[Phil]

rduran1216, on Sep 9 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

[JLOGIC]

hanp, on Sep 9 2010, 10:15 AM, said:

Did you just make us pass with AQJ94 of clubs? Is LHO, a passed hand lacking club length, really going to double me? If not, how can 100 per trick (that is, if we aren't making) really be too expensive?

What? Never disagreed with a hanp post more than this

RHO was third seat, it is not an uncommon thing at all for him to open 4S with a good hand and then double you. In fact, we know that it is quite likely that RHO has opened 4S with enough points for an opening bid since we have 8 and LHO and partner are passed hands (yes they could both have 11, but it's unlikely).

As far as I'm concerned if you open 4S with a good hand in third seat you are required to double them if they bid. I don't view that as unusual at all.

Also, it seems like a faulty assumption that LHO will never double you if he has a decent hand (like an ace, king, and stiff spade). He, too, knows that partner probably doesn't have a textbook preempt in third seat.

So I think we should bid on the merits of our hand and assume we are getting doubled most of the time that it's right. As it is we have maybe 7.5 tricks (being generous). We need partner to cover 2.5 tricks for us as a passed hand, and even then 4S might be going down. I would never consider bidding 5C here and think it's very bad.

As far as the rest of this thread, why is it so bizarre that partner has balanced with a double as a passed hand? This seems normal with A A Q or A K K and a stiff spade or many hands with a spade void.

As far as the UI, it seems we have brought it on ourselves with our question. We asked if they played namyats in third seat despite them not alerting, and they said yes, and yet we still passed (getting the most favorable response for us to bid). Obviously we could not really foresee this coming so it seemed harmless, but I think in general it is good to not ask questions unless the answer will make a difference to us (even if it's not to give away UI, it's good for the opponents to not know we were thinking of bidding).

Now I bid 5C, what else? Good bid partner.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Sep 9 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 9 2010, 05:04 PM, said:

Sure even the queen of hearts less plus another spade, x Axxx Axxx xxxx.

If he's got that, the score really will get adjusted.

One of the consequences of asking questions over 4♠ is that if partner does bid we know he's got it. I've never quite worked out whether that's authorised information or not - it feels like it ought not to be, but it's hard to find a rule that says it's not.

I certainly wouldn't ask if they play namyats if I was planning to pass anyway when they say yes. Anyway all my responses have not been considering the score might be rolled back, I'm just making the best bids I can based on the best reasoning I can muster.

[JLOGIC]

Are we really allowed to even consider the possibility of a score being rolled back/hands partner might have based on that in order to make our bid?

Done the other way it leads to double shots and is considered evil, why is it ok to do it this way?

[peachy]

If Namyats was on their card, then in ACBL a 4H or 4S opening must be alerted. It was lucky that you found out by asking, but the initial offense was their failure to alert the 4S opening. It seems completely unfair to assign UI to a question which was necessary to find out what their bid means. Besides, in ACBL, the regulation specifically says "ASK, DON'T ASSUME"

Here is a quote from the regulation:
" Natural opening bids at the three level or higher which convey an unusual message regarding HCP range or any other information which might be unexpected to the opponents must be Alerted.
EXAMPLE: 4H,S openings which are natural but are weaker than might be expected because the partnership has some other method (an example is the Namyats convention) for showing a good 4H,S opening. "

As to your call, 5C looks completely automatic. 6C is a second choice.

[peachy]

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

What kind of hand do you expect for the double?

I expect ability to play in a non-spade contract as well as defensive values. The Dbl is often left in with balanced hands that have a trick potential, not in trumps necessarily.

[gnasher]

Phil, you're not really telling us that you passed the double, are you?

Usually in this auction we have some awkward semibalanced 9-count and no idea whether we should be pulling. On this occasion we have an eight-card suit headed by three honours, and a singleton in the opponents suit. If this isn't enough to take out the double, what is?

[gnasher]

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 06:18 PM, said:

rduran1216, on Sep 9 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

I'm absolutely certain that it wouldn't have been adjusted to -590. -420 is possible, if they cancel partner's double. -590 would involve making me pass the double of 4♠, which is just inconceivable.

[Cascade]

jdonn, on Sep 10 2010, 03:45 AM, said:

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 10:28 AM, said:

What kind of hand do you expect for the double?

3 suited short in spades?!

You have read to many textbooks.

[jdonn]

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 12:18 PM, said:

rduran1216, on Sep 9 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

This seems like one of those lucky times where there is no alternative regardless of the level of player involved. Seriously I don't even know whether you are advocating pass or 6♣ as the other logical alternative.

[JLOGIC]

jdonn, on Sep 9 2010, 02:20 PM, said:

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 12:18 PM, said:

rduran1216, on Sep 9 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This is probably true, although the comments so far indicate that there is no alternative to 5♣, although I have my doubts.

This seems like one of those lucky times where there is no alternative regardless of the level of player involved. Seriously I don't even know whether you are advocating pass or 6♣ as the other logical alternative.

Huh? We have no UI, so we don't need logical alternatives. What am I missing? So far partner might have UI, and we have no UI. Parnter is the one who should have thought if there were logical alternatives to his bid.

[gnasher]

Maybe we have UI but Phil hasn't told us about it.

[jdonn]

Yes it made no sense to me either but Phil was the one who mentioned the issue of alternatives to 5♣ so I was just commenting on that.

[peachy]

rduran1216, on Sep 9 2010, 12:10 PM, said:

having seen the hand, the director would've been called and adjusted to +590 whether you bid 5C or not

This can never happen. If the Dbl is cancelled, the reult will be whatever tricks they make in 4S undoubled. If the Dbl is not cancelled, there is no way the Dbl will be passed, it would be insane to pass it.

[Phil]

gnasher, on Sep 9 2010, 02:06 PM, said:

Phil, you're not really telling us that you passed the double, are you?

Usually in this auction we have some awkward semibalanced 9-count and no idea whether we should be pulling.  On this occasion we have an eight-card suit headed by three honours, and a singleton in the opponents suit.  If this isn't enough to take out the double, what is?

Yeah I did unfortunately. It was a stressful day, and I thought (especially looking at my hand) the double might have been more penalty-oriented (who really knows these things when playing with a new partner - when you don't have a good idea about their ability?). I also thought that 5♣ x'd would be an awful score, and even if it were TO we could nip 4♠ a trick (we can if you trade the ♦KJ for the ace - yes I know 5♣ makes as well).

Partner held Ax K5xx KJxx xxx (Kx was offside). If you guess diamonds you can hold 5♣ to -1. 4♠ was frigid by the way - Not unexpectedly, RHO held a very heavy KQJxxxx Ax ATxx void - I can't imagine him not xing. I have no idea the MPs scores on this.

Sometimes my decision making isn't the best in circumstances like this. I don't know if its because:

- I feel like I need to play 'beyond' myself
- Outhinking problems
- Masterminding when I don't have to

None of these are valid reasons; I'm just telling you that it happens. If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

[gnasher]

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

[rduran1216]

gnasher, on Sep 9 2010, 05:54 PM, said:

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

its an unreasonable dbl.

[cherdanno]

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 04:33 PM, said:

If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

I think it has never happened to me that I pass a takeout double with an 8-card suit including 3 honors. (And a singleton in their suit.)
Did 4SX= versus 4S= cost many matchpoints though? (Or do you think the TD was incompetent enough to allow partner's double in case it worked?)

[Phil]

cherdanno, on Sep 9 2010, 08:50 PM, said:

Phil, on Sep 9 2010, 04:33 PM, said:

If its never happened to you, then you are better at this than I am.

I think it has never happened to me that I pass a takeout double with an 8-card suit including 3 honors. (And a singleton in their suit.)
Did 4SX= versus 4S= cost many matchpoints though? (Or do you think the TD was incompetent enough to allow partner's double in case it worked?)

The TD wasn't called.

I'm not sure I've ever sat for a takeout double with AQJ94 in their suit either.

I think everyone has misinterpreted doubles before, although you can make a reasonable argument that this is still a 5♣ call even if partner's double is explicitly penalties at other colors and perhaps if pard had not passed previously.

There is a sizable sub-group of players that still plays a double of 4♠ and higher as penalties. While this is a poor, if not misinformed way to play, if pard's hand was something like KQTx, Ax, xxxxx, xx passing looks a lot better obviously.

[the hog]

gnasher, on Sep 10 2010, 05:54 AM, said:

I make lots of bad decisions at bridge - everyone does. I just don't usually publish them on the internet.

What do we think of partner's double, when he had UI from Phil's question?

I don't think he had UI at all. I am perfectly entitled to ask whether they play Namyats or not. I don't have to ask this after the auction.
I think the x was a bit wild, and I would certainly have bid 5C and appealed if the score had been rolled back.