[gareth]

---

Scoring is by total points, but please explain if your decision would be different at IMPs / MP. If you feel it is relevant, a 1NT opening would be 12-14.

[Fluffy]

althou my ODR is average, I think opponet's is huge, and in doubt bidding 4♠ over 4♥ is a good rule. Assuming partner is suggesting 4♠ with the double.

[diana_eva]

I think it would be relevant to know if opps were robots. Robots would bid 4h (even vul vs non vul) more aggressively than humans.

[gareth]

You're playing against good human opponents.

[nigel_k]

Pass. I have good defence and not enough to expect we make 4♠ unless partner doubles again.

[jallerton]

What did the double of 1♥ mean in your style?

[AlexJonson]

4S.

I can't imagine bidding anything else. I expect to make.

[jmcw]

AlexJonson, on 2011-October-11, 15:13, said:

4S.

I can't imagine bidding anything else. I expect to make.

Care to explain why you expect to make?

[AlexJonson]

jmcw, on 2011-October-11, 15:32, said:

Care to explain why you expect to make?

Paertner has spades and some fitting points (ie outside hearts).

Is this is a surprise?

[jmcw]

AlexJonson, on 2011-October-11, 15:42, said:

Paertner has spades and some fitting points (ie outside hearts).

Is this is a surprise?

The short answer is yes.
I expect P to have precisely 4♠ and at least 6 points.
Based on P minimum type hand I would not expect to take 10 tricks. I much prefer pass.
If P holds the balance of power he will probably X, then I have another problem..bid or pass?...likely pass.

I simply don't understand how the available information leads you to conclude that 10 tricks should be expected.

[mycroft]

I don't expect it to make, but I do expect that I have two defensive tricks, max. I can pretty much guarantee that we have a double fit, if we have the expected 15 minor suit cards. Now, if that minor fit is ♦Qxxxx this may not be good - especially if the clubs are KQ, and the hearts are Kx. But it's my decision to make, because partner will feel uncomfortable doing anything but double (and what's that? Are you pulling that?) or 4NT (if you don't have spades, you must have a minor fit) when I don't say anything about spades. So I'm bidding.

There's a good chance that both sides can make 9 tricks, true. But that means that we have enough slow losers to go set *and* having enough fast winners to set 4♥. There's also a decent chance that we're only making 8 tricks, but we're not likely to get doubled.

At TPs, even if I'm wrong, I'm losing 150 points - 200 maybe, 300 if everything's wrong. If I'm catastrophically wrong, I could be giving up 500 to go -100, but I bet we can't find it even if it's there. If I'm right, we're swinging 320 (if we make and they go down) to 1040 (both make - that's unlikely, but gaining 320 or 520 even if we go down, if they make). This feels like the right time to "when in doubt, bid one more". IMPs is less secure; I'm guessing it's pretty much a crapshoot.

MPs is fascinating (as usual) - so, is 4♥ an auto-call, or have we just been given a chance to go +200 into 140 (either way)? If everyone has this decision, then anything could be right, depending on the field and the other three at the table. If this is bid-em-up boy who wins by pushing that extra trick and making people guess wrong, who knows?

[gnasher]

I'd bid 4♠, but I don't understand the comments like "I expect to make", "Partner has ... some fitting points", "I can pretty much guarantee that we have a double fit" and "we're not likely to get doubled". Partner can have a 4333 6-count with a wasted heart honour, and we could be going for 500 against nothing.

[aguahombre]

Yeh, 4H is a transfer to 4S and a super-acceptance might get us too high.

Seriously, having no idea who has the balance of strength I would probably bid 4S and hope for the best. They always bid one more, anyway; the only problem would be if CHO can't take the joke.

[gareth]

jallerton, on 2011-October-11, 15:08, said:

What did the double of 1♥ mean in your style?

Normal / undiscussed; 1♠ would have shown 5.

[jallerton]

gareth, on 2011-October-11, 05:34, said:

---

Scoring is by total points, but please explain if your decision would be different at IMPs / MP. If you feel it is relevant, a 1NT opening would be 12-14.

Given the system in use, this is a minimum opening bid with 4-card ♠ support. From a constructive bidding point of view, it's a raise to 2♠. In competition, it's often acceptable to stretch one level but not two. If you are making 4♠, partner will probably have enough to reopen (probably with a double) if 4♥ is passed round to her. For that reason, it would be obvious to pass if the vulnerability were reversed.

However, we are at favourable vulnerability. There are no guarantees, but if partner has a minimum double, a 4♠ bid might show a decent profit by going one or two off (-100/-300) instead of conceding 4♥= (-620). 4♥is not necessarily making but sometimes the opponents may find it difficult to double or take the push to 5♥. Bidding 4♠ will work out badly occasionally when partner misjudges thinking that you have a better hand. More likely, bidding is wrong when both 4♠ and 4♥ go one down, but that is a relatively small loss converting +100 into -50 or -100.

Thus I would bid 4♠ at at the vulnerability and form of scoring. At IMPs the decision is closer but I would still bid.

However, at MP Pairs, I prefer Pass. Here the magntitude of the potential swing is not as important as the frequency and I am concerned about the relatively high frequency of both games going one down.

[FrancesHinden]

For comparison purposes, the other day we were also playing a total points match against a team with some very good players, and a very similar problem came up.

At favourable vulnerability you hold
Q106
-
Qxxxxx
AKQx

and the auction at table 1 is
1D 1H 1S* 4H
?

*shows 5 spades

while at table 2 it is
1D 1H dbl* 4H
?
*shows 4+ spades

Jallerton was at the table with the slightly harder problem which didn't bid 4S and lost 570 points.

So possibly we're both influenced into bidding 4S on this hand.

[gareth]

At the table my thought process was simply that I knew it was normally right not to bid two levels higher than you would uncontested, and that, as long as I didn't think too long about this decision, if we were making game then partner would probably have enough to double. I didn't give much thought to bidding in the hope it was a save because I thought my ace rich hand was relatively defensive and perhaps gave insufficient consideration to the likelihood of a double fit.

---

The fits were very pure but I don't think they would have bid on to 5H, so the decision cost 1000+ points.

[whereagles]

Perfect FTL example