[diana_eva]

I think we all messed up on this deal, and don't really know how we could do better. Here's the full deal, help us debug please

---

[eagles123]

I think North could X rather than let it pass out?

[Bbradley62]

You certainly didn't get "fixed"; "fixed" means that the opponents did something dumb or wrong and it happened to work, not that they made a good strategic bid.

[diana_eva]

 Bbradley62, on 2014-May-25, 09:48, said:

You certainly didn't get "fixed"; "fixed" means that the opponents did something dumb or wrong and it happened to work, not that they made a good strategic bid.

Ah, sorry then, didn't know there's a nuance of stupidity to it. I didn't mean it that way, they did really well.

[gszes]

The opps had a system in place that takes advantage of the fact that
light opening bids are becoming ever more so popular. This creates
a lot of doubt about both the offensive and defensive potential of
hands for both partners. One never knows why p has passed or bid
anything---for ex catering to a typical light opener the N hand
does not really want to stretch out too much with no clear direction
and a (probably) wasted spade Q. It seems a shame to be shut out by
such a simple bid and I play 2d x as showing two quick tricks or greater
than 8 but no clear direction. Pass is highly reasonable w/o that type of
bidding available but look at the pressure on poor south. The 3s bid
no matter weak or invitational leaves them poorly placed opposite a
partner that could easily have zero.
I am unsure what the N hand should do by the time 3s has come around
to them-----they have no clue nor reason to suspect their side has the
majority of power. Pass is hardly unreasonable under these circumstances
especially when N has so little defense against 4s (they could easily have zero
tricks).

[inquiry]

There are two possible ways to avoid this particular disaster. The first relates to the opening bid. I usually downgrade balanced 18 HCP that are 4-3-3-3 and open them one notrump. I do this all the time. I have to admit, however, I would not downgrade this one, 8 controls is just too much of a plus to downgrade.

Having opened 1♦, and heard a 2♦ overcall (both majors), North has a nice bid available of "double". This shows a desire to penalize one of their two suits (essentially it is unusual versus unusual). If North showed any signs of life (the double), a few good things might happen (although I doubt you will get to the easy 4♥ contract). The first is East might be afraid to jump to 3♠ in what might be a 4-4 fit with you holding a bunch of spades. That will slow the auction down and give you a better chance to land on your feet. The second South might just blast 3NT, and it will take the miracle lead of the ♠K to beat that (then you would have really been fixed). The third is you might just end up defending 3♠x, and if declarer plays south for the spade queen, he will lose 2♦, 2♠,
a club and a heart and if the defense can manage to get two round of spades played, a second heart for +300 or +500 for a small imp gain or slightly larger imp loss (if only down two).

I have to admit the 2♦ overcall made it hard on you, I think a more typical bid with West hand would have been 1♠ or a slightly off shape double.

[1eyedjack]

Have to admit that I would have opened 1N. Too much time playing with robots.

Don't know what X of 2D by North would mean, but it looks like a good start.

[hrothgar]

I'd blame the bozo at the other table who didn't find the 3♠ bid after the auction started

(1♦) - 1♠ - (P) - ???

[1eyedjack]

 hrothgar, on 2014-May-25, 12:49, said:

I'd blame the bozo at the other table who didn't find the 3♠ bid after the auction started

(1♦) - 1♠ - (P) - ???

You think North should pass the 1S overcall?

[hrothgar]

 1eyedjack, on 2014-May-25, 13:37, said:

You think North should pass the 1S overcall?

Nope, however, there was a misclick at our table

[the hog]

I find Nth's first pass very odd indeed and poor bridge. What happened to the x?

[diana_eva]

 the hog, on 2014-May-25, 18:15, said:

I find Nth's first pass very odd indeed and poor bridge. What happened to the x?

I have a lot of sympathy for her pass. Double would have shown desire to penalize, and she didn't really have any desire to penalize them in spades. We hadn't discussed in detail what x means and whether it can be penalty in one of their suits or it should show defensive values in both majors. I tended to blame myself more on this deal, for not doubling or trying 3NT to show strength. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have reached our heart fit on this bidding and with our agreements, but we could have gotten to 3NT.

[nige1]

 diana_eva, on 2014-May-25, 09:45, said:

I think we all messed up on this deal, and don't really know how we could do better. Here's the full deal, help us debug please

---

IMO

• As South some might open 1N because of the flat shape but South seems to have too many As and Ks.
• It's a matter of style, but my 2/1 partners recommend that a double of Michaels or an unusual 2N just shows values. With interest only in penalties, they start with a pass.
• It's hard for South to make a Wlarus double at the 3-level.
• It's difficult for North to compete at the 3-level, especially with 4 cards in RHO's second suit

[equate]

I think how to handle this situation and judgement is important here.After initial opening of South ,North knows they have the majority of HCP is in their partnership and they are "the attackers".There is no need to rush ,because opps need to show their hands .

After East 3♠ bid and West pass,North needs to take the action for good news.North has a near opening HCP and count 23 or more HCP for their side, plus a very good general T/O DBL opportunity . They will bid accordingly then after even if they have an aggrement or not.

Noth South can not let opps play without pen.DBL after North DBL 3♠.Passes are forcing and/or they bid their game or keep bid on.

Other room's N-S bidding is very instructive .There is no rush, Mr.Garozzo and Mr.Cayne wait opps resume their bidding and Mr.Garozzo takes the initiative , simple and beautiful.

You may want to read this article http://www.clairebri..._en_attaque.pdf .It is in French but many would understand.

[hrothgar]

 equate, on 2014-May-26, 04:31, said:

I think how to handle this situation and judgement is important here.After initial opening of South ,North knows they have the majority of HCP is in their partnership and they are "the attackers".There is no need to rush ,because opps need to show their hands .

After East 3♠ bid and West pass,North needs to take the action for good news.North has a near opening HCP and count 23 or more HCP for their side, plus a very good general T/O DBL opportunity . They will bid accordingly then after even if they have an aggrement or not.

Noth South can not let opps play without pen.DBL after North DBL 3♠.Passes are forcing and/or they bid their game or keep bid on.

Other room's N-S bidding is very instructive .There is no rush, Mr.Garozzo and Mr.Cayne wait opps resume their bidding and Mr.Garozzo takes the initiative , simple and beautiful.

You may want to read this article http://www.clairebri..._en_attaque.pdf .It is in French but many would understand.

I was playing at the other table.

Garozzo said that his initial pass was a mistake...
I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions from the actual auction

[hotShot]

Against aggressive bidders you can't afford to wait to show your hand the next round.

So I think North has to show values over 2♦.
Without knowing more about your bidding system, I can only suggest to discuss what dbl and 2♥ would promise within your agreements.
I prefer dbl to show values here and this would at least allow S to dbl 3♠.

[the hog]

 diana_eva, on 2014-May-25, 18:39, said:

I have a lot of sympathy for her pass. Double would have shown desire to penalize, and she didn't really have any desire to penalize them in spades. We hadn't discussed in detail what x means and whether it can be penalty in one of their suits or it should show defensive values in both majors. I tended to blame myself more on this deal, for not doubling or trying 3NT to show strength. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have reached our heart fit on this bidding and with our agreements, but we could have gotten to 3NT.

No, the x says "I can penalise at least one of their suits. You do not have to be able to penalise both. Would she not want to hit hearts?
You cannot possibly bid 3NT in this auction!

[TwstofLime]

Diana!

I think this is all your fault.

When E bids 3♠, you should definitely double, forcing Helene to bid 4♥. Problem solved.

It's so much fun to de- your bugs in the forums. I learn a lot. Thanks!

♥ Sandy

[helene_t]

I should definitely have doubled. I was a little scared of Diana doubling them in spades with a balanced 13 count with long spades as I thought my hand wasn't quit as strong as a double would suggest. Maybe this is not how the double should work though. In any case, pass must be more risky.
I don't think Diana could do anything.

[nigel_k]

It's more or less standard that double is penalties of one or both suits and North has that. However:

1. North will not be happy if it goes 1♦-(2♦)-X-(2/3♠)-X. North has quite a lot less defence against a spade contract than a double in this situation will usually have.

2. Where would you want to be on this auction looking at both North and South? Probably not 3NT.

3. Playing double this way is not a very good method. The problem is that North had moderate values and doubt about strain. Those are the typical problem hands in this auction and it's just luck that the issue can be avoided here because North also happens to have good defence against hearts. Change North to something like Q Jxxx Qxx KJxxx and passing 2♦ risks a bad result opposite a strong South hand. You need to be able to do something on all these in-between hands without implying a desire to penalize.