[AL78]

MPs, 1st seat, red against green, playing Acol, weak NT, three weak twos.

North
♠97
♥AQT64
♦-
♣AK9874

What do you bid?

In case it is relevant, East is a fairly decent club player getting back into bridge after a long layoff, West and your partner are inexperienced players.

[Cyberyeti]

For us clear cut 1♣but we have some unusual agreements for hands like this

[DavidKok]

1♣, intending to bid 4NT over their 4♠ if that comes back to me, pulling 5♦ to 5♥.

[Douglas43]

1♣ is the best way to describe your hand. But especially at red and with an inexperienced partner I wouldn't criticise you for bidding 1♥. treating the hand like 5-5 and getting the major in.

[AL78]

I opened 1♣ deciding this was good enough to reverse if partner responds 1♠ and if I get the chance to bid the hearts twice, I have effectively put my hand on the table.

Unfortunately the pesky opponents got in the way of that grand plan:

---

I really wanted to pull partner's double to 4♥ offering a choice of games, given she has bid strongly and we are almost certainly better off in game in one of my suits if we have a fit which is virtually certain. Unfortunately the hesitation, which could imply she took a marginal decision and wouldn't be unhappy if I overruled it, means I have to pass as that is a logical call. I was directing and there were no other experienced directors in the field (only four tables) so if I pull the double and LHO complains, I have to make an objective ruling against our side on my own which I didn't want to get into.

Needless to say -100 was a bottom compared to the choice of three cold games our way. We can make 10 tricks in 3NT but can only get 4♦ one down.

Do you agree that I am compelled to pass the double after the long hesitation?

[Cyberyeti]

This was one of the situations we cover by agreement, here X shows 4 hearts, 2♥ shows 5 so partner knows from here I'm 5-6 and won't double 4♦, but I don't even do that. 3♥ over 2♦ shows exactly this hand type, 2 good suits, but not a huge hand, technically NF but rarely passed. Partner pretty knows both suits run (the suit requirements are one of the top 2, 3 of the top 5 unless AK, so ♥AJ10xx is the only possible holding where this is not true), and will investigate a slam (which is good opposite the 1516 version of the hand).

I'd have been inclined to bid 4♥ over 3N as long as I was confident 4♠ was keycard and 4N natural was available to partner. What would double instead of 2♥ have been from you ? It seems likely you're 2416 or similar from partner's point of view, particularly if double would have shown 3 spades and you can hardly have more than one diamond, so I'm not sure if Xing 4♦ is a good idea given the big club fit you have.

Once partner doubles slowly it's tough.

[DavidKok]

I would never have passed 3NT, so I wouldn't be in this situation. Your failure to describe the hand on the previous round now comes back to bite you when partner takes decisive action, thinking they have all the information.

Mind you, doubling with partner's hand is a really bad move. Partner has already denied club and heart support and shown spade and diamond values with the 3NT bid, doubling is bidding the hand twice. Just pass and let partner evaluate. I don't love the 3NT bid either but what can you do.

North and South both misbid, which put you in a difficult position for the final decision.

All the pause and hesitation crap is irrelevant. Or should I say, an excuse to win the postmortem.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2022-September-09, 06:13, said:

I would never have passed 3NT, so I wouldn't be in this situation. Your failure to describe the hand on the previous round now comes back to bite you when partner takes decisive action, thinking they have all the information.

Mind you, doubling with partner's hand is a really bad move. Partner has already denied club and heart support and shown spade and diamond values with the 3NT bid, doubling is bidding the hand twice. Just pass and let partner evaluate. I don't love the 3NT bid either but what can you do.

North and South both misbid, which put you in a difficult position for the final decision.

All the pause and hesitation crap is irrelevant. Or should I say, an excuse to win the postmortem.

I agree about the error of passing 3NT, but the pause and hesitation issue is decidedly not crap, for any law abiding player let alone a playing Director.

[mw64ahw]

I'm in the MAFIA camp so 1♥ which I guess makes it easy for me.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2022-September-09, 08:49, said:

I agree about the error of passing 3NT, but the pause and hesitation issue is decidedly not crap, for any law abiding player let alone a playing Director.

I agree

Part of the problem is that once a player passes 3N with the 2=5=0=6 hand, he is no longer a peer of those who would have bid 4H. Having announced that he saw the ‘best’ action over 3N as passing, I don’t see how he can be held to see passing 4D doubled is not a logical alternative.

That’s not at all the same as arguing that passing the double is the only or the most logical alternative: I think it obvious to pull, but it’s obvious to me that I should not have sat for 3N in the first place.

Having said that, I recognize how a player might talk himself into passing. Hamman’s rule might echo in my head…3N ends all auctions. But, of course, it doesn’t and Hamman never claimed that it really did.

Yes, if partner has something like KQxxx xx AQ10x Jx we’d rather play 3N from his side than either of our suits, but imagining awful holdings for our contemplated actions will lead us to misbid on a regular basis. So long as partner has 3 card support for one of our suits, and game values as announced by the jump to 3N, we should be safe in one of our suits. Plus on a great day he holds something like Axxx KJx AJxx xx and we’ll reach 6H (at mps anywhere outside of the last day of a Life Master or Blue Ribbon Pairs, I’m not interested in grand, which may well fail). Of course, the right doubletons also make one of our suits playable. Thus the odds are that we’ll find an acceptable dummy even on a bit of a misfit.

So, if one passes 3N, and partner perpetrates a slow double, I think we’re stuck….especially if we are the TD!

Btw, I echo those who say south should not double. A slow pass creates op issues as well, but even the janitor knows it’s forcing and so north can pull to 4H with a clear conscience. There is no logical alternative at all.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2022-September-09, 08:49, said:

I agree about the error of passing 3NT, but the pause and hesitation issue is decidedly not crap, for any law abiding player let alone a playing Director.

I agree

Part of the problem is that once a player passes 3N with the 2=5=0=6 hand, he is no longer a peer of those who would have bid 4H. Having announced that he saw the ‘best’ action over 3N as passing, I don’t see how he can be held to see passing 4D doubled is not a logical alternative.

That’s not at all the same as arguing that passing the double is the only or the most logical alternative: I think it obvious to pull, but it’s obvious to me that I should not have sat for 3N in the first place.

Having said that, I recognize how a player might talk himself into passing. Hamman’s rule might echo in my head…3N ends all auctions. But, of course, it doesn’t and Hamman never claimed that it really did.

Yes, if partner has something like KQxxx xx AQ10x Jx we’d rather play 3N from his side than either of our suits, but imagining awful holdings for our contemplated actions will lead us to misbid on a regular basis. So long as partner has 3 card support for one of our suits, and game values as announced by the jump to 3N, we should be safe in one of our suits. Plus on a great day he holds something like Axxx KJx AJxx xx and we’ll reach 6H (at mps anywhere outside of the last day of a Life Master or Blue Ribbon Pairs, I’m not interested in grand, which may well fail). Of course, the right doubletons also make one of our suits playable. Thus the odds are that we’ll find an acceptable dummy even on a bit of a misfit.

So, if one passes 3N, and partner perpetrates a slow double, I think we’re stuck….especially if we are the TD!

Btw, I echo those who say south should not double. A slow pass creates issues as well, but even the janitor knows it’s forcing and so north can pull to 4H with a clear conscience. There is no logical alternative at all.

[AL78]

mikeh, on 2022-September-09, 11:22, said:

I agree

Part of the problem is that once a player passes 3N with the 2=5=0=6 hand, he is no longer a peer of those who would have bid 4H. Having announced that he saw the ‘best’ action over 3N as passing, I don’t see how he can be held to see passing 4D doubled is not a logical alternative.

That’s not at all the same as arguing that passing the double is the only or the most logical alternative: I think it obvious to pull, but it’s obvious to me that I should not have sat for 3N in the first place.

Having said that, I recognize how a player might talk himself into passing. Hamman’s rule might echo in my head…3N ends all auctions. But, of course, it doesn’t and Hamman never claimed that it really did.

I've never heard of Hamman's rule, but the reason I decided to pass 3NT is the hands don't look like they fit well with partner marked with the other two suits, and if I bid 4♥ and partner corrects to 5♣ we are probably getting a poor score whether or not I make it. I had no idea that partner's spade suit was four to the jack or that LHO had chosen to pass their partner's overcall with five card support, so I was never going to visualise our hands matched so well.

The claim made by someone that I am trying to win the post-mortem is an unreasonable and disgusting accusation. I am not like that at all.

[DavidKok]

I think pass is not a logical alternative, since it wasn't last round. Mikeh's point about the modus tollens - we passed last round, so clearly we must be the sort of player that considers it a logical alternative now - is well taken, and I have no idea what the lawful course of action is. Maybe consider it a cheap learning opportunity (and pass) - you lost one board, but found four chances to improve your partnership (five if you include the 3NT bid, but that's maybe too harsh)!

[DavidKok]

AL78, on 2022-September-09, 13:10, said:

I've never heard of Hamman's rule, but the reason I decided to pass 3NT is the hands don't look like they fit well with partner marked with the other two suits, and if I bid 4♥ and partner corrects to 5♣ we are probably getting a poor score whether or not I make it. I had no idea that partner's spade suit was four to the jack or that LHO had chosen to pass their partner's overcall with five card support, so I was never going to visualise our hands matched so well.

The claim made by someone that I am trying to win the post-mortem is an unreasonable and disgusting accusation. I am not like that at all.

I'm sorry for that accusation, I shouldn't have made it. We've talked more than enough on this forum that I really should have known better. I'm sorry.

Hamman's rule states that, whenever 3NT is a logical alternative, it is also the best choice. The most common situation is something like (3♦)-X-(P)-? with ♠KQxx, ♥Qxx, ♦AT8, ♣xxx - do you try for 3NT or 4♠? Hamman's rule says to default to 3NT, although there are other (stronger?) versions that make more definitive statements about when to play 3NT.
The general point on this auction is complicated and interesting. Partner is announcing a misfit and sufficient strength to make game, with length or values in spades and diamonds. Generally it is best to stay low on a misfit. However, if your hand is sufficiently shapely, it becomes better to run. The question is where the line is for this 'sufficiently shapely' - usually 5-6 is enough, but it depends on the auction. Some 5-5 hands might also qualify. This is a tough judgement call to make, and I don't know of a faster way to become familiar with it other than practice and asking other players their thoughts.

[bluenikki]

AL78, on 2022-September-09, 04:17, said:

MPs, 1st seat, red against green, playing Acol, weak NT, three weak twos.

North
♠97
♥AQT64
♦-
♣AK9874

What do you bid?

In case it is relevant, East is a fairly decent club player getting back into bridge after a long layoff, West and your partner are inexperienced players.

Once you have opened 1♣ you are committed to bidding hearts twice. Well, maybe not at the 6 level.

[michel444]

AL78, on 2022-September-09, 04:17, said:

MPs, 1st seat, red against green, playing Acol, weak NT, three weak twos.

North
♠97
♥AQT64
♦-
♣AK9874

What do you bid?

In case it is relevant, East is a fairly decent club player getting back into bridge after a long layoff, West and your partner are inexperienced players.

1♥ as Major Always First if partner bid spade no problem i can bid 2 ♣ if he bid 2 ♦ i have to decide do i rebid heart or do i show the club