[Helmer]

Scoring: IMP

---

This board I asked another way before - but my partner still thinks she/he is right.
So I will try another way.

I opened 4♥ on norths hand.

4♥    - Dbl      - Pass   - 4♠
Pass - Pass   - double - ap

After the board I was blamed a lot for my 4♥ bid.
Yes its not correct - 1 too many.
But partner still says it has 7 losers. That I can't see - I can only count 6.

Now 4♠ doubled made 11 tricks - that was my mistake because of my opening bid - I simply said - that I couldn't agree with that double at all.

In an earlier pull I asked if people would double or not in this bidding sequence -

27 - 0 so far - NO they would pass.

My partner - well, still goes back to my opening bid is wrong.
Yes but that doesn't matter for the pull of double or not.

Furthermore - my partner says - who are those 27 people who voted - what are their skills/level.

I could make one more poll - about the opening bid - but I don't - as I agreed already that its one too many - though I think I would get many % on 4♥.
Partner still says wrong bid 800 out - thats still not the question.

So - who is to blame for the bad result on 4♠ double - me/partner or both?

Thanks - enjoy your game.

[hotShot]

1) your looser are
♦ Qxx =>2.5 - 3 (QJT is 2 looser)
♠ 1 => 1
♣ 76 =>2
♥ KDJ.... =>1
6.5 to 7 looser

2) If you change the ♥2 into the ace, you have 6 looser and 4♠x still makes. 4♥ is a one suited preempt, it should be stronger than 3♥ but it's still a preempt. So the south hand is to weak to dbl.

[inquiry]

You both bid poorly in my opinion. 4♥ is not right vul at imps. You realize that.

But your partners double was bad. Change your hand to...

x
KQJT98765
xx
x

and no one would take a second glance at your bid and his double is still horrible.

Your very gambling 4♥ bid does not change the fact that his bid was wrong, ESPECIALLY if you play namyats

[EricK]

The one who doubled is to blame for the bad result. They would probably have got to 4♠ even without the 4♥ bid. If opener had had a genuine 4♥ bid, he might have had even less defense than he actually had (eg an extra ♥ instead of ♦Q).

What 4 tricks does the doubler think they are going to make?

To put it another way. The 4♥ bid was bad. But the reason it was bad is that it doesn't have quite enough offense vulnerable at IMPS. If it is doubled it could cost quite a bit more than the value of the other side's vulnerable game. But the bad result which occurred was of a totally different sort. Hence the bad 4♥ bid was not to blame for the bad result.

[mcphee]

Opening 4H, foolish

Who cares if you have 6 tricks or 7? If someone wants to count Qxx as a 1/2 winner (which I suppose it is) I consider this optimistic .

Dble 4S, surely this is beyond foolish.

[luke warm]

this is one good reason to play namyats (how is responder to know whether the bid is preemptive or not?)... that aside, i'd have opened 3♥ and, if i knew 4♥ was preemptive, i'd have never doubled 4♠...

it sounds as if your partner thinks 4♥ should have some defensive value... either he's right or he isn't... if he isn't, his double is pretty bad (i'd never count on a preempting partner for defense)... even tho i'd personally have opened 3♥, your bid did put them to a guess at a high level and for that reason i'd say 75/25 blame south

[kenberg]

Since you are still discussing this with your partner, maybe a new approach is needed. Maybe you could start by asking what sort of hand your partner envisions for a 4H opening. Or, and this seems likely, maybe this has gotten to the point where further rational discussion is impossible.

I think your partner will find it very difficult to get anyone to agree with the double. As to the 4H bid, there are people who believe in highly aggressive preempts. I'm not one of them.

[Winstonm]

If you wait around for the perfect loser-count to adhere to the rules of 2 and 3 then you won't preempt nearly enough - the North hand is a clear cut 4H opener. But then, my views are colored as I have NAMYATS available with a good preempt.

The double is simple insanity. Partner preempts, warning of a hand with little to no defense. and with only 1 quick trick the south hand decides that this time partner holds 3 quick tricks?

I suggest instead of argument a new partner.

Winston

[Double !]

i wouldn't criticize the north hand too harshly for opening 4♥ in this age of pressure bidding. i just might make the same bid.
south's double of 4♠ makes no sense opposite a hand that says lots of offense for hearts, little if any defense.

DHL

[mulefloyd]

I'm new to the forum and the game. Can someone tell me what "namyats" is? I assume it's a bidding system. The only one I know is SAYC and I'm not exactly proficient in it.

[Winstonm]

mulefloyd, on Jun 25 2006, 10:58 AM, said:

I'm new to the forum and the game. Can someone tell me what "namyats" is? I assume it's a bidding system. The only one I know is SAYC and I'm not exactly proficient in it.

NAMYATS is Stayman spelled backwards. It was designed to differentiate between good and bad major suit preempts at the 4-level. Playing NAMYATS, you open 4C/4D with good 4H/4S hands, respectively, and with poorer hands you open 4H/4S. It is a treatment so it can be added to SAYC or just about any other system.

The way I play it, we substitute an opening 3N as a 4-level preempt in either minor to replace the direct 4C/4D standard bids.

Welcome to the forums.

Winston

[pclayton]

In the BBF are several that have represented their country in national events, a bunch of national event winners. Soon Josh will have a world championship trophy on his mantle too

So, yeah, we aren't a bunch of schlocks and if your partner wants to meet us outside after class, we'll be waiting.

Tell your pard that if you're 4♥ preempt was a little purer (say an 8th heart), than the double makes even less sense!

Technically you have a 6 loser hand, but in practice Qxx is seldom 2 losers.

[bid_em_up]

After the first thread and a result of 27-0 stating the X is terrible, no strike that, its HORRENDOUS, no strike that as well, mere words simply cant begin to describe how bad the X is, and I think more than enough people here are at a level high enough to be correct. Heck, even the ones that arent still got it right!!! And you never see this board agree unanimously on anything.

I said previously, I dont agree with the 4H bid but although it is an aggressive preempt, it certainly doesnt drastically misdescribe the hand.

I think winston had the right idea. If this is what your partner truly believes, and wants continue to argue in the face of an overwhelming majority that the X is plain and absolutely wrong, 100%, no questions asked, you really should be asking yourself if it is worthwhile to continue this partnership. If its not, dont waste any more energy on resolving this issue, because he is never going to believe you anyway.

[Free]

The one that doubles doesn't know anything from the purpose of preempting. It's a good suit, and the rest doesn't matter much (unless you agree otherwise).

Ok, it's light. You have 6.5 or 7 losers, which at this vulnerability should definetly be counted as 7. I can't see a way to only 6 losers... But that doesn't change much to your defensive strength: almost nothing.

Your partner has 2 Kings, which is probably worth 1 trick. He also has doubleton ♥ support. Double is plain ridiculous, even if one of the Kings would be ♠K.

I think the 4♥ bid is wrong, but the Double is SO POOR that I only blame the one that doubled. I mean, if the blame percentages are (doubler) 99.999% vs 0.001% (opener), I don't think "both" is the right description.

[jikl]

♠ 3
♥ KQJ10982
♦ Q54
♣ 76

The double is so bad, that if you change the opening hand to this:

♠ 3
♥ AKQJ10982
♦ Q54
♣ 7

A hand that your partner could never argue about for a 4♥ opener it is still going to make either 10 or 11 tricks depending on whether ♥s are 3-0 or 2-1. This is why hot drinks should never be allowed at the table, I have seen people throw cups of coffee at each other at the table for blame-games less than this.

Sean

[kolay]

I think Kenberg is right. The problem may be not who is right or who is wrong (although I think your pard shouldn't double with his hand). You and your pard sould negotiate about the preempt style, what kind of hand should be expected when preempt. Make sure this, or later you will find more problem with hands like this.

[Free]

I disagree. South clearly doubled full of "wishful thinking", which is misplaced a bridgetable most of the time. He thought he'd make both his Kings and opener would make 2 tricks as well. It's not even a pairs event, so double is extremely foolish, whatever the preempting style is.

My advice: make him more pessimistic first, learn him that doubling for -1 in an imp scoring is poor bridge (except if you need to double for a special lead - which is not the case here), and then talk about preempting style.

[pclayton]

kolay, on Jun 25 2006, 10:32 PM, said:

I think Kenberg is right. The problem may be not who is right or who is wrong (although I think your pard shouldn't double with his hand). You and your pard sould negotiate about the preempt style, what kind of hand should be expected when preempt. Make sure this, or later you will find more problem with hands like this.

Preempting style??

Preempts can show two types of hands; hands with long suits, or hands with bad suits. They can be disciplined or not. They can be wide ranging between the palatable and the ridiculous.

Except for 4th (and to a lesser extent, 3rd), preempts don't promises bupkis for defense. They are barrage bids.

I suppose a pair can agree that a 3♥ opener shows 7 cards in the suit and 2 defensive tricks. But they wouldn't understand the fundamentals of modern bridge either.

[kolay]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2006, 11:35 AM, said:

Preempting style?? 

I mean, make sure that your pard know that preempt does not assume any defense trick...

[kenberg]

kolay, on Jun 26 2006, 01:32 AM, said:

I think Kenberg is right. The problem may be not who is right or who is wrong (although I think your pard shouldn't double with his hand). You and your pard sould negotiate about the preempt style, what kind of hand should be expected when preempt. Make sure this, or later you will find more problem with hands like this.

I hope it didn't sound as if I thought the doubler might have a case. I only meant that since doubler is so adamant, s/he must have a very different idea than the rest of us as to what 4H shows. Some rational discussion might then follow. Or not.