[Jinksy]

MPs:

---

Not a stellar result. Who gets the kicking?

[PhantomSac]

Personally I would not make a neg X with west and I would bid 3S with east on the strength of the spot cards.

[kenrexford]

 PhantomSac, on 2014-October-30, 16:36, said:

Personally I would not make a neg X with west and I would bid 3S with east on the strength of the spot cards.

Really close to a negative double. If you look at this as likely 3 covers and tolerance, West seems fairly decent. If you pass West and then hear partner pass 3H, West shoots low passing twice. Not unreasonable, but definitely shooting low.

[mike777]

I thought this was a very tough problem, one that belongs in the expert forum. Look forward to the comments.


btw you may wish to break this into two forum problems one with only the west hand and one with only the east showing

[PhantomSac]

 kenrexford, on 2014-October-30, 19:06, said:

Really close to a negative double.

Sure I agree, I mean they both went somewhat low, I guess it is just showing my personal bias to overbid with the hand with short hearts and 1 loser six card suits and good honor structure/spots and underbid with the hand that has no fit and no aces and 3 little hearts (which at the time might have been a negative holding). I wouldn't really criticize someone who said you should make a neg X or someone who said you can't freely bid 3S r/w opp a partner that passed 2H, but if everyone goes low then stuff like this can happen sometimes.

[kenrexford]

 PhantomSac, on 2014-October-30, 19:20, said:

Sure I agree, I mean they both went somewhat low, I guess it is just showing my personal bias to overbid with the hand with short hearts and 1 loser six card suits and good honor structure/spots and underbid with the hand that has no fit and no aces and 3 little hearts (which at the time might have been a negative holding). I wouldn't really criticize someone who said you should make a neg X or someone who said you can't freely bid 3S r/w opp a partner that passed 2H, but if everyone goes low then stuff like this can happen sometimes.

I agree that. The final pass is what bothers me. West has to suspect that East has a stiff heart. If so, why not double as East? Any flaw East has, whether six spades or unbalanced minors, West can field. I can't imagine West doubling the second time and regretting it that much.

[nige1]

 Jinksy, on 2014-October-30, 16:08, said:

:

MPs
Not a stellar result. Who gets the kicking?

---

IMO Both had hard decisions but East should probably have acted ...

• West, after 2♥, Pass = 10, Double = 9.
• East, after 3♥, Double = 10, 3♠ = 9, Pass = 8.
• West after 3♥, Pass = 10, Double = 9.

Look on the bright side: a ♣ lead might defeat 4♠

[PhantomSac]

 kenrexford, on 2014-October-30, 19:35, said:

I agree that. The final pass is what bothers me. West has to suspect that East has a stiff heart. If so, why not double as East? Any flaw East has, whether six spades or unbalanced minors, West can field. I can't imagine West doubling the second time and regretting it that much.

He might regret it if partner takes it as penalty as I think most would heh. I have invented a rexfordian convention, balancing with 3S shows this hand

[PhantomSac]

And of course I was gonna say if partner has 5134 you might play 4C but of course you would remind me that opener would bid 3N with that

[aguahombre]

I think it is circular, here. Opposite a West who would pass 2H, East must bid 3S. Opposite West who would Double, East must have tools over 3H with extra strength and 5-1-3-4 shape.

[Jinksy]

 mike777, on 2014-October-30, 19:14, said:

I thought this was a very tough problem, one that belongs in the expert forum. Look forward to the comments.

I've pretty much given up posting bidding judgement questions in the expert forum, since I can never tell in advance what other people will consider difficult. In order for me to post a hand on BBF, normally I'm unsure myself, or possibly I have an answer I feel confident about, but my P feels the same about a different answer. In either case I don't have much epistemological basis for gauging how difficult a question it is

[Jinksy]

 kenrexford, on 2014-October-30, 19:35, said:

I agree that. The final pass is what bothers me. West has to suspect that East has a stiff heart. If so, why not double as East? Any flaw East has, whether six spades or unbalanced minors, West can field. I can't imagine West doubling the second time and regretting it that much.

I (W) haven't really got the hang of Xing with such info. I like Mike Lawrence's theory that with both a fit and an outside shortage you should bid up, but here Xing (even assuming my P didn't take it as penalty) would feel like bidding his hand for him. Other than being able to place P's shortage, my hand doesn't feel like it's got any better on the bidding. Is the info from S's pass really worth so much more than eg the ability to stay a level lower had I Xed the first time?

(this isn't meant to sound rhetorical - I don't have a clue with this hand, but I'm in reassuringly good company)

[kenrexford]

The first pass is debatable, as we all seem to agree. The second pass is also somewhat debatable. A partnership that would pass BOTH is dubious, as someone theoretically has to put on the pants.

So, now you get to the third pass. While I like the "3♠ means this hand" concept, I think 3♠ is more of a snapdragon call. Granted, Responder has a snapdragon holding, with two spades and five clubs. But, the diamond fragment is the location of the COV and makes this not look snapdragon. Move one diamond honor to spades and one to clubs, sure.

But, then is double penalty? I don't think double is pure penalty or pure takeout. If the hand is pure takeout, you would have made a negative double. If it is pure penalty, the opponents have lost their mind. I think double is cooperative/punt. This seems like cooperative/punt. I am not real confident in my take, though.

[ArtK78]

 kenrexford, on 2014-October-31, 09:55, said:

The first pass is debatable, as we all seem to agree. The second pass is also somewhat debatable. A partnership that would pass BOTH is dubious, as someone theoretically has to put on the pants.

So, now you get to the third pass. While I like the "3♠ means this hand" concept, I think 3♠ is more of a snapdragon call. Granted, Responder has a snapdragon holding, with two spades and five clubs. But, the diamond fragment is the location of the COV and makes this not look snapdragon. Move one diamond honor to spades and one to clubs, sure.

But, then is double penalty? I don't think double is pure penalty or pure takeout. If the hand is pure takeout, you would have made a negative double. If it is pure penalty, the opponents have lost their mind. I think double is cooperative/punt. This seems like cooperative/punt. I am not real confident in my take, though.

What would West do with a pure penalty double? Admittedly, the chances of West holding a pure penalty double goes way down when North raises, but it is not out of the question.

[kuhchung]

not that this contributes to the discussion, but i also wound up defending 3H

[neilkaz]

I think that the east hand has enough playing strength to bid 3♠ over 3♥.

[kenrexford]

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-31, 10:33, said:

What would West do with a pure penalty double? Admittedly, the chances of West holding a pure penalty double goes way down when North raises, but it is not out of the question.

On many of those hands, he passes partner's double. But, sometimes you have no option to double for penalty. If you make double pure penalty, then I could ask what you do with some other hand. There are only a limited number of options.

[gszes]

Playing x of 3h as penalty (by west) makes virtually zero sense once the
suit has been raised. It is really not feasible for west to have the kind of
length and if it is only strength perhaps some NT option will serve as an
alternative. I would much rather have a delayed x available in case of a
situation like this. My initial action can remain sound and with just a bit
less I can back in with reasonable safety.

While west was a wimp for finally passing out 3h that does not mean the 7 trick
taking east hand is not guilty of also being a wimp. East has a superb quality
spade suit that does not require "odds" to bring home 5 tricks. A 3s bid here would
go a long way to showing this hand while x of 3h could be saved for hands that are
somewhat stronger and less one dimensional. The very nature of the solid spade suit
mitigates probable penalty x by the opps and dramatically reduces risk.

[Jinksy]

 gszes, on 2014-November-01, 10:34, said:

Playing x of 3h as penalty (by west) makes virtually zero sense once the
suit has been raised. It is really not feasible for west to have the kind of
length and if it is only strength perhaps some NT option will serve as an
alternative.

Maybe at IMPs this makes sense, but at MP what does W do with such as x KJT Axxx xxxxx?

[Winstonm]

I doubt many others overcalled 2H.