[Stephen Tu]

MP you are vul, they are not.

---

For 2nd question assume you passed 3♥.

for 3rd question assume auction went like this instead:

---

[Hanoi5]

I pass over 3♥; given the vulnerability partner should stretch over my direct double, so I stick by his decision. If they compete I decided to take the leap to 4♥, but I think double is more convenient. Had partner passed their immediate competition I'd double again.

[nige1]

Stephen Tu, on 2015-February-16, 18:48, said:

After (3♣) _X (_P) 3♥ (_P) ??: Pass = 10; 4♥ = 9
For 2nd question assume you passed 3♥.

---

for 3rd question assume auction went like this instead:

---

IMO

• After _P (_P) 3♣ _X; (_P) 3♥ (_P) ??: Pass = 10. 4♥ = 9.
• After _P (_P) 3♣ _X; (_P) 3♥ (_P) _P; (4♣) _P (_P) ??: 4♥ = 10. Pass = 9. Double = 8.
• After _P (_P) 3♣ _X; (4♣) _P (_P) ??: Double = 10, Pass = 9.

[MrAce]

I would pass over 3♥ and dbl 4♣.

[helene_t]

Why do you guys act differently in the two situations? They seem very similar to me. If anything the first is more favorable as at least we know diamonds isn't partners longest suit so we almost certainly have a major suit fit.

[PhilKing]

I'd be interested to see anything resmbling a rational reason for bidding again in any of these auctions. What on earth are you playing partner to have?

[Stephen Tu]

Well, I couldn't really find any clear reason to bid again. So I passed twice on the first auction at the table, I'm glad to see some good players duplicating my actions so I don't feel so bad.

As it turns out, 4H is a horrendous contract requiring multiple miracles, but it makes if you can guess whether the preemptor started with Tx of trumps or Txx of trumps, you need to pick up qj8x opposite A9xx for no losers. No one in the field was bidding it though, and most only made 3. But apparently a large chunk of the field doesn't preempt despite holding kq9xxx of clubs favorable 3rd chair, and managed to play 1nt (on a non club lead) or hearts at a lower level, so 4c matchpointed rather poorly.

4c-x goes down 2. I was wondering if I should double on the basis of "It looks like I likely have 3 cashers, probably partner will come up with something for a trick?" . But then again they could be making, and x -1 which is probably most likely may not swing that many MP. Should I double if they are vul? Then again they are supposed to be more careful when vul and be closer to making it.

Just unlucky? On a better day 3H is down and 4c swung them back to minus and it's enough for a good board?

[Cyberyeti]

PhilKing, on 2015-February-17, 03:17, said:

I'd be interested to see anything resmbling a rational reason for bidding again in any of these auctions. What on earth are you playing partner to have?

You're hoping partner has a flat not complete pile that happens to be enough to beat 4♣ by 2 (if he bids you're unlikely to score well), say xxx, Kxxx, Qxxx, xx, on a good day is -2, most of the time is -1 and occasionally it makes, but often you weren't getting much for -130 anyway.

[gszes]

MP is a strange game indeed---At IMPS I will be passing all he time (after original x) but at
MP it is far too tempting to x 4c on the first auction. We know p has some stuff over there
since lho did not try 3n and apparently feels we can come close to making 3h. Since I had the
opportunity to pass 3h the second x should basically be promising book and hoping p can leave
it in. Too much risk to do this at IMPS but MP it is only 1 board and we might well gain quite a
few MP if the opps have gotten overboard. The second auction a follow up x just sounds like extra
power we do not have so we pass.

[mikeh]

I think that the first decision is clear. At mps, there is zero reason to bid a thin game and any game rates to be thin with our hand.

On the second point, I wouldn't double 4♣ at imps, but the auction is unusual, in that most players faced with a double of partner's pre-empt will not pull that stunt of passing and then bidding 4♣. Thus, regardless of the merits of doing so on this hand, at mps, I expect the auction to have gone differently at most tables.

If we are being allowed to play 3♥ most of the time, I pretty much have to double, which has two ways to win and one (big) way to lose, and one way to break-even. If we beat it 2 tricks, we do very well. If partner has a super-max for 3♥ with a stiff club, he can pull maybe to a making game. Obviously we lose big if they make, and we break even if there is no or little difference between +50 and +100.

Otoh, if the field was bidding 4♣ immediately, then we are really at the mercy of what partner would do. I upvoted Timo's post, but would not double again if LHO had raised immediately and the auction came back to me. I don't think the sequences are at all identical, since on the second one, I have passed 3♥ and doubled the balance, which is more suggestive of defending than the last sequence.

Again, at imps, they get to play 4♣ anytime they want to, undoubled.

[Phil]

The first one is interesting, but if we give partner the expected 8 count I don't think we have a game. Furthermore, partner could have double 4♣ to show proof of life.

The 2nd one is a pretty easy pass. I do not see committing this hand to the four level opposite a partner show can't take a call.

Maybe there's a third auction to look at: p p 4♣ ?

[Fluffy]

Yeti and mikeh expressed my thoughts, I wanna play 4♣X at MPs, but I can't on the second auction.