[Jinksy]

There are two polls on BW that have comparable hands, but which I'm struggling to understand the different outcomes of.

Both IMPs

Poll 1

http://bridgewinners...m-2-1z1nugrnx7/
x
KJxx
QJ8xxx
xx

All vul, P deals, and it goes 1C 2S to you...


Poll 2

http://bridgewinners...m-2-t7uasksp83/
T8x
JT
Kxxx
A9xx

Favourable, you deal, and it goes P P 1H 2D / to you...

So on the first hand you have some extra shape, and a fourth card in the unbid major. Against that, you have softer values, a point less, less tolerance for partner's suit, and the possibility of him being endplayed into penalty passing on various unsuitable 4nn4 hands, and you're driving a level higher.

So which factor(s) are the ones that made X the clear winner (inc among the players I know to be very strong) on the first poll, and pass the clear winner on the second, and why the factors pushing the other way are less relevant? To me I would they seems closely analogous, with (I would have thought before seeing the polls) the lower level on the second one being the deciding factor that suggested action.

[awm]

On the first hand, you have pretty much ideal shape for a double -- short spades, four hearts, a long diamond suit to retreat to if partner rebids 2NT. Further, with the short spades you should strain to act, because even with extras partner may have trouble balancing with spade length.

On the second hand, you don't even really have a bid. 2♥ shows three-card support, double shows four spades, 2NT shows a much better hand. Beyond this, you have length and values in the opponents' suit, making it likely that partner is short in diamonds and will be able to balance. If partner has long diamonds too you are happy defending!

In general it's a good rule that when opponents bid, the partner with shortage in their suit (if any) should strain to act.

[The_Badger]

Jinksy, on 2017-July-22, 07:10, said:

There are two polls on BW that have comparable hands, but...

---

---

Comparable hands. Really?

(Apologies Jinksy, but to me they don't look comparable in any shape or form.)

[eagles123]

bro I respect you a lot but these aren't even remotely comparable

[nullve]

The first hand is more suitable for a negative double than the second one.

[mike777]

Adam as usual says it well.

[Stefan_O]

The first one, you can neg-X since, if pd has 4♥s, you probably have good playing strength to compensate for you poor hcp's.
If opener rebids 3♣, I would Pass, and if opener rebids 2NT, I can bid 3♦ as sign-off.

The main issue with the second hand is pd will assume you have 4♠ (at least with minimum strength).
It might not be a big issue if he only bids 2♠ to play on a 4-3 fit.
But with extras, or if opps compete to 3♦, he might push to 3/4♠, which is likely a poor contract.
Switch a small ♦ to a ♠, and neg-X makes more sense.

[miamijd]

This is a good illustration of a few points:

1. If you have shortness in the opponents' suit, strain to bid. With length and secondary cards, be more conservative.

2. To quote Grant Baze (though maybe not quite precisely), 6-4 bid some more. These hands are good for offense.

3. When you make a negative double, you want to have an off-ramp.

On Hand 1, RHO has 6 spades, so LHO and partner very possibly have 3 each. Partner is quite likely to pass 2S out. Is that going to be a good spot for your side? Doubtful. If the opponents have 8-9 spades, you probably want to bid on the 3-level. So make a negative double and correct 3C to 3D to show this sort of hand (yes, I think you should correct 3C to 3D, because partner is going to be stuck for a bid holding something like a 13 HCP 3235 hand with no spade stop. You're short in spades; you have a good 6-4 offensive hand; you have an off-ramp. Perfect.

On hand 2, however, you have four diamonds. If partner has 3 diamonds and passes 2D out, the opponents are on a 6-fit. Don't you think defending 2D is going to be a good spot? Even if partner has drek and 2 diamonds and passes, defending 2D is apt to be right. And if partner has 2 diamonds and any sort of an opener at all, or 0-1 diamond, he's going to reopen, generally with a double. So there is no pressing need to bid now.

Moreover, what exactly is Hand 2 supposed to bid? You are too weak for 2NT; you lack a fourth spade for a negative X; you lack a third heart for a simple H raise. If someone forced me to bid with Hand 2, I would bid 2H (JT is nothing to be ashamed of), but where's the fire?

NOTE: Change Hand 2 by one small card:

Txxx JT Kxx Axxx

and now it's a negative X. It's not fantastic, but the key is that you are satisfied with whatever partner does. 2H rebid? JT and two good outside cards. Check. Some number of spades? Wonderful. 2NT? You have good stuff, including a diamond stop. 3C? You have them covered, too.

Or change the honor:

Kxx JT xxxx Axxx

Now I would trot out the 2-card raise and bid 2H. It's not that I'm so excited to raise H, but with four small diamonds, I'm not nearly so happy if partner passes this out with a doubleton. And what do I do if he reopens with a X? 2H is probably fine with the hand you gave (the Kd isn't worth a lot on offense and I only have 2 hearts, so it's not too much of an underbid), but 2H on this hand after a reopening X seems really wimpy, whereas 3H could get us overboard. Better, I think, to raise H immediately and apologize if it's wrong.

Cheers,
Mike

[ggwhiz]

Just look at the offence to defence ratio between the 2 hands. They aren't from the same planet.

[Jinksy]

Guys - 'comparable' means 'instructive to compare', not 'basically the same thing with minor variation'. They are comparable in that both are (IMO) relatively close to being a negative double at their respective levels.

Anyway, thanks for the responses. I started writing about why I dislike putting P under pressure with an X on hand 1 when he might well have 4 decent-ish spades under North's, but I think a big factor I'd overlooked was that when in doubt he'll often be able to bid 2N. I suspect that won't be a great competitive score most of the time, but it will prevent disaster (and maybe we can bid 3♦ as a signoff after it?)

[miamijd]

Jinksy, on 2017-July-24, 14:59, said:

Guys - 'comparable' means 'instructive to compare', not 'basically the same thing with minor variation'. They are comparable in that both are (IMO) relatively close to being a negative double at their respective levels.

Anyway, thanks for the responses. I started writing about why I dislike putting P under pressure with an X on hand 1 when he might well have 4 decent-ish spades under North's, but I think a big factor I'd overlooked was that when in doubt he'll often be able to bid 2N. I suspect that won't be a great competitive score most of the time, but it will prevent disaster (and maybe we can bid 3♦ as a signoff after it?)

Yes, on hand 1, if partner bids 2NT, you should bid 3D as a sign-off. This typically shows a hand that's 46 in the reds (sometimes you might have a stiff spade and 5 really good diamonds) and not good enough to force game by bidding 3D over 2S.

Cheers,
mike

[Jinksy]

miamijd, on 2017-July-24, 15:40, said:

Yes, on hand 1, if partner bids 2NT, you should bid 3D as a sign-off. This typically shows a hand that's 46 in the reds (sometimes you might have a stiff spade and 5 really good diamonds) and not good enough to force game by bidding 3D over 2S.

Cheers,
mike

That's about the shape I'd expect for the bid, but it's not obvious that it shouldn't be invitational. It seems less likely, but it could even be GF come to that - in theory you could launch such hands with a 2♦ bid, but you might want to be able to show your hearts now, before the bidding comes back to you at 3♠.