[manudude03]

---

MPs scoring.
Partner and I had a bit of a disagreement on this one. Over 3H, double by either partner would be penalties. A foul lie of the cards (spades 5-1, king of clubs offside, diamonds 3-1) meant that 4S went 5 off, 5D can be held to -2. ATB (yes, the opponents can make 4H).

edit: 12-14 NT.
1C- 16+
2H-intermediate (10-14)
X-9+ without strong stopper in hearts, takeout orientated.
vulnerability was white/red.

3H over 2H would have shown opening values without a heart stop, 3N would have promised a double stop, everything else would be natural (bids promising at least HTxxx).

[TylerE]

What's your NT range? I'd open this 1N playing any range that includes 17.

Using my methods:

1N-(2♥)-3♥ (4♠ exactly, no ♥ stop)-(p)
4♦ (Suit, also no heart stop, not 4♠) etc

[ArtK78]

You are going to have to provide more system information. South's opening bid makes sense only in a strong club system, and you did not mention that. Given that South's opening is likely to be a strong club, I need a definition for North's first double.

After that, it seems odd that a double of 3♥ would be for penalties, but perhaps the additional information needed to explain the first two calls will help to explain that.

[aguahombre]

 ArtK78, on 2013-June-25, 08:39, said:

You are going to have to provide more system information. South's opening bid makes sense only in a strong club system, and you did not mention that. Given that South's opening is likely to be a strong club, I need a definition for North's first double.

Were the Yellow shadings with explanations added after your post? I didn't know the OP could do that.

Anyway, maybe we should just move on with our minus 250, if the colors on the chart are accurate ---vs minus 420, or possible minus 300 when they woke up and doubled 5D.

[manudude03]

Explanations are in the yellow boxes as aqua pointed out. It is possible to edit those after posting, but I didn't. I'll add the explanations for the less yellow-box-conscious.

[ArtK78]

Sorry, didn't notice them.

I hate the fact that the double of 3♥ is for penalties. Given that, I don't see what else North can do other than 3♠, although you did not state whether he had any other actions available to him over 2♥ besides double to show 9+. If that is the only way North could show a 9+ point hand, you have really boxed yourself on this auction.

Quite frankly, at matchpoints 4♠ is not the worst contract that I have ever seen (admittedly, I have seen quite a few bad contracts). You are going to need quite a bit of luck to bring it home, and I am not shocked that it won't make. However, I suspect that it could have been played for more than 5 tricks at the table, even with bad breaks.

[Cyberyeti]

Chalk it down to system, penalty doubles from both sides are ludicrous over 3♥, since you've shown 16+/9+ you are in a forcing pass situation, N virtually cannot hold a penalty double here, so allowing him a takeout double will get you to diamonds, although I can see a case for S having a penalty X available, I think his X is best as T/O once hearts are bid and raised also.

[manudude03]

Funny that, I was thinking about the line of play taken walking towards the train, yes he butchered it. It was 2 rounds of hearts, ruffed. AK of spades, then tried to cash a few diamonds, 2nd one got ruffed, last trumps drawn and hearts run. Declarer only took 2 spades, 1 diamond, 1 club and a heart ruff. I think it can maybe be held to -2, didn't go too deep in the analysis.

[wank]

north should bid 4h over 3h imo. i don't think he wants to play 3nt opposite a hand which didn't double.

[ggwhiz]

 manudude03, on 2013-June-25, 08:26, said:

X-9+ without strong stopper in hearts, takeout orientated.

Yet if the same hand doubles 3♥ it's for penalty? That makes no sense to me.

[neilkaz]

 ggwhiz, on 2013-June-25, 12:24, said:

Yet if the same hand doubles 3♥ it's for penalty? That makes no sense to me.

We agree noting the forcing 1C opening.

[Hanoi5]

x instead of 3♠? I read the comments about it being for penalty but I couldn't believe it.

[wank]

i don't know why this is all so perplexing. there's nothing unreasonable about playing penalty doubles here. they're in a forcing pass situation (totally different to when one hand's yet to show values in which case you need your t/o X). south's pass implies a willingness to defend - with a shapely hand opposite a positive without a heart stack (i.e. what the original double showed) he would have bid himself. opposite that, north might easily want to defend. after all, that's normally the easiest way to a plus score with 2 random balanced hands and no big fit. imagine the north hand with 1 extra heart and fewer diamond. where would you want to play then? 3hx obviously. and who do you think is going to X it (or convert a t/o x) if north can't double for penalties?

[the_clown]

In my strong club system this shows a 3 suiter with short hearts.
When was the last time you had opening hand with 5 card suit you can bid and stopper in opponents suit? + with that hand you could X and cuebid and have no problem at all.

Anyway since North would have started with 2♠ if he had 5 of them, South should bid 4♦ over 3♠. I don't think North should X on the second round, he really cant stand a pass.

[Fluffy]

when you are GF and don't play take out doubles, you are just reversing the meanings of pass and double.

This means that south made what others would call a take out double of 3♥, and then with only 3 spades raised to game. This is wrong.

[gszes]

100% south

South has to realize the problem with spades from north's
point of view. After 3h it is fairly obvious our system will not
allow us to penalize 3h or bid 3n (heart QJ assures that) bid

4d

and clear this mess up as best you can. There is simply no way
to convince p your hand is no longer worth a 1c opener so you will
go overboard but at least it won't be blindly like might happen if you
pass over 3h.

[aguahombre]

I would have thought the pass of 3H was like a "responsive" pass ---making it automatic to now bid 4D (doubt about trump, but 5 of those). So, it didn't occur to me that it would be considered a bad thing.

And, yep our 1C opening strength has turned to crap; but we are stuck in commitment to game.

[gwnn]

So 2S would have been natural, but how strong? An initial reading of your post would suggest 2+ HCP but maybe it would be F or even GF?

[manudude03]

 gwnn, on 2013-June-26, 00:21, said:

So 2S would have been natural, but how strong? An initial reading of your post would suggest 2+ HCP but maybe it would be F or even GF?

GF (pass covers all weaker hands)

[han]

While I agree that double by north as penalties is absurd, I like the idea that double would be a more balanced hand (Kxxx xx Qxx Axxx). This makes it easier for south to pass with a hand such as this.

We have already denied 5 spades by doubling on the last round, so 3S as something like a 4-1-4-4 makes a lot of sense.