[Jinksy]

---

IMP teams knock-out match. You're moderately behind, and in the penultimate 8-board set.

I'll just admit I was W, since I don't think E has a lot of blame here - I would have bid 3 or 4Cs, but 2 doesn't seem like a crime. So was my final double poor judgement, or bad luck? I'd hoped with the major suit honours lying badly after what seemed a fairly unconvincing auction, we'd be safely taking them off, and was hoping for a decent few hundreds. So much for that idea...

[jogs]

Would you like to tell the entire story? What was the result? 5♦X=????

Shouldn't it go down one? ♣J, overtake with ♣Q. Return the singleton heart.
Would South find a double dummy line to make this hand? Next time don't double.

[Jinksy]

I led the D. That was that.

[rhm]

jogs, on 2014-March-02, 14:49, said:

Would you like to tell the entire story? What was the result? 5♦X=????

Shouldn't it go down one? ♣J, overtake with ♣Q. Return the singleton heart.
Would South find a double dummy line to make this hand? Next time don't double.

The hand is unbeatable on any lead, but I admit I would have duplicated West's action.

Rainer Herrmann

[bluecalm]

No trump stack and they bid game voluntarily. Your double might be good vs very weak players it's awful at decent level.
You have your share of points after constructive overcall from partner. That suggest they have a lot of distribution and you are not scoring your kings too often. Tbh you are lucky there were no overtricks as N was minimum for 3D and had the flattest distribution possible. Additionally you score +3 if you are successful and minus 4, 8 or more if not.
I think doubling is a blunder.

[HighLow21]

bluecalm, on 2014-March-02, 17:32, said:

No trump stack and they bid game voluntarily. Your double might be good vs very weak players it's awful at decent level.
You have your share of points after constructive overcall from partner. That suggest they have a lot of distribution and you are not scoring your kings too often. Tbh you are lucky there were no overtricks as N was minimum for 3D and had the flattest distribution possible. Additionally you score +3 if you are successful and minus 4, 8 or more if not.
I think doubling is a blunder.

Strongly disagreed. The auction is unconvincing and you have defense. Partner bid at the 2 level, dummy tried as hard as possible to sign off, and declarer went to game anyway; you have the hearts behind the heart bidder and you also have the king behind the spade cuebidder.

Yes, they might make it, but they're just as likely to go 2 off in my book. I recently doubled a voluntarily bid 2NT in a similar situation; yes, they might have made it, but I could tell the cards were probably badly placed based on the auction. Result: down 4, +800, 12 IMPs. Looking at the 2 hands in isolation, 2NT was a perfectly reasonable place to play.

The result was extremely unlucky. The AJ sixth of trumps in dummy is unlucky. If you'd led a club, partner not overtaking and returning a heart would have been unlucky.

If you don't allow the occasional contract that you double to make, you're absolutely not doubling enough. This is especially true if doubling them does not give them game. In my experience, if you set 70%+ of the contracts you double while rarely doubling them into game, your double shows a profit in the long run.

A little math here: your double costs -150 if they make, and gains either +100 or +300 if they go down. Even ignoring the +300, your double gains if they fail to make at least 60% of the time.

Another point: leading the singleton trump was a very bad idea. Singleton trumps are almost always a very bad idea. It probably didn't cost here, but partner will wonder why you led a single trump and not his suit. (Swap a small diamond from dummy with a small club from partner, and the opening lead very likely blew the defense.)

Final note: The idea that they are playing for overtricks is sheer lunacy in my book; the only way that's true is if partner psyched his overcall.

[bluecalm]

You see, you assume the opponents are weak in about every part of your post:

Quote

. The auction is unconvincing and you have defense.

They both more or less know what the other one have. They went to game anyway.

Quote

Partner bid at the 2 level, dummy tried as hard as possible to sign off

And his partner saw that, still he went to game.

Quote

Yes, they might make it, but they're just as likely to go 2 off in my book.

They voluntarily went to vulnerable game having a lot of bidding rounds to investigate, you have no surprises for them and you are assuming they are often down two.

Quote

. The AJ sixth of trumps in dummy is unlucky.

So what do you think N is bidding 3D on ? 2D wasn't forcing nor even encouraging. You have 8pc, your partner has at least 11-12 for his overcall. The opener clearly has a good hand for all his action that leaves very little for N... still he bid 3D. I think his bid was very aggressive and it's surprising how little shape he actually had.

Quote

The idea that they are playing for overtricks is sheer lunacy in my book; the only way that's true is if partner psyched his overcall.

Again, you are treating them like morons. You are adding points and seeing they have about 20 (in the best case) so they clearly overstretched. The idea that they are fully aware of their assets having all the bidding space in the world available and still going to game doesn't convince you.
That again means that your intuition is shaped by playing against very weak opponents.

[aguahombre]

Rainer is correct. The contract is cold on any lead. It is not double dummy; it is the only possible line ---made more comfortable by West not being able to raise Clubs, yet doubling.

[bluecalm]

Quote

made more comfortable by West not being able to raise Clubs, yet doubling.

Right!
One more reason for not doubling: sometimes they make while it wouldn't be so easy without a double.

[the hog]

I would have overcalled 1S of course, but that is another story.
The end result is not unlucky. Doubling is extremely poor. I echo Bluecalm's comments.

[HighLow21]

OK. I think you're all wrong and that's your prerogative.

[HighLow21]

bluecalm, on 2014-March-02, 21:32, said:

Right!
One more reason for not doubling: sometimes they make while it wouldn't be so easy without a double.

Look, I respectfully disagree with all of your comments. I have no qualms with anyone who does not double, but to me, anyone who argues that the double is poor is 'resulting', not being honest. They bid and made a 21-point, 11-trick game, and there are plenty of reasons for thinking it will not make. Plenty. But it does happen to make because it's a perfect fit.

So be it. I'd double the next time, too. I simply can't afford to leave it undoubled when the auction proceeds like this and I hold that hand. It gives up too much profit.

[the hog]

HighLow21, on 2014-March-03, 00:31, said:

Look, I respectfully disagree with all of your comments. I have no qualms with anyone who does not double, but to me, anyone who argues that the double is poor is 'resulting', not being honest. They bid and made a 21-point, 11-trick game, and there are plenty of reasons for thinking it will not make. Plenty. But it does happen to make because it's a perfect fit.

So be it. I'd double the next time, too. I simply can't afford to leave it undoubled when the auction proceeds like this and I hold that hand. It gives up too much profit.

I object to the "resulting" comment. I suspect those who did not double did not do so because they realised
1) the opponents knew how to bid
2) they had no trump tricks
3) the speculation about the Major suit honurs is just that..speculation.
If you really think this is a double I would like to meet you at the rubber bridge table.

[HighLow21]

the hog, on 2014-March-03, 01:24, said:

I object to the "resulting" comment. I suspect those who did not double did not do so because they realised
1) the opponents knew how to bid
2) they had no trump tricks
3) the speculation about the Major suit honurs is just that..speculation.
If you really think this is a double I would like to meet you at the rubber bridge table.

As I said, I have no qualms with people who wouldn't double. I would on this hand; I'd be wrong in this hand; but I think I'd be a winner in the long run. Your opinion may differ and that's just fine.

And in terms of the rubber bridge thing--I don't play for money. But I wouldn't be so cocky. Your results are pretty good, but they're not THAT good.

[Jinksy]

aguahombre, on 2014-March-02, 21:27, said:

Rainer is correct. The contract is cold on any lead. It is not double dummy; it is the only possible line ---made more comfortable by West not being able to raise Clubs, yet doubling.

Do you agree about the X, or just the play?

[cherdano]

Why is this an unconvincing auction? North made a game invite. South accepted, while probing for 3NT.

I find the criticism of the auction rather unconvincing. Why is ♦AJT-6th "unlucky"? Was North not allowed to look at his hand in the auction? You know they are light on values, so they will have shape.

[mcphee]

IMO west was asleep. I like west pass but feel they should bid over 2D, I like double, but can live with 2S. Why west felt he should come alive when they bid a game for me is a mystery.Failure to show spades over 2D is being a whimp.Dble to show them or bid em, who says you side my not make 4S?

[Jinksy]

FWIW, I agree with much of what the non-doublers have said. I didn’t think the auction looked illogical, just tentative, and I don’t think I was ‘unlucky’ to find so many Ds in dummy, given that they were what he based his raise on.

That said, just because they’re good opps doesn’t mean every time they bid game it will be making. If anything, it means they’ll probably be pushier in game hunting than weaker players. The odds favour bidding it when vul when it’s about 35%, so if they’re a minimum, which both my partner’s overcall and their sequence suggests they are, the a priori odds before I even look at my hand are that it’s not making.

Then I look at my hand, and find, as HighLow pointed out, multiple key honours apparently poorly placed for them. I also have a choice of two reasonable leads (I’m still not sure which of the minors I prefer, but it looked very likely almost all their tricks would have to come from cross-ruffing, so cutting out even one round of it might be key).

As HighLow said, doubling a making game doesn’t cost *that* much (on the hand, our teammates didn’t even bid game, so it cost maybe 3 IMPS), whereas taking it two off could pick up a major swing.

I can definitely be persuaded that Xing is wrong here (else I wouldn’t have posted it), but ‘good opps bid making games’ isn’t a sufficient argument for it. The X telling them how to play it seems like a stronger reason, but I felt like I had enough in E’s primary suit to restrict his options.

[billw55]

Jinksy, on 2014-March-02, 14:55, said:

I led the D. That was that.

rhm, on 2014-March-02, 16:35, said:

The hand is unbeatable on any lead, but I admit I would have duplicated West's action.

I would not double, but I am curious about the lead. Why lead a singleton trump when partner has butted in with his own suit, vulnerable?

[rhm]

billw55, on 2014-March-03, 07:46, said:

I would not double, but I am curious about the lead. Why lead a singleton trump when partner has butted in with his own suit, vulnerable?

Defending a high level contract, where your side seems to have all the side suits under control, declarer tricks will have to come from the trump suit.
A trump lead can be effective against a crossruff. When a trump lead is indicated, your actual holding in the trump suit is secondary.
I remember deals where the only lead to beat a contract was the singleton trump king.

Rainer Herrmann