[ahydra]

IMPs, opps vul, you're not

---

Result +1, losing 8 IMPs when team-mates come back with the expected +650. ATB.

ahydra

[steve2005]

south has 5♥ doubling is bizarre. 5♥ before X.

[Tramticket]

A bit unlucky. The overcall is marginal - but I would. the double is marginal - but I wouldn't. No reason at all to remove the double.

[eagles123]

really don't like the overcall, but if south wants to double now i think they should do something stronger on their first turn and then they wouldn't feel like they have to act now

[ggwhiz]

Against my partnership they had a free run auction but the double of 4♠ is particularly bad.

Swap the Ace♦ for ♥ and I would overcall at this vul for -1190 or -1390

[pescetom]

steve2005, on 2018-March-14, 06:39, said:

south has 5♥ doubling is bizarre. 5♥ before X.

For me, both 5♥ and double are bizarre.
The jump to 4♥ was justified but nothing more.

[wank]

south's actions are good. he has extra values for a 4h bid. double shows that. it doesn't show a spade stack. north has no expectation of defeating 4s opposite a 4h bid - 10x of spades is very benign.

5hx is only 500 even if clubs are 5-1 with a ruffable trump holding and 300 if they're 4-2. it would obviously be absurd for south to bid 5H with ak in an unbid suit and a balanced hand. the solution is to double to show this type of hand and let north make a decision.

as for north's original 2H, that's a matter of style. personally i would never play a style where i couldn't bid on that, but obviously that's a matter for agreement.
there's nothing in the OP to suggest this was out of line.

[gszes]

I ultimately blame N for passing 4sx BUT that is me. I would be thinking what the heck kind of 4h preempt can now suddenly have the 3 tricks needed to set 4sx? This is where the problem lies -- just what kind of hand should south have in order to suddenly say "partner if you do not think 4sx is a good idea I want you to sacrifice"? As North, where is the magic point where leaving 4sx in is a good idea --- x(x) AKxxx(x) Axx xxx should we sac or not? A TON is riding on this decision if 4sx makes we are chucking away at least 790 vs 620 for what an extra 100? If we sac and 4s was going down now we are talking about maybe -500 vs a +200 some serious coin. I think the x is wrong because it is essentially asking for TWO tricks OUTSIDE hearts for a pass to be right. This seems like a tiny target at best and the only real question would seem to be is our combined holding worth a sac or not in 5h. If it is absurd to bid 5h with a side AK and a balanced hand it is absurd to ask partner to do it.

Opposite almost all reasonable 2h bids 5h should rarely go down more than 3. IMHO rather than hoping for a tiny target a 5h bid seems to have a much greater chance of bringing home a better score than letting the opps play 4s. The side AK and massive trump fit have a side benefit of making 5h harder to x. I would bid 5c over 4s giving p a lead director if the opps continue to 5s which I will NOT x. If p cannot x 5s I sure dont want to. The 5c bid might also be a strong inhibitor to an opps throwing a x at our 5h contract.

Since I disagree with so much of the bidding I chose OTHER

[Phil]

wank, on 2018-March-14, 08:19, said:

south's actions are good. he has extra values for a 4h bid. double shows that. it doesn't show a spade stack. north has no expectation of defeating 4s opposite a 4h bid - 10x of spades is very benign.

5hx is only 500 even if clubs are 5-1 with a ruffable trump holding and 300 if they're 4-2. it would obviously be absurd for south to bid 5H with ak in an unbid suit and a balanced hand. the solution is to double to show this type of hand and let north make a decision.

as for north's original 2H, that's a matter of style. personally i would never play a style where i couldn't bid on that, but obviously that's a matter for agreement.
there's nothing in the OP to suggest this was out of line.

Totally agree. South's double doesn't say he's got ♠KJTx.

[TylerE]

80% N 20% Luck.

I'd duplicate S's actions.

[helene_t]

Just a thought: If S begins with 4♣ instead of 4♥, North will know that his club holding is useful only if declaring, and he might find a 5♥ bid, either directly or after S's double.

[cherdano]

wank, on 2018-March-14, 08:19, said:

south's actions are good. he has extra values for a 4h bid. double shows that. it doesn't show a spade stack. north has no expectation of defeating 4s opposite a 4h bid - 10x of spades is very benign.

5hx is only 500 even if clubs are 5-1 with a ruffable trump holding and 300 if they're 4-2. it would obviously be absurd for south to bid 5H with ak in an unbid suit and a balanced hand. the solution is to double to show this type of hand and let north make a decision.

as for north's original 2H, that's a matter of style. personally i would never play a style where i couldn't bid on that, but obviously that's a matter for agreement.
there's nothing in the OP to suggest this was out of line.

I am not convinced. If North's hand is a normal overcall for you, then what reason does South have to believe we are due for a plus? Random semi-balanced 10-counts with a 5-card suits are much more frequent than better hands, and I am not convinced we gain any equity from doubling opposite that.

Meanwhile, if you have a balanced hand with 4-card support, two aces and a random jack, IMO the practical thing to do is to bid 4♥ over 2♠, and to double 4♠ if they bid it. Say xx Axxx Jxx Axxx. Opposite that, you want to be in 4♠X rather than 5♥X.

[wank]

cherdano, on 2018-March-15, 18:20, said:

I am not convinced. If North's hand is a normal overcall for you, then what reason does South have to believe we are due for a plus? Random semi-balanced 10-counts with a 5-card suits are much more frequent than better hands, and I am not convinced we gain any equity from doubling opposite that.

Meanwhile, if you have a balanced hand with 4-card support, two aces and a random jack, IMO the practical thing to do is to bid 4♥ over 2♠, and to double 4♠ if they bid it. Say xx Axxx Jxx Axxx. Opposite that, you want to be in 4♠X rather than 5♥X.

i don't like 4h with that - it seems rather premature to be getting to the 4 level with a balanced hand when the total trumps are often only 17.

[cherdano]

wank, on 2018-March-15, 21:54, said:

i don't like 4h with that - it seems rather premature to be getting to the 4 level with a balanced hand when the total trumps are often only 17.

Well - I would say having to bid 3H with this is a heavy price to pay for your overcall style. Surely 3H could be much weaker.

[cherdano]

wank, on 2018-March-15, 21:54, said:

i don't like 4h with that - it seems rather premature to be getting to the 4 level with a balanced hand when the total trumps are often only 17.

Actually I had to reread this to realise what you are saying. You think partner's shape is often 3=5 in the majors?

[ahydra]

Interesting discussion, thanks all. I was North. Actually wank makes an excellent point - partner bid 4H, not 3S, and so I shouldn't expect him to have much more defence than this; nor can he have a pile of spades, since I'm holding two. I should pull to 5HX for 500.

I felt the 2H was thin, but within range when NV.

ahydra

[wank]

cherdano, on 2018-March-16, 04:32, said:

Actually I had to reread this to realise what you are saying. You think partner's shape is often 3=5 in the majors?

well often is a vague word isn't it? i mean partner's 35 in the majors often enough that 4h is excessive for my taste, but i've no idea how likely it is as a percentage.