redouble trouble
#1
Posted 2010-February-11, 07:01
nobody vul
Kx
Kx
AKQxxxx
xx
1NT-p-p-X (12-14)
XX-p-p-??
XX= forced, pass from RHO = to play, partner's pass is undiscussed
2. all vul
A10
xxxx
9x
108xxx
1♠-X-p-2♦
p-p-X-XX
p-p-??
XX showed a max hand (7-9)
3. all vul
-
K10xxx
Qxxx
AJ10x
1♠-p-2♠-X
XX-p-p-??
#2
Posted 2010-February-11, 07:17
2. I have 4 HCPS with no fit and no real shortness and showed it as 7-9? And now I am in troubel. Surprise surprise. 2♠
3. I have the meta agreement that pass behind the suit is to play. So I would pass without a problem. Without this agreement I have to gamble and try 2 Nt scrambling.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#4
Posted 2010-February-11, 09:29
Codo, on Feb 11 2010, 01:17 PM, said:
2. I have 4 HCPS with no fit and no real shortness and showed it as 7-9? And now I am in troubel. Surprise surprise. 2♠
3. I have the meta agreement that pass behind the suit is to play. So I would pass without a problem. Without this agreement I have to gamble and try 2 Nt scrambling.
the 2♦ bidder has shown 7-9, you have reopened the bidding with the double after partner opened 1♠.
Partner indeed passed 2♠XX to play, but you have to have the guts to stand it.
#5
Posted 2010-February-11, 10:16
2. Well since I was insane enough to X the previous round, 5♣!... Wait! a stroke of sanity, 3♠
3. Well my meta agreement preference is "must save" by partner in similar auctions which makes for an easy pass.
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#6
Posted 2010-February-11, 10:16
2. Reopening was pretty dumb IMO, anyway partner's pass is for penalty right? So I pass. But I would be defending 2♦ undoubled.
3. I don't think partner's pass is for penalty on this one so 2NT.
#7
Posted 2010-February-11, 13:36
Without that agreement I would still pass all of these but don't feel confident about any of them.
#8
Posted 2010-February-11, 13:47
jdonn, on Feb 11 2010, 11:16 AM, said:
After a discussion I had with Noble I agree with this. For me this pass shows no pref, like at the 1-level.
#9
Posted 2010-February-12, 01:10
Fluffy, on Feb 12 2010, 12:29 AM, said:
Partner indeed passed 2♠XX to play, but you have to have the guts to stand it.
Oh sorry, misread it. Now I agree with Josh that the reopening double was on the very light side. I had defend 2 ♦ undoubled too. Now I run to 2♠, my patner will expeca lllllmore defence fro me.
And I would hae no problems to sit for 2 ♠XX the last example. I have full values for my double.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#10
Posted 2010-February-12, 05:10
the normal club allows declarer to score its 4th trick, diamond lead or heart will squeeze declarer and maybe score 2 or 3 tricks, while a spade might be fatal clearing the suit for them and maybe even make.
At the table our opponents run, while me and partner had yet another missunderstanding against weak 1NT at the other table and missed 3NT
On the second one partner just has ♠KJ9xxx ♥Jx ♦AKJ10x ♣- 11 tricks are avaible for the defence, opps playing on a 4-2 fit. Our opponents run, we almost made 5♦X at the other table O_o
The third one is quite complicated, partner has ♠AJ87x ♥Jx ♦A10xx ♣xx
certainly you'd like to be able to play this contract, however declarer has some perfect distribution KQ109x AQ KJ9x Qx, and the play is very messy. From the 43 tables, 30 played a spade contract on EW cards from 1 to 4, often doubled but never redoubled
9 tricks made 3 times
8 tricks made 16 times
7 tricks made 11 times
my partner run, but he run with 3 hearts, it could had went -500 but in practice it went undoubled for -200
Had he passed instead of doubled 2♠ LHO was raising to 4♠ for at least +500
#11
Posted 2010-February-12, 08:07
#12
Posted 2010-February-12, 10:24
So many experts, not enough X cards.
#13
Posted 2010-February-12, 11:11
Fluffy, on Feb 12 2010, 06:10 AM, said:
That would have been a good lead problem to post, I bet you would get votes for each suit.
#14
Posted 2010-February-12, 14:55
Free, on Feb 12 2010, 02:07 PM, said:
its an old polish theory I believe, you redouble and the doubler never has the guts to pass because they haven't talked about the situation, you avoid a lot of 1NT doubled contracts this way when the final decision gets to the guy who is not on lead and its often a passed hand
#15
Posted 2010-February-12, 14:57
Free, on Feb 12 2010, 09:07 AM, said:
Usually it's part of a runout scheme that gives responder twice as many options. He can act directly over the double, or pass forcing the redouble then act next round. This usually lets people show all the 1 and 2 suited hands as well as perhaps some other things.
I do not think Fluffy's explanation is the reason people play that at all
#16
Posted 2010-February-12, 22:44
The convention played in #1 is extremely strange. You purposely take away the ability to play 1NTx in order to limit the number of sequences available to responder?
#17
Posted 2010-February-13, 00:22
MarkDean, on Feb 12 2010, 11:44 PM, said:
The convention played in #1 is extremely strange. You purposely take away the ability to play 1NTx in order to limit the number of sequences available to responder?
Huh? You DOUBLE the number of sequences available to responder.
#18
Posted 2010-February-13, 00:27
jdonn, on Feb 12 2010, 11:22 PM, said:
MarkDean, on Feb 12 2010, 11:44 PM, said:
The convention played in #1 is extremely strange. You purposely take away the ability to play 1NTx in order to limit the number of sequences available to responder?
Huh? You DOUBLE the number of sequences available to responder.
Opener redoubled, not responder.
#19
Posted 2010-February-13, 01:05
rogerclee, on Feb 13 2010, 01:27 AM, said:
jdonn, on Feb 12 2010, 11:22 PM, said:
MarkDean, on Feb 12 2010, 11:44 PM, said:
The convention played in #1 is extremely strange. You purposely take away the ability to play 1NTx in order to limit the number of sequences available to responder?
Huh? You DOUBLE the number of sequences available to responder.
Opener redoubled, not responder.
Yes I am aware. What am I missing because it seems like you are both crazy?
1NT X, responder's turn. If responder's pass gets opener to pass, responder must bid right away to run, you have that many sequences.
1NT X, responder's turn. If responder's pass gets opener to redouble, responder can bid right away to run or pass first then bid after the redouble to run. You get twice as many sequences.
#20
Posted 2010-February-13, 01:31
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.

Help
