this got high too quickly
#1
Posted 2013-July-30, 19:00
♥9xxx
♦Kx
♣x
our side vulnerable, theirs not IMPs, partner is dealer
1 ♠ - 4 NT - 5 ♠ -6♣
pass-pass - ? ?
#2
Posted 2013-July-30, 19:43
I think we are in fp auction and pd is passing when we have AK spades+Kx ♦
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#3
Posted 2013-July-30, 20:14
#4
Posted 2013-July-31, 01:36
#5
Posted 2013-July-31, 07:34
Partner failed to X missing AKJ109 of ♠ so he probably has a nice fitting hand.
#6
Posted 2013-July-31, 09:11
CamHenry, on 2013-July-31, 01:36, said:
Nah, its minors, with hearts and an unpassed hand partner you wouldn't go over 4♥ so quickly.
#7
Posted 2013-July-31, 09:15
If partner didn't want to double 6♣, then I sure don't want to do it.
#8
Posted 2013-July-31, 12:46
I though my partner had a clear forcing pass, not sure what you think:
♠8xxxxx
♥AQ52
♦-
♣AJ10
#9
Posted 2013-July-31, 16:17
ArtK78, on 2013-July-31, 09:15, said:
If partner didn't want to double 6♣, then I sure don't want to do it.
question: since our 5s cannot be a sac but, given the colors, has to be a bid
that responder thinks has a chance to make----does this not set up a FP
situation and pass by opener a statement about the possibility of slam and
doing so missing AK of trumps.
Are we not bidding 6s (I would look for 7 if there was a decent way to do it)
because p has suggested it despite missing the AK of trumps? IE would
partner not x 6c with any normal minimum even if they could not see a
single trick in their hand????? Qxxxx KQJx QJ Qx or some similar such
dreck??????
#10
Posted 2013-July-31, 17:44
I think pard should just pot a slam (6th spade, three first round controls) and hope to make it on one of those loser on loser thingies, or maybe we make on the opening lead. It's pretty surreal that South is screwing around with better diamonds than clubs, but whatever. Their sac is cheap, so we are getting good pot odds for slam.
#11
Posted 2013-July-31, 17:53
Fluffy, on 2013-July-31, 12:46, said:
I though my partner had a clear forcing pass, not sure what you think:
♠8xxxxx
♥AQ52
♦-
♣AJ10
If that isn't a clear penalty double, what is?
#12
Posted 2013-July-31, 17:56
PhilKing, on 2013-July-31, 17:44, said:
I think pard should just pot a slam and hope to make it on one of those loser on loser thingies, or maybe we make on the opening lead.
Why is
9xxx _____ AQ52
clearly only one loser in hearts?
#13
Posted 2013-July-31, 18:46
#14
Posted 2013-July-31, 21:43
#15
Posted 2013-August-01, 03:46
#16
Posted 2013-August-05, 07:03
#17
Posted 2013-August-05, 12:01
Zelandakh, on 2013-August-05, 07:03, said:
I agree that we could have bid something different than 5♠ perhaps. But we did not and problem was given to us at this stage.
I understand Phil, Arend and Justin. I am not one of the FP fanatics either and my responses in previous FP topics will support my claim on this.
However this particular auction should be FP auction imo. 5♠ bidder is not saving. He believes they have at least a good shot at making 5♠. And they bid slam, opener remains silent.
The level they bid is important to me. A lot of situation where they end up at 5 level i am totally with above names. Not when they bid slam though, after we opened, pd did bid under pressure (or failed to make a stronger bid, idk what was available for Gonzalo except than 5♠) vulnerable vs not . To me this is not a good time to try to defeat them peacefully and sit on their slam silently. Of course we can construct hands which fits in this category but it is small target imo. It is whole an other story when they end up at 5 level though. One may ask what is the big difference between 5 level and slam. If we think what a FP or Double means and what do they encourage or discourage, that 1 level (5 or 6) has huge difference in the mean of chances to defeat, chances to make if we decide to bid, expected bonuses gains and losses etc etc...Combined with this vulnerability. So it was not only vulnerability which made this a FP auction for me.
Basically they are not going to play their slam without being doubled when we open and bid game, red vs white. They are trying to get over this board as cheap as possible % 90 of the time and trying to remain passive is a very bad idea imho, with the excuse that we did not have the chance or failed to create a FP auction.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#18
Posted 2013-August-05, 12:54
Yes, we bid 5S, we were jammed and will often have a good fit and some shape and some major suit values and feel compelled to bid 5S. For opener to be forced to double with a large majority of his hands (almost all) because they don't have slam interest seems like a really flawed agreement when we have no idea if we were making or if they are making. I think you are wrong that 90 % of the time they are down when they bid 6C, it's a pretty major bid to bid 4N even white/red, that hand will have a lot of shape and could easily make opposite a decent fit and not much else.
The most important thing is for partner to be able to double because he actually thinks they are down and wants us to stop bidding and maybe increase the penalty. The most typical occurence is all pass in this type of spot as far as I'm concerned, but if we have no D and great offense in passout we can save with knowledge that partner doesn't think we are beating them and that is a big gain (compared to partner doubling in front of us with almost all hands and us having to defend 6m X making), and if we have great O and no D and partner doubles for penalty in front of us we can safely pass.
I don't agree with the thought that we are on the offense here and they are on the defense, one of their hands has shown extreme shape and no matter what the vulnerability is that is still true. We need to be able to focus on whether we think we can actually beat them or not, not be in a situation where we force ourselves to double them in order for partner to involve us in a making slam decision. It is way more likely to be their hand than our hand because they have shown much more playing strength than we have, and that is a bad time to be in a forcing pass. We want to be in a forcing pass when we know it is our hand.
#19
Posted 2013-August-05, 13:16
I mean you do not have to call it a FP, but don't you think pass should be used for other reasons than its natural meaning when we open and reached to game, red vs white, and they bid slam (not by a jump) ?
Maybe i am too naive but i think losing some imps for a double (which you may be true that % 90 is overrated, but i am sure you know from experience that it is unlikely than likely that they are making it.) should be less concern than making the right decision.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#20
Posted 2013-August-05, 19:00
But that is really not so important, your rules either say you play it or not, most people play that if you make a game bid having a cuebid available like 5♠ here there is no FP which makes sense.
After this hand I've added a new rule to my FP agreements, if we bid game vul vs not and a passed hand pushes we are in FP, surely it won't be perfect, but I will be happy for the most part of it.
Last time I had a FP disaster, Del Monte redoubled his 5♠ and made an overtrick (could be held to 11 if I guessed the lead), alas! had we really both knew we were in FP I would no doubt had bid 6♥, which would go -500 vul vs not for a 1 or 2 IMP loss. Having your agreements clear is more important than what they really are.