[Fluffy]

IMPs, we deal, we are vulnerable opponents aren't
♠Q972
♥108
♦Q1098
♣KJ3


pass-(1♦)- 1 ♠-(double)
3♦-(double)-pass-(pass)
3♠ -(pass) -pass-( 4♦)
???

[mgoetze]

I would certainly find this question interesting if it were Matchpoints.

[ggwhiz]

That was still a vul 1♠. I'm smashing them.

[MrAce]

Fluffy, on 2012-March-20, 17:14, said:

IMPs, we deal, we are vulnerable opponents aren't
♠Q972
♥108
♦Q1098
♣KJ3


pass-(1♦)- 1 ♠-(double)
3♦-(double)-pass-(pass)
3♠ -(pass) -pass-( 4♦)
???

Gonzalo, why would someone think of doubling them with this in imps bro ?

- Are we sure that we can defeat them ? NO
- Are we protecting ourside for our game bonus or do we think we may make a game after we settled in 3♠? NO
- Even if we get lucky and defeat them, are we expecting to defeat them by 2 tricks good amount of time ? NO
- Even if they are going down 2 and we get +100 instead of our +140 or +300 is this a big loss ? NO
- Does the win/lose ratio justify this DBL ? NO
- In the hands where the fate of 4♦ depends on how declarer will play it, arent we replacing our +50 with -510 by doubling and alerting declarer ? YES

No need to mantion that letting them make a doubled partscore will definetely give other side a momentum that maybe more costly than the score of this board itself. I can tell that from my hand they are probably going down 1 or 2 but i aint doubling them.

If opponents are sane players, pd is likely to be single in ♦ and he didnt bid game, isnt this some sort of hint that he doesnt have much ? If opps are insane and bid 4♦ 4-3 fit, even with a 4-4 fit, what do we lose ? We take 100 insteada 140, big deal, but we now know that we will win this match if we dont do stupid things like doubling this kinda partscores which may change things for us.

Maybe partner, due to vulnerability or due to side hearts didnt wanna make a weak 2♠ bid and didnt wanna pass either with a hand like

AJ9xxx Qxxx x xx

I dunn others but this is a legit 1♠ overcall to me in red.

[aguahombre]

Depends on, in your style, what the pass by partner meant last round. For us, it would be a minimum overcall AND no particular shape. She could also have bid 3S with a bit of extra offense. They don't have as many diamonds as it would normally sound, and likely opener made one of those "noise" doubles misinterpreted by his partner.

I hope my 3D was a mixed raise

[r_prah]

aguahombre, on 2012-March-20, 21:44, said:

Depends on, in your style, what the pass by partner meant last round. For us, it would be a minimum overcall AND no particular shape. She could also have bid 3S with a bit of extra offense. They don't have as many diamonds as it would normally sound, and likely opener made one of those "noise" doubles misinterpreted by his partner.

I hope my 3D was a mixed raise

I agree with the flavor of this post. In my style, 3♠ by partner would have been the minimum hand, and pass denies a complete dog. It looks like RHO has chosen an inopportune moment to compete, and I wield the ax.

[MrAce]

Fluffy, on 2012-March-20, 17:14, said:

IMPs, we deal, we are vulnerable opponents aren't
♠Q972
♥108
♦Q1098
♣KJ3


pass-(1♦)- 1 ♠-(double)
3♦-(double)-pass-(pass)
3♠ -(pass) -pass-( 4♦)
???

DONT DOUBLE !!


Since you asked this question and it is not MP, i am predicting it to go down 2 or 3. Thats apprx what u would get if u were making 3♠

[hatchett]

I agree with others who say it depends on what pass of the double meant. If pass is at least a mild game try
which it would be for me, then I would double. If pass was a minimum hand I would let them have it undoubled.

[gordontd]

MrAce, on 2012-March-20, 21:42, said:

AJ9xxx Qxxx x xx

I dunn others but this is a legit 1♠ overcall to me in red.

Looks more like a 2♠ bid to me, but even if it's a 1♠ bid for you, surely it's not a legit Pass over 3♦x?

[billw55]

I don't understand the urge to double. I may well have only one trump trick, and perhaps one other defensive trick pending location of ♣AQ. Furthermore partner is yet to speak over 4♦ and I have already shown roughly these values. True I have a decent trump holding that partner doesn't know about, but IMO this only brings my defense potential up to average for my bid. Lastly I remember what SJ Simon said, double gives away one trick.

Easy pass for me.

[billw55]

oops ninja self quote, lol

[ggwhiz]

Partner can still pull with the extremely rare distributional hand severely lacking in defence. If they don't have at least that it's a pass first balance later hand in my partnertship style.

One of those is 5-5 in the blacks that we can't show over 1♦ and he is allowed to pull but won't go for a boatload opposite my clubs.

If it's a long imp match and an early hand I'm not about to tell them I can be pushed around.

[MrAce]

gordontd, on 2012-March-21, 05:56, said:

Looks more like a 2♠ bid to me, but even if it's a 1♠ bid for you, surely it's not a legit Pass over 3♦x?

Some people dont preempt with side 4 card major.

It has nothing to do with what pd should have done, could have done, must have done over 3 ♦ doubled. Idk what his pass meant in this topic. He passed 3♠ thats what matters to me.

It is a matter of what level is your opponents. Good ones usually dont bid this 4♦ to give you 300 or 500. Because all u were trying to get was +140. It is not like u shd never double good opps, but i wld be more careful if they voluntarily bid 4♦. I dont expect spades to divide 2-2 when they bid 4♦ even if they are playing 4-3 fit. If they are doing something stupid and if they are down 2, yes i miss that extra 200 points and settle with 100.

I can easily see how things can go wrong when;

Pd has

AKxxx
Kxxx
x
xxx

Opener has

xxx
xx
AKJx
AQTx

Responder has

x
AQJxx
xxxx
xxx

And i can also see how DBL can be very good if pd has stiff ♦J or something and/or they are suicidal and bid that with 2-2 ♠s. But if thats the case arent we going to win the match anyway ?

Perhaps i am too cautious/sissy and a wimp

[quiddity]

Fluffy, do you have an agreement about whether the pass over 3♦-X showed a minimum or extras?

[billw55]

I am just now noticing that this was stated up front as IMP scoring, red on white. Gosh how on earth can double be right? We aren't protecting a game, and we have to set them two to show any worthwhile profit - which the double itself may prevent. On top of which, we may already have won the board if 3♠ was going down.

But if they make 4♦? Egads. The IMP odds seem like 2:1 against even assuming down two, and excluding redouble when someone is void spades.

Maybe I am misunderstanding something ...

[wyman]

I would rip it at MP, but at IMPs, I'm scurred.

[MrAce]

wyman, on 2012-March-21, 15:08, said:

I would rip it at MP, but at IMPs, I'm scurred.

Oh at MP i would rip it too, no doubt about it.

And i am sure those who voted for pass like me and you also knows this is very likely to go down in 4♦, we just say "screw it" at imps.

[Fluffy]

I suspect partner passed 3♦ because he wasn't fully sure of the meaning of it, and had it been mini splinter he didn't want to discourage me on bidding game. On our meta agreements advancing the call we are forced to play is weak.

[bigbenvic]

I voted double based on agreements I have, his pass of the X shows a mild interest (3S weak, XX strong pen orientated and 3H shape game try) my bid of 3s shows the lower end of my range and since he's not a minimum overcall I want to collect!

If not a regularly partnership with these agreements I would pass.

[Fluffy]

I passed and put 3 down, partner had ♠AKJ10x ♥xxxxx ♦K ♣xx