[BerylliuMM]

---

I was generating some random hands for bidding practice when I got into this. Is a double here still responsive double?

And suppose south bids double (or something else) here, what should north do? This hand requires only ♥Q dropping for a grand slam.

[fuzzyquack]

Responsive X of level-five preempt continuation promises transferable values, e.g. could be 4333 with the same location of HCP. The hand N holds calls for 5N, pick a slam

[BerylliuMM]

fuzzyquack, on 2024-December-18, 22:43, said:

Responsive X of level-five preempt continuation promises transferable values, e.g. could be 4333 with the same location of HCP. The hand N holds calls for 5N, pick a slam

I know very little about transferable values. Does it mean S also need some strength on opponent's suit (♣) to make the double?

[DavidKok]

No. It is vaguely defined, and often abused terminology.

Generally a (takeout) double says "I want to act but have no good bid. Partner, you choose the right call for me." At higher levels of the auction the right call is often to defend - 3 tricks are easier than 11, for example. This means that, unlike a double at the 1- or 2-level, partner will often sit for the double. "Transferable values" refers to the idea that our hand should have support if partner chooses to pull, but not be completely useless on defence if partner converts the double to penalties - the most frequent scenario.

Even at high levels of the auction the decision to double is often motivated by shortage in the opponents' suit. It does not promise trump length.

People often confuse this idea with adjacent meanings of double, leading both to poor understanding and poor communication.

[BerylliuMM]

Thank you for the clarification! If I'm understanding it correctly, after this double, N would know S is holding something more than only soft points like ♥Q, ♦Q and ♠J, and it's very likely S would have at least an A on the unbid suits, then this hand can very likely hit slam?

Another thing I'm curious about is the possibility of a grand slam. (Let's say it's IMP and/or NS is far behind) As far as I know 5N before agreeing on the trump suit is forcing to small slam only. Would N bid something like 6♣ to show void (idk if that's the exact meaning for this bid)? Then with N's strength of 3-level takeout and 11 good points in hand, S would give it a try?

[DavidKok]

 BerylliuMM, on 2024-December-20, 02:00, said:

Thank you for the clarification! If I'm understanding it correctly, after this double, N would know S is holding something more than only soft points like ♥Q, ♦Q and ♠J, and it's very likely S would have at least an A on the unbid suits, then this hand can very likely hit slam?

It is difficult to assign any individual card to any particular hand on this auction. NS are cramped by the preempt, and have to make decisions under pressure. This involves a lot of educated guessing. As South I would not double, but instead I would force to slam. I feel like South is better off cutting the knot than risking passing the decision back to North. It may well backfire though, on auctions like this you are always only playing the odds.

 BerylliuMM, on 2024-December-20, 02:00, said:

Another thing I'm curious about is the possibility of a grand slam. (Let's say it's IMP and/or NS is far behind) As far as I know 5N before agreeing on the trump suit is forcing to small slam only. Would N bid something like 6♣ to show void (idk if that's the exact meaning for this bid)? Then with N's strength of 3-level takeout and 11 good points in hand, S would give it a try?

You were careful to give the state of the match, but I still want to show the numerical context of bidding grand slams at IMP scoring. Let's say the opponents are likely in a small slam, and we rate to take 12 or 13 tricks exactly. Bidding the grand rather than the small slam, at IMP scoring, when vulnerable (as we are here) gains +750 points or +13 IMPs. Conversely, if there are only 12 tricks, bidding the grand scores -1530 points or -17 IMPs. Based on these rewards we would need to be approximately 57% sure of that 13th trick before bidding the grand is percentage.

However, there's a complication. The opponents might not be in slam. This happens to me on the regular - not to put too fine a point on it, but people aren't exactly great at bidding slams, or at competitive bidding, let alone at combining them. Let's go through the numbers assuming the opponents are in game. Now the small slam gains +750, or 13 IMPs, regardless of the number of tricks. The grand gains +1500 (+17 IMPs) if there are 13 tricks, and scores -780 (-13 IMPs) if there are only 12. Suddenly we're risking 26 IMPs to gain 4 by bidding the grand, which requires a confidence of approximately 87%.
The actual odds depend on how likely you think it is that the opponents find the slam. My experience is that they usually do not, so I want very high confidence that we're taking 13 tricks before I bid a grand. And you just can't get that kind of certainty on a pressure auction. So in line with that I have a soft rule to never bid a grand slam in competition - there just isn't enough room to share the information required to make it a good proposition. It's not absolute of course, the game is too rich and complex for that, but keep in mind the odds are typically not in your favour.

Now if, despite all that, you still want to look for grand slam you can use the bidding or bypassing of 6♣ to show or deny a first round club control. It is common to play 5NT as pick-a-slam here, and you could make (and I have made) additional agreements about the difference between 5NT and 6♣, both of which commit us to slam on this auction. This requires good partnership agreements though, do not spring this on partner without prior discussion (and committing the agreement to paper, because it likely will take a while before it comes up again and you may need a memory refresher in between).

[thepossum]

Not sure how NB this hand is but you just have to go for it

[mw64ahw]

thepossum, on 2024-December-20, 03:48, said:

Not sure how NB this hand is but you just have to go for it

I don't think that the hand you are dealt with is dependent on your level of experience

[thepossum]

mw64ahw, on 2024-December-20, 03:51, said:

I don't think that the hand you are dealt with is dependent on your level of experience

The point I am making is about confidence and assessment of a situation without rules

5 clubs doubled is a disappointing outcome

Does double mean please bid your best suit or not

I still don't regard that hand as an NB level assessment

I would probably just bid 5 spades although 5 hearts would be fine of course

I got it 6 clubs feeling confident 7 clubs - of course void clubs is safer bidding 7 than singleton

Pick a slam is dodgy I think

6 clubs

KISS - small slam in anything or even game whatever

My card theoretically says double is only takeout up to 4

EDIT of course we all forget about the pass option. My favourte Bridge engine passed and then North doubled again and ended in 5 hearts

Just a general tip as an old timer in all kinds of things. I used to be desperate for someone to teach me rules and a method and what you should do

I don't like to make such metaphors but what is better getting to know the (possible) love of your life

The could have been. Don't look back. Pass bid whatever and move on. My one and only lesson to the world. Do something enjoy and move on

But somebody else got the girl. Whatever. Could have been Elon Musk. Could be in the gutter

That is a tip to NBs from an old pro

PS Sorry for the rant. That is life. Don't look back in anger (or any emotion really) I am literally the worst person to hand out such advice

[Cyberyeti]

fuzzyquack, on 2024-December-18, 22:43, said:

Responsive X of level-five preempt continuation promises transferable values, e.g. could be 4333 with the same location of HCP. The hand N holds calls for 5N, pick a slam

6♣ - like 5N but with a club void ?

[Zelandakh]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-December-20, 05:33, said:

6♣ - like 5N but with a club void ?

I was thinking about this too but I was worried about it being too tangential to make the comment in N/B. In general I far prefer to invert the traditional idea and cue with a loser in their suit, since in the equivalent auction a level lower, it can become very difficult to bid strong hands with xx in their suit if you cannot cue, whereas hands with a control have a much simpler path and can often just go straight to key cards or a final contract. Similar logic applies to preferring asks rather than shows in control and 2-suited auctions. It amazes me that so few top pairs do this despite clear advantages in certain situations.