[manudude03]

---

Forum indy, MPs. Assuming you agree with the initial double (apparently one didn't), what do you do now?

[kenberg]

Ah, another chance to be 100%. 1 vote out of a total of 1.

As far as I know, that 2S bid after the redouble is very different from a 2S bid without the redouble. I expect length not strength. But Kxxxxx should be enough for 4S. Pard did bid 2S vul. There is, well I hope that there is, a limit to how little he can have, even when he knows I support spades.

Now as to what is going on. Beats me. I suppose there is something fishy with the 1D opening. But I don't actually care all that much. My interpretation of 2S rules out a slam and I am not stopping short of 4 so I bid it.

[robert2734]

4S. I have a four loser hand and I hope partner can cover one. If he can't maybe they can make 5D the other way. Maybe they can't make 5D but they bid it. Actually, I know partner can't cover a loser if E and W have their bid and I'm bidding 4S anywayz. Otherwise it's too easy for them to find 3NT or 6D or wherever they belong.

[apollo1201]

W (obviously) psyched the 1D opening as E seems to have around 10 and partner some kind of (semi) positive hand. I'm not sure how positive it is re. HCPs and S's though: 8-10 and 4, 5-8 and 5, or even less?

What is the preferred treatment of the answer?

As I'm unsure I cue-bid to avoid playing a 4-3 fit with my QJ having to trump D's, and also because it is not impossible that partner stops D if W completely psyched in a non-existing suit like ATxx or QJxx (I've seen it done before) so 3NT could still be our spot.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

x is fine, now i am a bit torn between 3S (my vote) and 4S.
If partner has the Ace or King of spade and 5+ spades, with the jack as well,
he will move, so 3S is enough, and we play MP, but it is close.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

kenberg, on 2016-May-08, 15:10, said:

Ah, another chance to be 100%. 1 vote out of a total of 1.

As far as I know, that 2S bid after the redouble is very different from a 2S bid without the redouble. I expect length not strength. But Kxxxxx should be enough for 4S. Pard did bid 2S vul. There is, well I hope that there is, a limit to how little he can have, even when he knows I support spades.
<snip>

But he was not able to open 2S, I know in 2nd and red vs. green: however you set your weights may make this limitation meaningless.

[Fluffy]

Someone is psyching, but if it is the reodublle guy we are screwed if we pass, so Have to bid the normal game.

[ggwhiz]

I'm in for a 3♦ cue on the way to 4♠ (likely) but at no cost since there are at least 1 1/2 jokers in this deck and I don't think partner is one of them.

[kenberg]

P_Marlowe, on 2016-May-09, 04:14, said:

But he was not able to open 2S, I know in 2nd and red vs. green: however you set your weights may make this limitation meaningless.

And this is an individual so who knows?
Kxxxxx and out is not my idea of 2S when R vs W, and really I am not all that enthusiastic when W vs R. It's not so much that I worry about going for a number, it's that I like partner, when holding values, to be able to bid on with some confidence.

I take my best shot. It would be good if 3S, or some other below game bid, meant go to 4 if you hold Kxxxxx and sign off in 3 if you have xxxxxx but I doubt that any bid means that. I suppose partner might have just Kxxxx and bid that way, a tad aggressive I think, but we will still have a play for it.

This is the sort of thing where I bid 4S and do my mea culpas for partner if he insists. Then I play the next hand.

[nige1]

manudude03, on 2016-May-08, 14:47, said:

Forum indy, MPs. Assuming you agree with the initial double (apparently one didn't), what do you do now?

---

Double seems reasonable over 1♦. Now I rank

• 4♦ = SPL. High card ♠ raise. Consultative if opps bid on.
• 3♦ = UCB. Procrastination that may not achieve much.
• 4♠ = PRE. Non-descriptive but practical.
• 3♣ = NAT. Might miss game.
• 3♠ = INV. Underbid,
• Pass = NAT. Timorous but safe,

[Stephen Tu]

I don't understand the "someone has to be psyching" comments. I thought expert standard was that jump by South after redouble is weak preemptive not strong (Mike Lawrence in his takeout doubles book suggests 5 bagger is enough at 2 level). To expose psych opener or redouble South passes first then bids spades freely later.

However, given this is an individual, there are a ton of players who don't know about these treatments, so South might be rather strong, so I think should bid game since even if South has the weak hand you'll often still have some decent play.

[manudude03]

The winning call was to go low. I bid 3S figuring I would only ever bid over 2S with a rockcrusher.

---

[kenberg]

Thanks for posting it.

A question (I do ot necessarily expect a definitive answer). South has a 4 count. Suppose it was just a 3 count, but his spades were Kxxxxx. Would he raise 3S to 4S? Maybe he would/should, I don't know.

This is not a situation that arises so often that any partnership has such an agreement. We do our best. I suppose that East's XX was meant to be "Don't worry, we should be able to make 1D". That is not the usual meaning,

Congrats to Manu for getting it right. Seriously, I mean that. A lot of bridge comes down to making the best estimate you can. If you get more of these right than wrong you usually have a pretty decent game.

[manudude03]

kenberg, on 2016-May-10, 06:34, said:

Thanks for posting it.

A question (I do ot necessarily expect a definitive answer). South has a 4 count. Suppose it was just a 3 count, but his spades were Kxxxxx. Would he raise 3S to 4S? Maybe he would/should, I don't know.

This is not a situation that arises so often that any partnership has such an agreement. We do our best. I suppose that East's XX was meant to be "Don't worry, we should be able to make 1D". That is not the usual meaning,

Congrats to Manu for getting it right. Seriously, I mean that. A lot of bridge comes down to making the best estimate you can. If you get more of these right than wrong you usually have a pretty decent game.

I don't have any agreements on what anything means after this auction, but I would assume it is best to give up on game if you need 2 useful cards, and to invite if needing 1. That being said, I think Kxxxxx and out should be accepting.

[mikestar13]

4♠ is extremely likely to be a make or a good save even at unfavorable. Slam is too unlikely to worry about, so 4♠ it is.

[rmnka447]

I'm a 4 ♠ bidder also.

If partner wants to preempt on that dross, he deserves to find me with something like ♠ Qxx ♥ AKxx ♦ xx ♣ Kxxx.

[rhm]

Stephen Tu, on 2016-May-09, 15:02, said:

I don't understand the "someone has to be psyching" comments. I thought expert standard was that jump by South after redouble is weak preemptive not strong (Mike Lawrence in his takeout doubles book suggests 5 bagger is enough at 2 level). To expose psych opener or redouble South passes first then bids spades freely later.

However, given this is an individual, there are a ton of players who don't know about these treatments, so South might be rather strong, so I think should bid game since even if South has the weak hand you'll often still have some decent play.

The trouble with this type of descriptions is that they do not account for the vulnerabilities.
How weak do you expect your partner to be red versus white, when opponents have already told a lot about their hands?
Red versus white is not very conducive for preemption.
I would expect the bid would have to be at least ♠KTxxx with a side suit singleton.
Assuming partner can not have a yarborough at these colors how can West have an opening bid and East a maximum passed hand?

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

manudude03, on 2016-May-10, 16:14, said:

I don't have any agreements on what anything means after this auction, but I would assume it is best to give up on game if you need 2 useful cards, and to invite if needing 1. That being said, I think Kxxxxx and out should be accepting.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the actual colors.
It would not occur to me to bid 2♠ with the actual South hand, which is only asking for trouble, a typical bid of a palooka.
The only one, who will likely be deceived by South bid, is partner.
I can understand your arguments if the colors were different.
Of course preempts can work even red versus white, but they should then invariably have a constructive tinge (e.g. good suits in context are mandatory). White versus red you can take liberties.
This is simple Bridge logic.
I do not understand why even seasoned tournament players have so much difficulties applying that at the table.

Rainer Herrmann