[jdonn]

It is not only logical to pass over 4♠ then pull to 4NT when partner doubles. Both actions in fact seem rather automatic.

[jdeegan]

mikeh, on Jul 18 2007, 10:52 AM, said:

One problem with hand construction is that most of us suffer from an inability to act as our own hand generator, without being biased by our hopes and fears.

Sounds like you are pressing a bit too hard. Bridge is a highly competitive game, but unlike physical sports, it doesn't burn adrenaline.
This is why trying too hard can work against you - although you have to remain sufficiently motivated to win. A leading woman player of the 1960's and 70's - Imogene Hawes from Ft. Worth, Texas - explained this to me once.
When you achieve the right mental combination of engagement and detachment - constructing 'representative' hands is not too hard with practice. Indeed, Larry Cohen's advice for applying the LOTT over a preempt and partner's double is to start by assuming partner is 4-4-4-1 with the stiff in preempter's suit. In the problem hand we have here, we know quite a bid about partner's hand. 4+♥, no more than 3♠, 8+ HCP, but likely less than 12 HCP. You don't need to construct that many hands to see that most leave you at least three losers.

N.B. Always remember Hamman's advice - never make a game or slam try that requires the 'magic' hand.

[ArtK78]

Just one last comment in response to those who would pass over 4S but then bid 4NT if partner doubles 4S.

How do you penalize your opponents?

Apparently, it is impossible for you do defend 4Sx on this hand (OK, two last comments).

[jdonn]

ArtK78, on Jul 19 2007, 02:02 PM, said:

Just one last comment in response to those who would pass over 4S but then bid 4NT if partner doubles 4S.

How do you penalize your opponents?

Apparently, it is impossible for you do defend 4Sx on this hand (OK, two last comments).

If you bid any other way, how do you get to bid your game on the 5 level only when partner has extra values but not when he is minimum? Obviously you can't do everything. But there is nothing inconsistent about saying "I want to play on the 5 level only if partner has extra values, otherwise I want to defend 4♠". The argument about inconsistency would only be valid if partner's double was defined as penalty, rather than what it actually is.

[Halo]

jdonn, on Jul 19 2007, 02:19 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 19 2007, 02:02 PM, said:

Just one last comment in response to those who would pass over 4S but then bid 4NT if partner doubles 4S.

How do you penalize your opponents?

Apparently, it is impossible for you do defend 4Sx on this hand (OK, two last comments).

If you bid any other way, how do you get to bid your game on the 5 level only when partner has extra values but not when he is minimum? Obviously you can't do everything. But there is nothing inconsistent about saying "I want to play on the 5 level only if partner has extra values, otherwise I want to defend 4♠". The argument about inconsistency would only be valid if partner's double was defined as penalty, rather than what it actually is.

Jdonn

Does your position mean partner cannot double second time with a non-offensive balanced hand? Must he pass?

[jtfanclub]

skaeran, on Jul 18 2007, 01:55 PM, said:

Double doesn't say "I can beat 4♠". It means "I've got extra offensive strenght".

If X shows extra offensive strength, what the heck do you bid to show extra defensive strength?

I like pass then pull because I think the club ace is toilet paper on defense. There are way too many points in this deck if they bid game vulnerable and partner Xs, and a club void with either opponent would explain it. Even if one of them has a singleton, partner may have nice club support for me (like Kx or KQx) and have no idea that it's not going to take any tricks.

Without the club ace, this hand becomes too weak for me to leave in the X. I'm not even close to having the kind of support on defense that partner should reasonably expect.

But then, I'm weird that way.

I expect partner to have something like:

KTx
Axxx
xx
KQxx

for his X. That looks iffy for setting 4♠ if I'm right about the freak distribution.

[Halo]

What it seems to boil down to is that we cannot penalize the oppos in this auction - on the Forum at least.

I would go for penalties just because you need to confront the opponents if for no other reason.

[jdonn]

Yes, if partner has straight up penalty double but can't stand you pulling like QJTx Axxx xxx xx or something, he passes and takes the small plus, happy the his opponents gave it to him.

[Halo]

jdonn, on Jul 19 2007, 03:55 PM, said:

Yes, if partner has straight up penalty double but can't stand you pulling like QJTx Axxx xxx xx or something, he passes and takes the small plus, happy the his opponents gave it to him.

No...


Partner of course has:

Axx
Axxx
Kxx
xx

Come on keep it real.

[jdonn]

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 04:12 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 19 2007, 03:55 PM, said:

Yes, if partner has straight up penalty double but can't stand you pulling like QJTx Axxx xxx xx or something, he passes and takes the small plus, happy the his opponents gave it to him.

No...


Partner of course has:

Axx
Axxx
Kxx
xx

Come on keep it real.

Whichever minor you put the missing 13th card into you have an easy game in that suit. By the way I giggled when you gave a 12 card hand as your example of "keeping it real".

[jtfanclub]

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 04:12 PM, said:

Partner of course has:

Axx
Axxx
Kxx
xx

Come on keep it real.

OK. The opps bid to 4 spades, vulnerable against not, with your side not even showing the slightest hint of a fit. Sacrificing makes no sense at all, unless you're thinking they're sacrificing against slam.

Now you're saying that they have 18 hcp between them.

If YOU bid 4♠ to make with 18 hcp and only a 9 card fit between you and your partner, what do you think your distribution in the other suits must be?

Give your opponents at least a little respect.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Jul 19 2007, 04:33 PM, said:

Whichever minor you put the missing 13th card into you have an easy game in that suit. By the way I giggled when you gave a 12 card hand as your example of "keeping it real".

Wasn't that an Eddie Kantar trick? First hand of the night, bid up a storm, let the opponents double you, and you redouble. Opening lead, dummy lays down his hand, opponents are seeing visions of 2200 dancing in their heads, and then...

"wait a minute, I have 14 cards! I guess we'll have to redeal."

[Halo]

Yes, OK. I refrained from giggling at your QJ10x trumps. Would you like a fifth small heart?

[Echognome]

jtfanclub, on Jul 19 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

Wasn't that an Eddie Kantar trick? First hand of the night, bid up a storm, let the opponents double you, and you redouble. Opening lead, dummy lays down his hand, opponents are seeing visions of 2200 dancing in their heads, and then...

"wait a minute, I have 14 cards! I guess we'll have to redeal."

As I've mentioned before on this forum, Stephen Potter discusses this gambit in his 1947 book, The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship. It's a fun read.

[Halo]

Jlall, on Jul 19 2007, 05:25 PM, said:

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 04:41 PM, said:

Yes, OK.  I refrained from giggling at your QJ10x trumps. Would you like a fifth small heart?

He's not saying you can't beat the opponents, he's saying with a hand like that you pass and beat them. You cannot double.

Kindly meant thank you, but did your partner double 1S with QJ10x, if we wind our way back through the auction?

For me this is like so many key situations. You need a strategy and you and Jdonn clearly have one. But why - the fact that you or someone else wins (say if they have a different strategy) does not by itself show that it is this aspect of your agreements and game that contributes to success. It is quite possible you win despite this particular tendency. So arguments are interesting as well as instincts.

Of course humorous stories are even better.

[jdonn]

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 04:41 PM, said:

Yes, OK. I refrained from giggling at your QJ10x trumps. Would you like a fifth small heart?

Sure, then I can get the last giggle at your negative double after 1♣ (1♠) with Axx Axxxx Kxx xx. 2♥ card was missing from the box I assume?

[jdonn]

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 05:57 PM, said:

Kindly meant thank you, but did your partner double 1S with QJ10x, if we wind our way back through the auction?

For me this is like so many key situations. You need a strategy and you and Jdonn clearly have one. But why - the fact that you or someone else wins (say if they have a different strategy) does not by itself show that it is this aspect of your agreements and game that contributes to success. It is quite possible you win despite this particular tendency. So arguments are interesting as well as instincts.

Of course humorous stories are even better.

In other words "Even if I think someone who disagrees with me is good, I'm so stubborn that instead of saying they are right I'll say they are wrong here but good despite being wrong in this particular aspect of their thinking."

By the way you keep going back to my example with QJTx of spades. Of course you will not really hold this. But you asked

"Jdonn

Does your position mean partner cannot double second time with a non-offensive balanced hand? Must he pass?"

so I was trying to show that if somehow partner holds a hand where he completely wants to double 4♠ but does not want you to pull the double, then he can't double. Instead of focusing on the (intentionally) unlikely nature of the example just focus on the point that was being made. Partner can not double 4♠ unless he is willing for you to pull with extra shape, because he holds many more flexible hands than "I am DYING to defend" hands.

[cherdano]

Halo, on Jul 19 2007, 02:23 PM, said:

What it seems to boil down to is that we cannot penalize the oppos in this auction - on the Forum at least.

I would go for penalties just because you need to confront the opponents if for no other reason.

You still penalize opponents often enough in the style that Justin and Josh are explaining (and that almost every expert seems to play in this situation). Opener will pass the double whenever he has a weak NT (with other hands too), and responder can double more often than in your style.