[Wackojack]

3NT was explained as a 4 card pudding raise with some slam interest
4D was a cue

---

As west do you bid?

[quiddity]

Do you have the vulnerability backwards?

[Wackojack]

quiddity, on 2013-August-23, 12:06, said:

Do you have the vulnerability backwards?

No

[quiddity]

ok.. no, i don't bid.
I can see an argument for doubling to hopefully increase the chance of a club lead. Is double a "bid" or a "call"?

Given all my values it looks like a thin slam so I'm not too worried about it being a normal contract. The only question is whether the double helps us to beat it. It looks like partner could have a red-suit control and that we need a club lead to set up my tricks before it gets knocked out. The downside is when we're beating the contract on partner's normal lead and they end up making when partner instead leads a diamond. That seems unlikely; partner probably has a good spade suit for his overcall so I expect he's leading a spade almost always. RHO has spades covered for his jump to slam so I don't think the double will ever cost the contract.

All right, I have talked myself into doubling.

[gnasher]

quiddity, on 2013-August-23, 12:06, said:

Do you have the vulnerability backwards?

Wackojack, on 2013-August-23, 12:10, said:

No

quiddity, on 2013-August-23, 12:12, said:

ok.. no, i don't bid.

Can we infer that you would have bid at some other vulnerability?

[cherdano]

Did their auction after 3N increase our trick-taking potential in spades?

[gnasher]

quiddity, on 2013-August-23, 12:12, said:

Is double a "bid" or a "call"?

It's a call.

[quiddity]

gnasher, on 2013-August-23, 13:07, said:

Can we infer that you would have bid at some other vulnerability?

No, I just wanted to make sure that partner had a vulnerable overcall. Not sure it makes enough of a difference to affect whether I would double but it makes it more likely that he has a good suit and less likely that he is going to lead a club without the double.

[gszes]

X no matter the vulnerability


we use lightner x of slams far a very good reason. It is sometimes the only way to let p know
we need an unusual lead to set this contract. The application here clearly asks for a club. It
is well worth letting a few imps dribble away here and there by not x when we expect p normal
lead to set a contract and gain oodles of imps when we defeat an otherwise unbeatable
slam. If we had a spade void we would pass since we expect a spade lead and we do not
want to do anything to make p think about leading something else.

The reason the x asks specifically for clubs is due to the bidding. Opps are playing in hearts
and if we thought a spade would defeat 6h we would pass as that seems to be p normal lead
and finally it cannot be diamonds because lho showed a dia control behind us.

[mikeh]

I would not make any bid at all. I would pass.

Btw, I have no idea why this would be a 'lightner' situation. If I had overcalled and partner had doubled, I'd expect him to be saying that he expects to beat this contract, not that I have to find an unusual lead.

I would expect him to find a club lead some degree of the time, without the double, since the opps have told him that they can handle the usual spade lead.

[PhilKing]

Double would ask for a diamond lead, so I don't do that. Partner is likely to fish a club if we pass, and so I try that. Maybe a fearless 4♣ is best. As long as 4♠ only goes for a monkey, you are OK, but the upside is quite large, and they generally let you off the hook.

[quiddity]

mikeh, on 2013-August-23, 16:27, said:

I would expect him to find a club lead some degree of the time, without the double, since the opps have told him that they can handle the usual spade lead.

PhilKing, on 2013-August-23, 17:09, said:

Partner is likely to fish a club if we pass, and so I try that.

I assumed from the subtitle "session 1 board 9" that this is a pairs game. I really can't imagine partner leading from 3 or 4 small clubs instead of a top spade. It seems like a totally random thing to do against what could be (from his point of view) a normal contract.

edit: oops, sorry, i just saw from the other posts that the scoring is probably imps. that changes things

[quiddity]

mikeh, on 2013-August-23, 16:27, said:

Btw, I have no idea why this would be a 'lightner' situation. If I had overcalled and partner had doubled, I'd expect him to be saying that he expects to beat this contract, not that I have to find an unusual lead.

Even if this were true, it seems like showing values outside of spades (by doubling) would make a club lead more attractive.

[nige1]

Wackojack, on 2013-August-23, 10:10, said:

3NT was explained as a 4 card pudding raise with some slam interest. 4D was a cue
As west do you bid?

---

At the other table, Lorne Anderson, as West, made an earlier death-defying lead-directional ♣ bid which scuppered North-South slam aspirations. At our table, as South, I showed no enterprise and languished in a ♥ game.

[Wackojack]

---

Sitting west it did cross my mind to double for a club lead since I know that a spade lead could give declarer the contract. I chickened out having a residual doubt that a double might not be clear that I wanted a club lead and hoping that north's failure to cue 4♣ would in any case indicate that leading a club was most likely to defeat the contract. Partner led K♠ and declarer wrapped up 12 tricks when the diamonds came in. My fault I think.

Bidding 4C over 3N at red looks like losing bridge to me. Yes it would almost certainly stops the opps from bidding 6H and we can get away with -500 in 4S doubled.

[gnasher]

I think 4♣ would be insane. Looking at all those honour cards you don't expect the opponents to bid slam, and you're quite like to go for 800 in 4♠.

[gordontd]

quiddity, on 2013-August-23, 17:28, said:

I assumed from the subtitle "session 1 board 9" that this is a pairs game.

Why would it suggest that?

[the hog]

X asks for a D not a club. Anyway, I am not bidding nor making a call.

[quiddity]

gordontd, on 2013-August-24, 05:48, said:

Why would it suggest that?

I guess it made me think of duplicated boards across a field which made me think of a pairs game. Obviously it wasn't a valid assumption.

[quiddity]

PhilKing, on 2013-August-23, 17:09, said:

Double would ask for a diamond lead, so I don't do that.

the hog, on 2013-August-24, 05:53, said:

X asks for a D not a club. Anyway, I am not bidding nor making a call.

My understanding is that this double can also show a good holding in dummy's suit. In this auction dummy implied clubs (or at least a club control).