[gnasher]

1098x x A1076x J8x

Both vulnerable, IMPs

1♥   2♦   pass pass
dbl  pass pass rdbl
pass 2♠   dbl  pass
pass 3♣
Do you agree with your bidding so far? What would you do now?

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2008-September-25, 05:23

[OleBerg]

I'd -670 I presume. (Meaning I'll double for penalties.)

Edit: And the lead will be lowest from Jxx

[skjaeran]

I disagree with doubling 2♠, that's insane.
And I'm not too happy with passing 2♦x either, but that's a decision I might have made myself.
Now I'm passing, there's no reason at all for me to double now. If partner can't whack it, they're probably making.

[the hog]

Agree with Harald. Why did I double 2S? Pass now.

[OleBerg]

skaeran, on Sep 25 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

I disagree with doubling 2♠, that's insane.
And I'm not too happy with passing 2♦x either, but that's a decision I might have made myself.
Now I'm passing, there's no reason at all for me to double now. If partner can't whack it, they're probably making.

Yes I agree. I misread the original post, and thought partner had doubled 2♠. I wouldn't have doubled 2♠.

However, having doubled two spades, I have to double 3♣, lest partner thinks himself into bidding 3♥. (My double of 2♠ showed values.) A 3♥ bid by partner is not likely, but it might happen, and 3♣ will be down very often.

[655321]

RHO's bidding is very suspicious.

• Partner reopened with double, showing spade tolerance.
  
• LHO redoubled for rescue, showing diamond shortage and spade tolerance.
  
• We have 4 spades.

There aren't enough spades in the deck for everyone to have their bid.
LHO was happy to sit 2♠X, so it seems to me that RHO is playing games. Perhaps spades are 5440 around the table.

I suppose we could be optimistic and play RHO to be bidding a non-suit because he has nowhere to go, but that sort of thinking is likely to lead to -670 or worse.

I pass now.

[han]

I wouldn't have doubled 2S.

[Edmunte1]

skaeran, on Sep 25 2008, 05:57 AM, said:

I disagree with doubling 2♠, that's insane.
And I'm not too happy with passing 2♦x either, but that's a decision I might have made myself.
Now I'm passing, there's no reason at all for me to double now. If partner can't whack it, they're probably making.

Agree with that.

[jdonn]

I would not have passed partner's double, although I don't think it's terrible. And I would not have doubled 2♠, which I do think is terrible.

[MFA]

Would not have passed partner's double? WTF??

I'm too weak to let me be sucked into a rythm double sequence, so I'm passing 2♠ although it looks strange that they should have a good spot there.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think I would have passed 2S, the pass should
have been nonforcing.
Now pass is certainly forcing, so I would go with
X, I dont want to hear anything from partner, e.g.
a 3H bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

MFA, on Sep 25 2008, 10:45 AM, said:

Would not have passed partner's double? WTF??

Oh sorry I mis-saw the hand! It must have been a 9 count with KQT9x of diamonds. I'll get my glasses checked

[FrancesHinden]

I think it's pretty clear to pass the initial reopening double with good pips.

The question of what to do over 2S is interesting: we have four trumps and a holding we are happy to lead from at trick 1, we have the ace of diamonds rather than slow honours, we have a singleton in partner's suit. On the downside we have a 5-count when we could have an opening bid. I think I would double 2S, not least because the auction sniffs as if it is not going to end here: when partner reopened 2D he either had extra values or decent spade length so I doubt spades is their best fit.

Now I pass 3C. This is not a forcing pass auction. RHO is a very strong player (and LHO a very weak player)* and RHO might be having a laugh with 5-5 in the minors.

p.s. whilst it is an interesting problem, after we doubled 2S I don't think our choice of action over 3C is going to affect the final contract*.

*I have information not available to everyone on this forum, I was one of gnasher's team-mates at the other table and I know what the hand is.

[jdonn]

Frances, I don't understand how you can bid a weak hand like this the same as you would bid a much stronger hand. I really feel like once you double 2♠ your next pass is forcing. Are you just supposed to let them off the hook with a much better hand when partner is the one who can double 3♣ instead of you? Even if it doesn't create a forcing pass, partner certainly is on a huge guess as to how good of a hand you have.

I think your argument that the auction likely won't end here is a very good reason NOT to double 2♠.

[sathyab]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 25 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

when partner reopened 2D he either had extra values or decent spade length so I doubt spades is their best fit.

Not quite sure why partner needs to have extras of any kind to reopen with a double. If you play negative doubles, it's routine to double with balanced minimums in case partner had a penalty double. If partner's reopening with a double does imply extras, it wasn't stated in the original post.

[cherdano]

sathyab, on Sep 25 2008, 12:02 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Sep 25 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

when partner reopened 2D he either had extra values or decent spade length so I doubt spades is their best fit.

Not quite sure why partner needs to have extras of any kind to reopen with a double. If you play negative doubles, it's routine to double with balanced minimums in case partner had a penalty double. If partner's reopening with a double does imply extras, it wasn't stated in the original post.

What part of "or" do you not understand?

[mikeh]

I agree with those who object to the double of 2♠.

I would expect 2♠ to fail more often than not, given my hand and partner's reopening double, and maybe that's enough to warrant double.. since the auction often ends at this point. But, the double has created a real problem here, since the second double announces significantly more strength than we actually have.

It would not have occurred to me that RHO was fooling around with really short spades, but the auction suggested to me that maybe he was 3=1=5=4 or such, and was hoping to play 2♠ undoubled and is now running for his side's real fit. Maybe I don't play enough clever opps... and of course the OP didn't add the info that rho is very strong and lho will probably defer to whatever rho does (which is how I read Frances' additional info). I don't criticize the OP: adding that info would have been a real giveaway.

So: I hate the double of 2♠, I don't object to the pass of 2♦ (I might have bid 2♠, but this suit looks wrong for a 4-3 and partner didn't promise 4, while double might work very well and cost little, unless they make an overtrick or two) and I pass here.

I think pass is non-forcing, but there is no doubt but that partner will choose his or her action with the wrong impression of my hand: QJxx x KQ109x xxx is more consistent. However, we may survive

[RichMor]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 25 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

The question of what to do over 2S is interesting: we have four trumps and a holding we are happy to lead from at trick 1, we have the ace of diamonds rather than slow honours, we have a singleton in partner's suit.  On the downside we have a 5-count when we could have an opening bid. 
<some snips>

Now I pass 3C. This is not a forcing pass auction.
<more snips>

Frances,

I'm having a hard time putting these 2 statements together:

'we could have had an opening bid'

and

'This is not a forcing pass auction'

If you can pass the reopening double with an opening hand (surely sensible with good Diamonds) and double 2♠ with good Spades, then how can a pass of 3♣ be non-forcing?

[sathyab]

cherdano, on Sep 25 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

sathyab, on Sep 25 2008, 12:02 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Sep 25 2008, 12:31 PM, said:

when partner reopened 2D he either had extra values or decent spade length so I doubt spades is their best fit.

Not quite sure why partner needs to have extras of any kind to reopen with a double. If you play negative doubles, it's routine to double with balanced minimums in case partner had a penalty double. If partner's reopening with a double does imply extras, it wasn't stated in the original post.

What part of "or" do you not understand?

The very part of "or" that you appear to be totally clueless about. The way "or" is understood in normal written English. In case you have trouble comprehending it, which I suspect you will, let me elaborate: Partner doesn't need to have either spade length "or" extras to reopen with a double to protect partner's penalty double. The only thing you can infer is that partner doesn't have length in Diamonds. Any pattern such as 2533, 2524, 3523, 3532 will suffice with minimum values for the reopening double.

[han]

Disagree that partner will reopen on a minimal 2533.