[Jinksy]

---

Teams. X would ask for ♥ lead. Pass or X? How close is it? What's the smallest change you could make that would change your action?

[rmnka447]

Double

At Teams, the objective is to beat 3 NT.

You're looking at 12 HCP. The opponents should have at least 24 HCP and probably more. So partner probably can't have more than 4 HCP. Chances of beating 3 NT with long suit tricks in partner's hand are remote. So if you're going to beat 3 NT, it looks like you need to set up tricks in your long suit which is ♥.

If they make 3 NT exactly, you'll give up 150 points which translates into -4 IMPs. If the ♥ lead lets you beat 3 NT versus 3 NT making without it, you'll pick up 800 if they don't find the double against 3 NT by your partners. That translates into +13 IMPS. If they double 3 NT at your partner's table, you likely half the board for no IMP difference. But if they double and beat 3 NT against your partners and you don't double with 3 NT making without a ♥ lead, you'll be giving up -800 points and -13 IMPs.

You do have enough "stuff" that worst case looks like maybe 3NT making 4 which would be a net -320 or -8 IMPs.

So Double certainly looks like a risk worth taking.

Certainly, it will be easier to explain why you doubled when 3 NT makes than why you didn't double and gave away a VUL game swing when the double is needed to beat 3 NT.

[WesleyC]

My first instinct was to double, but upon reflection I think pass is probably better.

In support of double:

A heart lead will often be best for our side, and might beat the contract straight up.
The minor suits look to be sitting poorly for declarer, so the contract might also fail on it's own.
If the opponents don't redouble, you're only risking 4 or 8 IMPs to potentially gain 13.
Holding 12 HCP increases the chance that the opponents are stretching to a skinny 3NT rather than a rock solid 30 HCP 3NT.

In support of pass:

Even if the hearts do sit favourably for our side, setting up the suit will often require 2 leads through dummy which won't be possible.
Our heart spots aren't very good - dummy will often stop the 4th round.
Our holding in spades looks very promising and it would be a disaster if we talked partner out of a spade lead on a hand like: [T98xxx xx x QJxx] or similar.
Getting redoubled on this auction is a serious concern, especially if RHO holds 15+ HCP and a chunky heart suit. On a bad day -1400 or even -1800 isn't out of the question.

If you changed the hand to:[xxx AKT9 JT9xx x] then double is standout. This new hand has no tolerance for a spade lead, better heart spots and less hcp/hearts which means partner will usually be able to lead hearts through dummy twice.

[Jinksy]

WesleyC, on 2015-September-19, 22:46, said:

Our holding in spades looks very promising and it would be a disaster if we talked partner out of a spade lead on a hand like: [T98xxx xx x QJxx] or similar.

I would probably lead a club on that hand if no double.

[jfnrl]

Bid 2♥ on the first round

[gszes]

We have not a single clue how strong rho is for that 3n bid they could be just shy of a 4n quant. I would gamble on x if my hearts were AKQTx since a heart lead is a virtual lock to set 3n no matter how strong the opps are (but i'm a big chicken). I would also x if the auction had been a tad different 1c 1h 1n 2n 3n for ex where I know it is close. My spade tolerance is quite good so a spade lead from p (vs heart) is unlikely to cause me too much heartache.

PASS

[mikeh]

I think double is a very poor choice....it is what we used to call, in my neck of the woods, a Cooper Double: it is a double that ensures that we take the maximal number of tricks on defence, but do not defeat the contract.

Unless LHO is prone to rebidding 1N with a stiff, partner has at most 2 hearts. What do we think the odds are that he has Qx? No other holding will suffice (excluding QJ), given our spots. Bear in mind that even Jx isn't assured of a set: what makes us think that the opps can't run 7+ minor winners as well as the heart trick we are forced to give them, and the spade A?

If I held AK109x, that would be more palatable, but I'd want to change my spades to Axx as well. With no change in the side suits, give me AKJ9x.

Bear in mind that the opps are allowed to redouble! If I held, for example, xxx QJ9x AQx AKx I would have bid 3N and now gleefully redouble. A factor that seems to have escaped at least one earlier poster in his analysis of the imp odds. 2 redoubled overtricks tend to hurt.

[phil_20686]

I would think about doubling and then not do it.

I don't really have anything insightful to add except that they do sometimes xx, particularly if they are good.

[gnasher]

mikeh, on 2015-September-20, 09:17, said:

I think double is a very poor choice....it is what we used to call, in my neck of the woods, a Cooper Double: it is a double that ensures that we take the maximal number of tricks on defence, but do not defeat the contract.

I think that overstates the merits of double. If partner was about to lead a pointed suit from Qxxx, the double may well reduce the number of tricks we take.