[gwnn]

sitting 3rd seat, favourable@MP's, you pick up:

A6
K864
KQT5
952

against reasonable oops at a late-night MP tournament, you see the bidding go like this:

1D-p-1H-2C
x-2S-3D-p
p-3S-??

3D was not really the value bid, but what do you do now? Partner is a sound opener.

edit: now there are 13 cards

[PhantomSac]

12 cards

[cherdano]

PhantomSac, on 2014-August-27, 16:46, said:

12 cards

They are vulnerable at MPs in 3♠, what else do you need to double?

[Lord Molyb]

cherdano, on 2014-August-27, 17:56, said:

They are vulnerable at MPs in 3♠, what else do you need to double?

A 13th card.

[Lovera]

Another topic with 12 cards ..

[gwnn]

Ah, I found a club on the floor!

[whereagles]

In my experience RHO has a bunch of weak spades. It's no use to dbl because LHO will pull to 4♣ like 110% of the time, so I'd say 4♦ (3NT risks seeing LHO cashing a bunch of clubs).

[PhantomSac]

cherdano, on 2014-August-27, 17:56, said:

They are vulnerable at MPs in 3♠, what else do you need to double?

I dunno if I had a fifth diamond maybe I would not want to double, it hurts our defensive prospects and helps our offensive prospects. In general I want to have 13 cards before I decide what to do

[Trinidad]

gwnn, on 2014-August-27, 16:31, said:

3D was not really the value bid, but what do you do now? Partner is a sound opener.

- You have told partner your distribution in the red suits. He will expect you to be about 3-2 in the blacks.
- You have about an ace more than what my partner would expect you to hold (unless you are playing some form of good/bad 2NT).
- We have at least invitational values, you have a balanced hand, the opponents bid at the three level and are not sure of a fit.
- We are at favorable @ MPs.

I don't care whether the opponents are "reasonable". I double as a strong suggestion to penalize them.

I trust that my partner realizes that we have a double fit in the red suits. That means that he shouldn't sit for the double if he has a minimum opening with a lot of diamonds.

Is it possible that they make 3♠X when RHO got clever with an eight card spade suit and partner passed with a minimum 2353? I guess it is possible. If so, congratulate he opponents. But I don't think it is a very likely scenario.

Rik

[Zelandakh]

How come PK has not replied here yet in size 7 font?

[gwnn]

Partner had

K97
J85
AJ97
K84

and passed my x. Unfortunately declarer had

QJT8532
AT76
-
T5 (giving dummy x Qx xxxxx AQJxx - sorry, I'm posting from my phone)

and easily wrapped up 730. My partner thought my x was insane and I whined diplomatically remarked "RHO bid like a joke, what can I do?" RHO disagreed with this assessment but was happy with his score so didn't mind too much.

[Lovera]

Usually a declaration of this type ( pass then bidding ) denotes an hand like that in post 11(force + distribution : 6/7 p. with 6-4).

[ahydra]

Lovera, on 2014-August-28, 07:37, said:

Usually a declaration of this type ( pass then bidding ) denotes an hand like that in post 11(force + distribution : 6/7 p. with 6-4).

I'm not convinced. Not bidding on the first round with this 7-4 hand is somewhat risky; partner with 2 kings and out won't enter the auction, but you're cold for 4S.

ahydra

[helene_t]

I am losing confidence in gwnn's law. When opps make stupid bids it can mean that they are in a 4-1 fit but it can also mean that they underbid drastically.

[Zelandakh]

helene_t, on 2014-August-28, 08:15, said:

I am losing confidence in gwnn's law. When opps make stupid bids it can mean that they are in a 4-1 fit but it can also mean that they underbid drastically.

You are forgetting Csaba's Corrollary - when Gwnn's Law fails it will be against gwnn.

[Lovera]

ahydra, on 2014-August-28, 08:13, said:

I'm not convinced. Not bidding on the first round with this 7-4 hand is somewhat risky; partner with 2 kings and out won't enter the auction, but you're cold for 4S.

ahydra

Infact i intended another thing: what i said is referred to bidding to reach at the end and when part is passed not in this case, sorry.

[Trinidad]

Trinidad, on 2014-August-28, 03:09, said:

- You have told partner your distribution in the red suits. He will expect you to be about 3-2 in the blacks.
- You have about an ace more than what my partner would expect you to hold (unless you are playing some form of good/bad 2NT).
- We have at least invitational values, you have a balanced hand, the opponents bid at the three level and are not sure of a fit.
- We are at favorable @ MPs.

I don't care whether the opponents are "reasonable". I double as a strong suggestion to penalize them.

I trust that my partner realizes that we have a double fit in the red suits. That means that he shouldn't sit for the double if he has a minimum opening with a lot of diamonds.

Is it possible that they make 3♠X when RHO got clever with an eight card spade suit and partner passed with a minimum 2353? I guess it is possible. If so, congratulate he opponents. But I don't think it is a very likely scenario.

Rik

Of course, I really meant to write:

"- You have told partner your distribution in the red suits. He will expect you to be about 3-2 in the blacks. He can decide for himself.
- Having an ace more than what my partner would expect is NOT a good reason to double.
- We may have at least invitational values, but remember: Points, Schmoints! And you may have a balanced hand, but the opponents won't and obviously have a fit.
- We are at favorable @ MPs. But the opponents also saw the vulnerability and they know it is MPs. How stupid do you think they are? Of course, they will make 3♠!

Is it possible that they go down in 3♠X when RHO got silly with a six card spade suit and partner passed with a minimum 4342? I guess it is possible. If so, humiliate the opponents. But I don't think it is a very likely scenario."

But somehow my keyboard was malfunctioning...



Rik

[nige1]

gwnn, on 2014-August-27, 16:31, said:

sitting 3rd seat, favourable@MP's, you pick up: ♠ A 6 ♥ K 8 6 4 ♦ K Q T 5 ♣ 9 5 2
against reasonable oops at a late-night MP tournament, you see the bidding go like this:
1♦-(_P)-1♥-(2♣)
_X-(2♠)-3♦-(_P)
_P-(3♠)-??
3♦ was not really the value bid, but what do you do now? Partner is a sound opener.

Double seems sensible

gwnn, on 2014-August-28, 05:29, said:

Partner had ♠ K 9 7 ♥ J 8 5 ♦ A J 9 7 ♣ K 8 4
and passed my x. Unfortunately declarer had ♠ Q J T 8 5 3 2 ♥ A T 7 6 ♦ - ♣ T 5
(giving dummy ♠ x ♥ Q x ♦ x x x x x ♣ A Q J x x - sorry, I'm posting from my phone)
and easily wrapped up 730. My partner thought my x was insane and I whined diplomatically remarked "RHO bid like a joke, what can I do?" RHO disagreed with this assessment but was happy with his score so didn't mind too much.

Congratulate the dog-walker

[PhilKing]

Zelandakh, on 2014-August-28, 03:32, said:

How come PK has not replied here yet in size 7 font?

I'm gonna need a bigger font.

[the hog]

I don't like the X - I would pass. I don't really like pd's opening on this 9 loser piece of trash. I don't like the 2C overcall. I don't like the way declarer misbid his hand.
I don't like being at work today.