[manudude03]

---

Teams, N/S vul. ATB for this disaster. 4H doubled made after South led the ♠K.

[gnasher]

North has an clearcut pull to 4NT. South's second double isn't, or shouldn't be, penalties: it says that he has a takeout double with more high cards.

As South I'd have led a top club. It's always worth having a look at dummy. Also, spades is the suit where North is least likely to have length, because he didn't take out the double to 4♠.

[ggwhiz]

On a close decision I don't mind the final contract a bit as 5♣ is hardly cold. The opening lead was the right colour but REALLY wrong. A trump would be my 2nd choice.

[Cyberyeti]

I'd have led a trump, where are declarer's tricks coming from If I play 2 rounds ?

I actually think 5♣ will be -1 a fair bit of the time, W can play ♥ AQ or KQ to conjure up the image of the A/K the other side and you now may play him to have ducked with the A♠ after a spade to the K/Q holds.

[MrAce]

I do not think Andy suggested 4 NT because it leads to a making contract. He did because this is the correct bid, regardless of 5♣ makes or not. In North's point of view, EW has 10-11 card fit.

[aguahombre]

North is 100 percent to blame. He should do everything in his power to ensure South never gets to be on opening lead. Perhaps he shouldn't allow south to Declare either, and should choose 5C rather than 4NT.

[Fluffy]

Its hard to blame south for not reaching 5♣

[helene_t]

The opening lead was not great but surely North's pass is worse.

[gszes]

North 100%

South has made 2 tox showing a pretty strong hand and heart shortness. Our singleton
means the opps are almost assuredly on a 10 and maybe even 12 card suit. this is not
a good recipe for converting the second x to penalty. The fact that p has doubled twice
also increases the odds that our side belongs in slam and while a hand filled with so
many quacks cannot take us to 6 the very least we can do is get our side to 5m.

It seems to me 4n is the best overall bid as there appears to be zero risk we will end up
in less than a 44 fit. 5c is a fair candidate

4n=10 5c=8 p=2

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2015-February-05, 19:26, said:

I do not think Andy suggested 4 NT because it leads to a making contract. He did because this is the correct bid, regardless of 5♣ makes or not. In North's point of view, EW has 10-11 card fit.

What I was trying to suggest was that from N's point of view, 5C might be a bit of a stretch and a plus score off 4♥X even 100 might be the best available, at pairs I might well try this.

At teams it's a bit too risky for my liking though.

[wank]

Cyberyeti, on 2015-February-06, 09:43, said:

What I was trying to suggest was that from N's point of view, 5C might be a bit of a stretch and a plus score off 4♥X even 100 might be the best available, at pairs I might well try this.

At teams it's a bit too risky for my liking though.

south was minimum for his call and 5c can still be made.

[Phil]

Would everyone also pull with North if the auction was

4♥p p x
p ?

[Cyberyeti]

wank, on 2015-February-06, 09:48, said:

south was minimum for his call and 5c can still be made.

Give S AKxx, xx, Axx, AKxx a better hand and 5♣ is no play but you have an easy 100 off 4♥ and possibly more (diamonds don't have to be 5-1), this is the sort of thing I'm looking at.

An interesting thing is that 4♠ on both my hand and the actual hand has decent play.

[mikeh]

Phil, on 2015-February-06, 10:09, said:

Would everyone also pull with North if the auction was

4♥p p x
p ?

This is one of those situations in which I think the decision to pull, in your auction, is so close that it is impossible to answer objectively, having seen the hands. Check back in a year, reversing the minors

[PhilKing]

Phil, on 2015-February-06, 10:09, said:

Would everyone also pull with North if the auction was

4♥p p x
p ?

I would pass. There are a lot more off centre hands that should be allowed to double in that auction, and none in the original one.

Vulnerability also matters - I have been persuaded that it is right to play this double as takeout at favourable vulnerability, since there is a higher chance that they will make, and our saves will be more worthwhile. At all other vuls, I play a double of 4♥ as more cooperative, but promising tolerance for spades unless very strong.

[aguahombre]

mikeh, on 2015-February-06, 10:20, said:

This is one of those situations in which I think the decision to pull, in your auction, is so close that it is impossible to answer objectively, having seen the hands. Check back in a year, reversing the minors

Yet, in an ATB, the blame or credit for the contract would still be all North's.

[gnasher]

Phil, on 2015-February-06, 10:09, said:

Would everyone also pull with North if the auction was

4♥p p x
p ?

I would. The doubler is allowed to be off-centre, but he's not allowed to be unsuitable.

[mikeh]

aguahombre, on 2015-February-06, 10:36, said:

Yet, in an ATB, the blame or credit for the contract would still be all North's.

I know this has come up before, but in bridge many decisions are so close that it is wrong to assert that going one way gets 'blame' simply because, on the hand, it worked poorly.

There are ATB problems, then there are 'who was responsible?'

On the Phil example, assuming that S had what we'd all consider to be a clear-cut double, then N will be responsible for whether N-S defend or play 5m after pulling to 4N, but unless we consider the arguments to weigh more heavily on one side or the other, no blame should attach if the decision worked badly.

As for how clear the decision is, witness that I said 'too close to call, having seen the hands already', Philking passed and Andy bid. I think that makes it pretty reasonable to conclude that whatever the decision, N won't be guilty of a 'mistake' whether he passes or pulls to 4N.

[Fluffy]

I would also pull, they have 10-11 hearts even when 5m is wrong RHO will be willing to take the push.