[microcap]

Playing a team match, you are losing going into the last hand in case that influences your opinion.

You hold

What do you think is going on?

---

In case I didnt do it right, 3♠ was alerted as "weak"

[mikeh]

I have waffled and waffled over this one, which is the sign of a good problem imo.

I am going to bid 4♥. This could be a disaster, but partner has to be expecting me to take this double out and, while I expect his shape to be flawed, the one suit he really has to have four card length in has to be hearts, since it is the suit I am most likely to bid when I have 2 or more 4 card suits.

I hope the LOTT protects me here. I think the opps rate to have 10 spades most of the time, altho maybe partner is donning the superman cape with some 4333 13 count.

A fairly common holding for RHO is a very weak 5332: a lot of players tend to blast the 4-level with all 5 card support hands but I think that is bad bridge at equal when one has 8 side losers.

In any event, if we can take 5 tricks on defence, we rate to take 9 or 10 on offence and I'll gladly trade +100 for +420, and accept -50/100 for +100 or -530.

No way, btw, am I playing the opps to have psyched at equal with a lead.

[microcap]

IMPORTANT, i forgot to mention BOTH sides are vulnerable, if that influences you at all..

[ArtK78]

I find it interesting that Mike has thought long and hard about this problem.

To me, bidding 4♥ seems automatic. I don't know if I am going to make it, but I can't come up with any excuse not to bid it.

As for passing, that makes no sense. If partner had a strong balanced hand with some spade values, he would have acted over 1♠ in direct seat. He did not do so. The only hand he could have that wants to defend 3♠x would be a penalty double of 1♠, and that is not possible on the auction (unless one of the opps has psyched, and I am not playing for that).

[kenberg]

I am, so far, the lone passer. Actually the tally is 1 to 1. I can't actually justify any action here, but I am passing.

[whereagles]

I guess pard is like 3415 or 3451 and intends to pull 4 of the "wrong" minor.

In any any case 4♥ seems easy here.

By the way, why didn't *I* dbl??

[kenberg]

I was short of time before. I haven't changed my mind about passing, but I will supply a reason or two.

It seems that I have to decide in just which way is partner crazy. Doubling for take-out can go wrong in three ways:
a. We get doubled in a 4 level contract and go down two or more.
b. We bid at the 4-level, they go on and make a game that they were not planning on bidding.
c. Partner, for whatever his reason, leaves it in and it makes.

All this to compete against -140 ?? It seems wrong. It seems to me that he must feel that if they go on to the 4 level then he can beat it. I have more values than he can expect me to have (responder is weak, opener did not have enough to bid 4 but that is not the same as weak) so we should be able to set this.

Partners keep making these "Do something intelligent" doubles. They need to remember who they are playing with.

[whereagles]

These unexpected "do something intelligent" doubles are a fine way of derailing a match and getting into an argument. Irresponsible actions don't lead to winning bridge.

[MrAce]

whereagles, on 2014-May-02, 14:36, said:

By the way, why didn't *I* dbl??

Nuno, you asked the million $ question bro Good catch.

+1

kenberg, on 2014-May-02, 17:15, said:

Partners keep making these "Do something intelligent" doubles. They need to remember who they are playing with.

You mean they play with a pd who can not do something intelligent? (joke)

[kenberg]

MrAce, on 2014-May-03, 05:34, said:

You mean they play with a pd who can not do something intelligent? (joke)

Exactly. My goal in life is to convince my partners that forcing me to do something intelligent is a very bad idea. The deal at hand is exhibit A. Somehow I am supposed to figure out why, with a hand he thought unworthy of entering the auction over 1♠, he is now forcing me to intelligently choose between playing at the 4 level or defending against a contract that I am not at all sure we can beat. Thanks for your vote of confidence, pard, but I never claimed that I was brilliant.

[TheoKole]

I just cant see not bidding 4 ♥. It will probably take some good guesses but I will play the opener for most of the strength during the declaration of the hand. If ops want to sacrifice in 4 ♠ I will gladly X for penalty.

Just my thoughts, Theo

[MrAce]

kenberg, on 2014-May-03, 06:13, said:

Exactly. My goal in life is to convince my partners that forcing me to do something intelligent is a very bad idea. The deal at hand is exhibit A. Somehow I am supposed to figure out why, with a hand he thought unworthy of entering the auction over 1♠, he is now forcing me to intelligently choose between playing at the 4 level or defending against a contract that I am not at all sure we can beat. Thanks for your vote of confidence, pard, but I never claimed that I was brilliant.

OP said that you are behind, he also said this is the last board of the match. And we made a huge error imo by passing a textbook T/O double of 3♠. Last thing that would occur to me would be annoyed by pd taking action in these circumstances. I agree that we don't know wtf is going on and what is pd up to. But I don't think it matters, we need blood and passed out 3♠ doesn't look like to deliver it to us. By the way, as I stated I was joking about your pass. Pass can as well be doing something intelligent. Otoh it is not likely that they would do something crazy when they have the lead.

And even if your pd deserved a pass because you warned him not to do this, you still have 2 other guys in other room who may have played much better than you expected and some responsible bid now was gonna be enough here to win the game. Even if it was your pd who acted irresponsibly by doing something you are known to react, imho you should be on the same side with other guys (a.k.a teammates). It is never a good idea to give a lesson to pd in a team match.

Bottom line is, if you are passing because you believe it is the action that will bring you what you need, I would not have any complain. But if you are passing just because you are annoyed and trying to give pd a lesson, in a team match, this is a NO NO to me

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, ..., I may have double for T/O, now bidding, is guessing the
8 card fit, which may or may not be hearts.

I dont think p can have a hand for his bidding, but if I try to go
to the 4 level, it can be expensive, so I hope, he has 1-2 spade tricks,
and we wil beat it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenberg]

MrAce, on 2014-May-03, 08:26, said:

OP said that you are behind, he also said this is the last board of the match. And we made a huge error imo by passing a textbook T/O double of 3♠. Last thing that would occur to me would be annoyed by pd taking action in these circumstances. I agree that we don't know wtf is going on and what is pd up to. But I don't think it matters, we need blood and passed out 3♠ doesn't look like to deliver it to us. By the way, as I stated I was joking about your pass. Pass can as well be doing something intelligent. Otoh it is not likely that they would do something crazy when they have the lead.

And even if your pd deserved a pass because you warned him not to do this, you still have 2 other guys in other room who may have played much better than you expected and some responsible bid now was gonna be enough here to win the game. Even if it was your pd who acted irresponsibly by doing something you are known to react, imho you should be on the same side with other guys (a.k.a teammates). It is never a good idea to give a lesson to pd in a team match.

Bottom line is, if you are passing because you believe it is the action that will bring you what you need, I would not have any complain. But if you are passing just because you are annoyed and trying to give pd a lesson, in a team match, this is a NO NO to me

Absolutely I agree. My pass was not petulance, it just seemed, to me, to be best. I see that the well-known private dick, P_Marlowe, also passes. It was getting lonely out there!

My general rule is that I never assume partner has lost his mind unless there is simply no other explanation. Here, I have to think that partner has some defense. I just can't imagine a hand where he passed first round and now wants to force me to the 4 level.

The fact that we are behind perhaps should play a bigger role in my thinking here than it did, but I am assuming that this only means that we have had what appears to be a bad session rather than that I know the imps on the previous hands. As you note, partners might be haing a great game and won't be amused with a bad result.

I still pass.

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 4 ♥. I'm applying the Fred Will principle -- "I never do anything in the bidding or play of the hand that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." Passing here can hurt you in a couple ways. The opponents might scramble and take 9 tricks, or we might beat 3 ♠ down 1 when 4 ♥/5 of a minor is a rock. Pushing for a thin vulnerable game is not too difficult to explain, but taking a view and have passing result in a large swing will be painful to justify.

The real question is "What do you do if the opponents bid 4 ♠?"

If partner doubles 4 ♠, I sit.

If 4 ♠ undoubled is passed around to me, I'm not so sure what I'd do but would probably bid 4 NT and get partner's input on where to play.

[gszes]

Seems to me we have to decide what hand p is most likely
to hold given the bidding and go from there. We also need
to take into consideration we feel we are behind and that
p might be taking a "reckless" action in an attempt to gain
ground on what appears to be a boring hand.

In the "pass" corner we need to hope p has gambled they can
set the opps and they were frozen out of the bidding due to
spade power and/or bad distribution something like AQJ xx xxxx Kxxx.

In the "take out" corner we need p to have reasonable distribution
and a hand that was too weak to act initially but (we are playing with
this partner for a reason right) when they realized we are short in
spades and could have been frozen out of the bidding with a decent hand
they "took leave of their senses" and decided to tox with a hand that
looks similar to xxx Axxx Axxx xx or xxx QJxx Qxxx Kx (same principle
but it looks way harder to bid with this one).

IMHO it is just plain too difficult to pass and hope that we can either
set 3s on power or hope p has the AQJ (with the k right for us) and the
resultant penalty is worth the gamble. P holding AQJ of spades when the
opps have at least 9 of them is such a tiny % (ask us lottery players) that
the chances of it paying off are slim to none. Partner taking a calculated
risk (knowing you wont play them for AQJ of spades) and hoping you were
jobbed out of bidding is entirely plausible however and the best part is
that this could be the case even if we were not trailing in the match.

[jmcilkley]

Of course I am going to bid 4h. Partner is clearly not strong enough to double first time, probably 10 of maybe 11 points, and I'd protecting me after both opponents have not down much strength. It looks like the 3s bid had made it hard for me to come into the bidding.
Partner is quite likely to be 1444 shape so I am optimistic about our chances in 4h.

[mikeh]

jmcilkley, on 2014-May-04, 03:38, said:

Partner is quite likely to be 1444 shape so I am optimistic about our chances in 4h.

Two points:

1stly, it is virtually impossible that any semi-competent opps have 11 spades and opted to play in 3♠

2ndly, hands with mirrored shape usually play worse than their combined hcp values would suggest.

I am not arguing with 4♥: it is my choice as well, but for different reasons

[kenberg]

What struck me about the 1-4-4-4 idea is that I just cannot imagine holding that shape and taking this course of action. With an 11 count, I would hae to see the 11 count first, but quite likely I would have doubled 1♠. With a 10 count I think I would go quietly when 3♠ is passed back to me. So I am thinking the double is something like, "We are behind, I have some defense, but if you hae a six card suit or something like that you should probably pull this."

The (perceived) state of the match might well play into this. But I would like to put this aside for a moment. Expert long term partnerships may well have defined this double. I have defined it with no one, it has low priority compared to many other undiscussed sequences, but I would be delighted to hear from those who have. I value opinion "on the fly", it's an important part of bridge to cope with the unexpected, but I can imagine that at least some partnership somewhere has sat down and said "Let's play it this way". Bergen type pre-emptie raises are not rare. Anyone?

[jdgalt]

kenberg, on 2014-May-03, 06:13, said:

Exactly. My goal in life is to convince my partners that forcing me to do something intelligent is a very bad idea. The deal at hand is exhibit A. Somehow I am supposed to figure out why, with a hand he thought unworthy of entering the auction over 1♠, he is now forcing me to intelligently choose between playing at the 4 level or defending against a contract that I am not at all sure we can beat. Thanks for your vote of confidence, pard, but I never claimed that I was brilliant.

This is exactly why I conclude it can't logically be takeout. If partner were strong enough that we can make 4 of anything, either he should have overcalled at his first turn, or he should have bid his long suit. If he's got some kind of two suiter, he should have bid Michaels or 2NT. Since none of these happened I can only infer that he was trap-passing and has a spade stack. If anything else is going on, he wants a mind-reader for his partner, and I don't qualify.