[WasWinM]

I pass and stay screwed. My loyalty lies with my partner and teammates, and their trust that I will always have my bid is more important long term than the results of any one board or match.

[Huibertus]

Late to the thread.

I'd bid 4♠. Partner knows it could be a stretch and should allow for it by not getting overexcited. Passing is risky due to the ♦ singleton. It's likely partner has too many small ♦ to reopen. Yes it might be down just as 4♦ but preempts work sometimes, that's why they exist. I'm just not risking missing a game.

[WasWinM]

mw64ahw, on 2025-May-05, 11:43, said:

I have 6, overcaller about 8, with 8 playing tricks at EV, and opener a minimum of ~12 leaving 14 unaccounted for. So probability wise opener has extras. 4♠ on balance should make given the joint modified loser count suggests 3 opposite a minimum. If I go 1 down undoubled then I score better than opponents making 4♦ or better. If I Pass we may be out of the game. If I have a stronger hand there are other bids available.

Curious why LHO can’t hold the stronger hand with no diamond fit and nowhere to go.

[mw64ahw]

WasWinM, on 2025-May-24, 05:59, said:

Curious why LHO can't hold the stronger hand with no diamond fit and nowhere to go.

They can do but that is more in the tail of probable distributions.

[DavidKok]

WasWinM, on 2025-May-24, 05:59, said:

Curious why LHO can’t hold the stronger hand with no diamond fit and nowhere to go.

This is indeed the more common scenario. I ran a little simulation out of curiosity. Given our hand, the 1♠ opening and giving RHO 8 HCP with 7-8 diamonds for the 4♦ bid (though I'm sure we could debate the exact requirements for a preempt, if it helps) partner's mean HCP is 14.07, based on 1,000 hands. An overview of the HCP distribution I got was:

• 9 or fewer: 0%
  
• 10: 2%
  
• 11: 12%
  
• 12: 17%
  
• 13: 17%
  
• 14: 16%
  
• 15: 10%
  
• 16: 8%
  
• 17: 6%
  
• 18: 6%
  
• 19: 4%
  
• 20: 2%
  
• 21+: 1%

Incidentally, 4♠ was making double dummy 36% of the time. Conditional on 4♠ making partner has an average of 15.92 HCP:

• 9 or fewer: 0%
  
• 10: 1%
  
• 11: 4%
  
• 12: 5%
  
• 13: 9%
  
• 14: 11%
  
• 15: 17%
  
• 16: 14%
  
• 17: 13%
  
• 18: 14%
  
• 19: 9%
  
• 20: 4%
  
• 21+: 2%

Double dummy simulations aren't perfect, of course, but this is in line with my expectations:

• Partner will not have significant extras most of the time.
  
• 4♠ can be good, but on balance isn't based on the information we have.
  
• With a lot of the hands where 4♠ makes partner may act again.

Lastly there's the main reason for not bidding 4♠ - if we bid and partner does hold one of these, say, 16+ or 17+ hands, partner may bid again and take us too high.

[WasWinM]

mw64ahw, on 2025-May-24, 08:41, said:

They can do but that is more in the tail of probable distributions.

I think of it this way: what would I have bid if RHO had passed? 2S. 4S is forcing partner to hold specific hands rather than normal hands and there is no reason to think either 4D or 4S makes.

[mw64ahw]

DavidKok, on 2025-May-24, 09:21, said:

This is indeed the more common scenario. I ran a little simulation out of curiosity. Given our hand, the 1♠ opening and giving RHO 8 HCP with 7-8 diamonds for the 4♦ bid (though I'm sure we could debate the exact requirements for a preempt, if it helps) partner's mean HCP is 14.07, based on 1,000 hands. An overview of the HCP distribution I got was:

• 9 or fewer: 0%
• 10: 2%
• 11: 12%
• 12: 17%
• 13: 17%
• 14: 16%
• 15: 10%
• 16: 8%
• 17: 6%
• 18: 6%
• 19: 4%
• 20: 2%
• 21+: 1%

Incidentally, 4♠ was making double dummy 36% of the time. Conditional on 4♠ making partner has an average of 15.92 HCP:

• 9 or fewer: 0%
• 10: 1%
• 11: 4%
• 12: 5%
• 13: 9%
• 14: 11%
• 15: 17%
• 16: 14%
• 17: 13%
• 18: 14%
• 19: 9%
• 20: 4%
• 21+: 2%

Double dummy simulations aren't perfect, of course, but this is in line with my expectations:

• Partner will not have significant extras most of the time.
• 4♠ can be good, but on balance isn't based on the information we have.
• With a lot of the hands where 4♠ makes partner may act again.

Lastly there's the main reason for not bidding 4♠ - if we bid and partner does hold one of these, say, 16+ or 17+ hands, partner may bid again and take us too high.

Interesting, what happens if you factor in the vulnerability with the 4♦ bid having 8 playing tricks, plus how often does 4♦ make?