[Phil]

AKX QTxx Tx xxxx

P p - (1S) 2H
(45) - ?

Mps nv nv.

[gnasher]

Pass.

There's a fair chance that this will go down, so I don't want to sacrifice. If we're making 5♥, partner, who probably has a singleton spade, will bid again.

Double would be for takeout, so I can't do that. That seems to leave pass.

[SteveMoe]

What gnasher said. Whenever I hold 7 HCP in their suit I fear the HCPs they hold in other suits - our offensive chances go down dramatically.

[dave_w]

gnasher, on 2012-June-17, 01:47, said:

Pass.

There's a fair chance that this will go down, so I don't want to sacrifice. If we're making 5♥, partner, who probably has a singleton spade, will bid again.

Double would be for takeout, so I can't do that. That seems to leave pass.

Why can't you double? You aren't broke. If partner bids at the 5 level you can correct to 5♥. If partner passes it's going down (partner might pass with balanced-ish hands for his action so far if making anything at the 5 level opposite a passed hand is too much to ask). I can't imagine passing. Surely we were making 4♥ - I know I was going to bid it to make.

[gnasher]

dave_w, on 2012-June-18, 05:28, said:

Why can't you double? You aren't broke. If partner bids at the 5 level you can correct to 5♥. If partner passes it's going down (partner might pass with balanced-ish hands for his action so far if making anything at the 5 level opposite a passed hand is too much to ask). I can't imagine passing. Surely we were making 4♥ - I know I was going to bid it to make.

Partner has a singleton or void in spades. If I make a takeout double, partner will take it out. So yes I can double, but it's equivalent to bidding 5♥, which I've already decided not to do.

I don't agree that we were necessarily making 4♥, but even if we were that's not particularly relevant. What matters is what I can achieve from where we are now. If the choice is between a small positive score from 4♠, and a small negative score from 5♥, I'll take the positive. And if I pass there is still a fair chance that partner will act again, in which case I will get a rather larger positive.

[Phil]

I agree with Gnasher's views. Its barely possible partner has a doubleton spade against some players. Its way more likely partner has a heart stiff or void. With a void he is pulling, and with a stiff he might.

On the actual hand, partner pulled the double to 4N with void K8xxx QJ9x AKxx. Does he get any charge?

[cherdano]

Phil, on 2012-June-18, 12:08, said:

On the actual hand, partner pulled the double to 4N with void K8xxx QJ9x AKxx. Does he get any charge?

Are you asking whether we should blame partner for taking out a takeout double with a void in the opponent's suit?

[ArtK78]

I don't see why this is a takeout double. With a true takeout hand, 4NT is available. This hand must have values (even as a passed hand).

Partner should have passed.

[nigel_k]

I would have doubled for takeout with the first hand which would probably have avoided the problem. My understanding of the double of 4♠ is that partner is expected to nearly always pull with a shortage. So that call is clearly wrong, as others have explained, and should get at least 75% of the blame.

[MrAce]

DBL is neither pure take out nor penalty.

It means you are too strong to pass and too balanced to make a 4NT take out bid. Coming from pass i expect max of a passed hand and balanced from doubler. This includes some of the hands with ♥ support.

With current hand it is easy pass though.

I would double if you add another K and if i didnt open for whatever reason.

AKx Qxxx Qxx Jxx

Axx Jx QJxx Kxxx

[JLOGIC]

To me this is the equivalent of asking what to do over a 4S opener with KQJT Axx Axx Axx. Sorry, you have to pass, it sucks but that's life.

[MrAce]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-18, 17:08, said:

To me this is the equivalent of asking what to do over a 4S opener with KQJT Axx Axx Axx. Sorry, you have to pass, it sucks but that's life.

They are different though, when someone opens 4♠ u dont expect to have too much ♠ cards and a strong hand. You dont expect to face this frequently.

But in this one pd already showed some constructive values, it is obvious that you are being stolen, and it can happen a lot when they have 9+ fit. Over 4♠ opening you dont know what pd has, you would DBL though with the hand you gave if you knew pd has values.

On the hand you gave, your peer will face the same problem. But on auctions like this, i have yet to see a good player on vugraphs who would pass just because he doesnt have take out shape.

Now you have more points when we are coming from pass, assume you are not. It is an everyday auction. Assume you have 14 hcp pd overcalled and they have 9-10 card fit and blasted 4♠. We can not just pass because we dont have a take out shape. It is also foreign to me since i have 4NT available too.

EDIT: In fact in one of your posts in the past, you mentioned the same thing or similar to what i wrote. You said something like "In forums people easily call it a take out but we do not have this luxury, we have to double with a lot of hands that are too strong to pass"

[JLOGIC]

MrAce, on 2012-June-18, 17:25, said:

They are different though, when someone opens 4♠ u dont expect to have too much ♠ cards and a strong hand. You dont expect to face this frequently.

But in this one pd already showed some constructive values, it is obvious that you are being stolen, and it can happen a lot when they have 9+ fit. Over 4♠ opening you dont know what pd has, you would DBL though with the hand you gave if you knew pd has values.

On the hand you gave, your peer will face the same problem. But on auctions like this, i have yet to see a good player on vugraphs who would pass just because he doesnt have take out shape.

Now you have more points when we are coming from pass, assume you are not. It is an everyday auction. Assume you have 14 hcp pd overcalled and they have 9-10 card fit and blasted 4♠. We can not just pass because we dont have a take out shape. It is also foreign to me since i have 4NT available too.

EDIT: In fact in one of your posts in the past, you mentioned the same thing or similar to what i wrote. You said something like "In forums people easily call it a take out but we do not have this luxury, we have to double with a lot of hands that are too strong to pass"

That means X is not penalty? I think you misinterpreted what I wrote, I think our hand with the AK of spades is at best a penalty X, ergo I pass, just like I'd pass with a penalty X over 4S. In both cases, we do not expect to have trump tricks but sometimes we do (as here).

I do think X is cards/convertible values/whatever, the point being if partner bids we have some values and will almost always have a fit for him somewhere.

Here my values seem to be the AK of spades which are not useful on offense.

[lalldonn]

Yes the main point of this hand IMO is that we have values and shape were bidding is possible but with so much in spades our offense isn't good enough. With xxx QTxx xx AKxx instead I think it would be clearly correct to act. With Axx QTxx xx Kxxx it's a closer decision. With the original AKx QTxx xx xxxx I think it's definitely right to pass, even though you know you are being stolen from.

[MrAce]

JLOGIC, on 2012-June-18, 17:51, said:

That means X is not penalty? I think you misinterpreted what I wrote, I think our hand with the AK of spades is at best a penalty X, ergo I pass, just like I'd pass with a penalty X over 4S. In both cases, we do not expect to have trump tricks but sometimes we do (as here).

I do think X is cards/convertible values/whatever, the point being if partner bids we have some values and will almost always have a fit for him somewhere.

Here my values seem to be the AK of spades which are not useful on offense.

This is why i wrote i would not DBL with this hand in this topic. I agree with you. (And Josh)