As East, the bidding has gone as shown. What will you bid now?
what will you bid?
#2
Posted 2016-August-16, 02:09
It is 100% clear to pass now. You showed your hand well enough with a double and have no reason to expect the opponents will not make 4S.
#3
Posted 2016-August-16, 03:51
#4
Posted 2016-August-16, 04:39
ahydra
#5
Posted 2016-August-16, 06:00
#6
Posted 2016-August-16, 06:53
eagles123, on 2016-August-16, 06:00, said:
Perhaps normally, but here we have a first time poster. (welcome delmo!)
I rather suspect a "my partner criticized my choice and I want to check it" scenario.
For the actual hand, definitely pass. With spades this bad, you may have already overbid. For sure it is at most a minimum to double at the 3 level. So bidding again is far beyond consideration.
-gwnn
#7
Posted 2016-August-16, 08:17
Welcome to the forum
The answer is pass (as everyone else has suggested.) But being a bit OCD - only a bit I hear everyone say - around the edges, I searched through the hand records (for completeness) and found the board this hand relates to.
Big Mmmm....
What happened at the table only you (and maybe the three other players) can say, but I bet my bottom dollar that someone wasn't a very happy bunny (in a manner of speaking) after the board was played, I surmise.
#8
Posted 2016-August-16, 08:21
billw55, on 2016-August-16, 06:53, said:
Ask yourself what partner would expect for the first double. At least this strength, probably better spades and better shape yet they passed 4♠.
Since my first double promised something in spades they could have doubled with values but didn't because they don't have any.
What is baby oil made of?
#10
Posted 2016-August-16, 09:29
#11
Posted 2016-August-16, 11:49
If anyone has to make a move over 4 ♠, it had to be your partner.
#12
Posted 2016-August-16, 15:28
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#13
Posted 2016-August-16, 21:28
i think this hand shows the dangers of accusing people of cheating for successful actions. everyone except north is evidently clueless and welcome to the forum, east, delmo.
was this originally posted in the expert forum?
#14
Posted 2016-August-17, 02:08
Yes, I bade 5♦, doubled, but got 4+ IMPs. I could alternatively bid 5♣ for the same reason.
There was 16 pairs to have played the board, and 5 pairs had chosen the same decision as mine.
My decision was as follows.
Since N already showed 7+♥, and S, presumably, also 7+♠, I had 3♠, then my partner should be very short in ♠, and at the same time, he should be very long in both ♦ and ♣.
#15
Posted 2016-August-17, 03:03
delmo, on 2016-August-17, 02:08, said:
Yes, I bade 5♦, doubled, but got 4+ IMPs. I could alternatively bid 5♣ for the same reason.
There was 16 pairs to have played the board, and 5 pairs had chosen the same decision as mine.
My decision was as follows.
Since N already showed 7+♥, and S, presumably, also 7+♠, I had 3♠, then my partner should be very short in ♠, and at the same time, he should be very long in both ♦ and ♣.
So they didn't take you for the available but tricky 500 while you could have got 4♠ down by simply leading your stiff heart (4♥ is making which is why you scored OK).
And yes I'm with Wank, N's only questionable decision was playing with S, for the rest:
https://www.youtube....h?v=t0OVpyvey4U
#16
Posted 2016-August-17, 03:07
delmo, on 2016-August-17, 02:08, said:
Yes, I bade 5♦, doubled, but got 4+ IMPs. I could alternatively bid 5♣ for the same reason.
There was 16 pairs to have played the board, and 5 pairs had chosen the same decision as mine.
My decision was as follows.
Since N already showed 7+♥, and S, presumably, also 7+♠, I had 3♠, then my partner should be very short in ♠, and at the same time, he should be very long in both ♦ and ♣.
your decision should've been as follows: I've already made a dead minimum/below minimum takeout double and partner can also listen to the auction, therefore it is up to partner whether we bid on.
#17
Posted 2016-August-17, 03:17
delmo, on 2016-August-17, 02:08, said:
Yes, I bade 5♦, doubled, but got 4+ IMPs. I could alternatively bid 5♣ for the same reason.
There was 16 pairs to have played the board, and 5 pairs had chosen the same decision as mine.
My decision was as follows.
Since N already showed 7+♥, and S, presumably, also 7+♠, I had 3♠, then my partner should be very short in ♠, and at the same time, he should be very long in both ♦ and ♣.
In a way I am glad Wank has now shown the whole board, too. I admit, Delmo, I do agree to a very small degree with your logic, but looking through the traveller - and that's a fun exercise in itself - for this board, the only other minor suit games have been bid by East/West, not by East alone
What it does illustrate perfectly - and this is instructional by itself - is that it can be a very dangerous exercise assuming partner has a certain-shaped hand (especially with limited bidding). I think most players will agree you got lucky this time, and probably made the opponents fume that you bid at the 5 level with a 4 card suit and a passed partner, and found the right result.
Equally, North could have been void in ♠, and South in ♥ and both could have had a 4 card minor suit in addition. Depending on the layout you may have been looking at a -500 or a -700 penalty instead!
#18
Posted 2016-August-17, 06:26
-gwnn
#19
Posted 2016-August-17, 06:34
The_Badger, on 2016-August-17, 03:17, said:
-700 would take some doing!
London UK