotely guaranteed imo. Unless of course opponents do not have singleton or void in this auction, which is unlikely. They both may have shortness and this is when it gets ugly, especially when we have a huge fit as well.

Having said all of that, I would not bid 5♣. Whether I pass or dbl depends on what it actually means. To me dbl means "I have values but not shape to bid anything myself" All teh hands being constructed for pd are 1444 hand as far as I saw. Why pd can not have 1453 1543 (with weak hearts) or 0463? Having learnt I have some values, perhaps he can reevaluate his hand. Or is everyone playing 4♠ dbl = penalty? I admit we are a tad light for this and our hcps are not prime. My point is I do not think pass leads to good result as often as some of us think it will.

[diana_eva]

OK, thanks all. So it wasn't clear what to do, at least I wasn't on another planet when I found it hard to decide without huddling for 5 minutes.

I first thought "Goodie, I've got stuff!", then I tried to picture what I need for game/slam to make. I then realized partner needs to have quite a perfect hand for us to make something 5th or 6th level, and then, instead of passing, I figured I have to tell pd I've got something, so I doubled.

I didn't expect double to be 100% penalty, and pd was a very good player, he wouldn't play me for a trump stack with opps bidding and raising spades against us. But he had the most boring 1-4-4-4 T/O double so he left it in, and opps made 4SX.

Other table bid 5C which went down 2 undoubled.

What went wrong with my judgement though was that I kinda took it for granted that we own the board, and didn't consider the possibility of them making as a strong alternative, in which case maybe I should have thought of bidding just because we don't know who makes what and we've got a good fit.

[cherdano]

Of course, the proper reason to pass has been explained by Mike - think about what would happen opposite typical hands from partner. Let me add 2 small cents to his analysis:
- It is a mistake to only think about 1444 hands with partner. While 4 might be the most frequent club length with partner, he will have 3 clubs quite often (and much more often than 5) - that obviously makes the case for defending stronger. There is even a small chance that he has 2 spades.
- While there are 16 counts where we will miss games by passing (I dont think x Kxxx KQJxx AKx should double again), partner is much more likely to have a minimum takeout double. In that case, 5C is down for sure, and 4S may or may not be down - just the situation where you want to take your chances defending undoubled.

But the short reason to pass is that our hand is not too different from what partner expects. He will play us roughly for a balanced 7 count; a balanced 9 count (with one hcp wasted) is not too a good enough reason to take action at the 5 level. If you think about it that way, you may find a pass in tempo at the table.

[whereagles]

4441s are not boring

If dbl is sort of "optional", I might have pulled with pard's hand (without even seeing it).