Help
What's your call?
Page 1 of 1
It's your call..high level decision...IMPs, favourable,.
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 511
- Joined: 2003-June-20
- Gender:Male
Posted 2016-February-10, 01:35
IMPs, white vs. red, partner opens 4H (7-card suit possible and 3N would have shown a better preempt in either major).
What's your call?
What's your call?
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 288
- Joined: 2007-August-07
Posted 2016-February-10, 03:36
X - spade and diamond tenace over RHO looks good - we'll wallop 5♣ if we get pard a ruff or two. 5H looks iffy, could easily lack the A♥ and have two club losers.
I'd have passed 4♥ - seems like a bid here is either slam-orientated or obstructing their slam, and neither scenario seems on the cards. What would XX show for most people?
I'd have passed 4♥ - seems like a bid here is either slam-orientated or obstructing their slam, and neither scenario seems on the cards. What would XX show for most people?
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,696
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2016-February-10, 04:31
el mister, on 2016-February-10, 03:36, said:
What would XX show for most people?
A typical meaning for Redouble is cooperative penalty, usually with a penalty double in 2 of the unbid suits. I think some also use it to offer partner the chance to bid 5 without being willing to commit.
(-: Zel :-)
#4
- enigmatic
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,757
- Joined: 2009-July-31
- Gender:Male
Posted 2016-February-10, 07:33
I double, exit a heart, and expect to take exactly three tricks.
Life is long and beautiful, if bad things happen, good things will follow.
-gwnn
-gwnn
#5
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 511
- Joined: 2003-June-20
- Gender:Male
Posted 2016-February-10, 14:38
For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix 
:
5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
:5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,366
- Joined: 2012-March-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Illinois
- Interests:Bridge, Golf, Soccer
Posted 2016-February-10, 14:59
Double, the hand looks like 4 ♥ is a probable make, but 5 ♣ probably won't. The hand doesn't have the ♣ shortness to pull to 5 ♥. If partner has ♣ shortness and decides to pull the double, chances are that your cards are right to make 5 ♥.
OTOH, if 4 ♥ is allowed to make at the other table, you need to extract as big a penalty as possible to offset the potential swing.
OTOH, if 4 ♥ is allowed to make at the other table, you need to extract as big a penalty as possible to offset the potential swing.
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,170
- Joined: 2009-July-13
- Location:England
Posted 2016-February-10, 15:26
foobar, on 2016-February-10, 14:38, said:
For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix :
5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
:5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
Err - 5♣X won't make on this layout, you won't make more than 9 trumps and a diamond unless E leads a spade, A♥ lead and it won't be made.
#8
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 511
- Joined: 2003-June-20
- Gender:Male
Posted 2016-February-10, 15:46
Cyberyeti, on 2016-February-10, 15:26, said:
Err - 5♣X won't make on this layout, you won't make more than 9 trumps and a diamond unless E leads a spade, A♥ lead and it won't be made.
Try to set it
. A♥ was led at the table and as long as declarer makes the reasonable assumption that the a ruffing finesse against the ♠AQ exists (after initially ruffing a couple of small ♠s and seeing T9 fall), it's impossible to set.
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,170
- Joined: 2009-July-13
- Location:England
Posted 2016-February-10, 16:26
foobar, on 2016-February-10, 15:46, said:
Try to set it . A♥ was led at the table and as long as declarer makes the reasonable assumption that the a ruffing finesse against the ♠AQ exists (after initially ruffing a couple of small ♠s and seeing T9 fall), it's impossible to set.
. A♥ was led at the table and as long as declarer makes the reasonable assumption that the a ruffing finesse against the ♠AQ exists (after initially ruffing a couple of small ♠s and seeing T9 fall), it's impossible to set.Yes OK, you can I think take enough ruffs to exhaust E of spades then set one up after you start with the K, you don't need W to hold AQ, you will catch Qxx with E.
#10
- Group: Members
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 2015-February-25
Posted 2016-February-11, 00:41
I would redouble 4Hx. However, if I were forced to pass, then I would double their 5C. The probability of voids in 2 suits is small and there is a chance for 500, maybe 800.
#11
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,196
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:UK
Posted 2016-February-11, 05:16
rmnka447, on 2016-February-10, 14:59, said:
If partner has ♣ shortness and decides to pull the double, chances are that your cards are right to make 5 ♥.
I am afraid partner is not allowed to pull this double. The general rule is that a double opposite a preempt is unilateral penalty.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,170
- Joined: 2009-July-13
- Location:England
Posted 2016-February-11, 05:30
helene_t, on 2016-February-11, 05:16, said:
I am afraid partner is not allowed to pull this double. The general rule is that a double opposite a preempt is unilateral penalty.
He's allowed to pull it, but he'd better have a damn good reason, something like an 0850/0940 I'd seriously consider pulling.
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,866
- Joined: 2008-July-13
Posted 2016-February-11, 16:30
Cyberyeti, on 2016-February-11, 05:30, said:
He's allowed to pull it, but he'd better have a damn good reason, something like an 0850/0940 I'd seriously consider pulling.
no he's not. if he has a hand to pull a double, he has a hand to bid over 5c.
#14
- Group: Members
- Posts: 18
- Joined: 2016-January-30
- Gender:Female
- Location:Taipei, Taiwan
Posted 2016-February-12, 01:55
In terms of W, S dare double 4♥ when W holds ♠AQ and ♦AQ so S have ♠K,♦K and ♣AK at least. Moreover, S probably has A or KX or void on♥. E has 6cards outside♥ and W holds 4tricks on♠♦. E-W can tolerate 1 loser on♥ and 2 on♣. 4H-X-XX is reasonable. Of course W can pass, but however N will bid 5C.
In terms of E, he will pass 5C without that redouble but may bid 5♥ to indicate 0♣ instead of pass. I can imagine some brave players at the seat of W will gamble 6♥ on 1 more trick on♠♦
Let's come back to the terms of W for 2nd question. W thinks they holds 3suits(except♣) against vulnerable N-S and then doubles 5♣ because only 5♣x-1 scores better for N-S. Although S will get 5♣x-1 by the most reasonable ♥lead, in most situations N-S will get worse result by such unfavorable vulnerability
It's really an interesting hand for everyone to discuss and learn
In terms of E, he will pass 5C without that redouble but may bid 5♥ to indicate 0♣ instead of pass. I can imagine some brave players at the seat of W will gamble 6♥ on 1 more trick on♠♦
Let's come back to the terms of W for 2nd question. W thinks they holds 3suits(except♣) against vulnerable N-S and then doubles 5♣ because only 5♣x-1 scores better for N-S. Although S will get 5♣x-1 by the most reasonable ♥lead, in most situations N-S will get worse result by such unfavorable vulnerability
It's really an interesting hand for everyone to discuss and learn
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,092
- Joined: 2005-June-27
Posted 2016-February-12, 03:13
foobar, on 2016-February-10, 14:38, said:
For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix :
5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
:5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.
Bridge is a game of probabilities.
what are you aiming at?
That there are unlikely layouts?
I encounter this on almost any tournament I enter.
But catering to the unlikely is loosing Bridge.
Here West has a semi-balanced hand. The odds against that everybody else at the table has a void is extreme even given the bidding.
Even though everybody else does have a void, what matters is which one.
For example given the bidding, it would be several times more likely that East has a spade void than a club void. (Why should they have an 11 card fit in clubs?)
Nothing what is really interesting about this deal
Rainer Herrmann
#16
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,696
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2016-February-12, 03:17
rhm, on 2016-February-12, 03:13, said:
Bridge is a game of probabilities.
Maybe not for you Rainer but I suspect many others will find the smother play and squeeze interesting, if not the bidding decision itself.
(-: Zel :-)
#17
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 2015-February-11
- Gender:Male
Posted 2016-February-12, 08:47
Already sent this but my txtts vanish. Seems simple pass then x not alternatives
#18
- Group: Members
- Posts: 18
- Joined: 2016-January-30
- Gender:Female
- Location:Taipei, Taiwan
Posted 2016-February-12, 08:56
rhm, on 2016-February-12, 03:13, said:
Bridge is a game of probabilities.
what are you aiming at?
That there are unlikely layouts?
I encounter this on almost any tournament I enter.
But catering to the unlikely is loosing Bridge.
Here West has a semi-balanced hand. The odds against that everybody else at the table has a void is extreme even given the bidding.
Even though everybody else does have a void, what matters is which one.
For example given the bidding, it would be several times more likely that East has a spade void than a club void. (Why should they have an 11 card fit in clubs?)
Nothing what is really interesting about this deal
Rainer Herrmann
what are you aiming at?
That there are unlikely layouts?
I encounter this on almost any tournament I enter.
But catering to the unlikely is loosing Bridge.
Here West has a semi-balanced hand. The odds against that everybody else at the table has a void is extreme even given the bidding.
Even though everybody else does have a void, what matters is which one.
For example given the bidding, it would be several times more likely that East has a spade void than a club void. (Why should they have an 11 card fit in clubs?)
Nothing what is really interesting about this deal
Rainer Herrmann
I don't think you usually encountered such kind of board, in which 3 players had a void, unless you like goulash matches. Moreover, not all interesting issues of this board are about voids. Do you know by reasonable defence 5♣ will never be made？Do you know why the double you voted against 5♣ scores worse than 5♥？Do you know this board can product a great slam？For example：http://tinyurl.com/hl75nue
Any board can be interesting when the possible result is far from how you expect in advance. I think you should read this board and this topic with a more humble mind even when you think you are much more experienced than foolbar. He didn't aim at anyone by a not nice way while you seemed to indicate his topic shouldn't be here. Maybe you can ask diana_eva to remove it
#19
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 317
- Joined: 2011-October-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Melbourne, Australia
Posted 2016-February-18, 01:18
Style of partners pre-empts really matters here.
With Partner using a loose style, first seat white V red then I pass and pass again.
Facing a more standard and predictable pre-empt (rule of 2 and 3) I re-double to show I thought 4♥ was making (2 Aces and the Qh + partners 7 tricks) and probably bid 5♥ over partners silence.
Would you pass in his seat with a 2740 after partner doubles? I don't know. I think I should be disciplined but there is an argument for a bid - being void in their (assumed) fit, partner's likelihood of a spade trick (barring a ruff from North) and again the chance they might lead a club which gains me back the tempo.
I try to stay passed once I've pre-empted and I'm not sure the reasons to bid are enough to offset that rule. 2 of partners tricks must come from outside hearts so if I push them on it's probably going to be doubled. My main worry is that he'll want a piece of 5♣ and by bidding I deny him, also neither can make at the 5 level and by bidding I turn a good score bad, worse if they find X.
With Partner using a loose style, first seat white V red then I pass and pass again.
Facing a more standard and predictable pre-empt (rule of 2 and 3) I re-double to show I thought 4♥ was making (2 Aces and the Qh + partners 7 tricks) and probably bid 5♥ over partners silence.
Would you pass in his seat with a 2740 after partner doubles? I don't know. I think I should be disciplined but there is an argument for a bid - being void in their (assumed) fit, partner's likelihood of a spade trick (barring a ruff from North) and again the chance they might lead a club which gains me back the tempo.
I try to stay passed once I've pre-empted and I'm not sure the reasons to bid are enough to offset that rule. 2 of partners tricks must come from outside hearts so if I push them on it's probably going to be doubled. My main worry is that he'll want a piece of 5♣ and by bidding I deny him, also neither can make at the 5 level and by bidding I turn a good score bad, worse if they find X.
Page 1 of 1