[apollo1201]

So that partners knows it is penalty (LOL).

I held against green opps while red in a friendly IMP duplicate at home the following 2NT opening hand but LHO had dealt, and his 1H opening was quickly raised to game by RHO. At these colors, and against good friends, a 5-cd fit, one « goodie » and a singleton are more than enough to propel partner at the 4th level.

What now with

AQ
QJx
Axxxx
AKx

I can’t just sit there collecting 50s, but:
- X is take-out and partner will not have the weakish balanced hand to leave it in
- 4NT is for minors (even if natural, I wonder where I could find those 10 tricks)
- and 5D...oh well did you see a D suit in my hand, really?

The rest of the sequence will be given after your comments to avoid too much disapproval🤣

[Tramticket]

Double. Partner should leave it in unless he expects to make. This is unlikely since there doesn't seem enough points for him to bid, so he would have to be very shapely to remove the double.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

your option are X or Pass.
If you X and partner bids 4S, pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ahydra]

Reminds me of the bidding boxes at uni. Some had old cards where double was D rather than X, so X is takeout and D is penalty.

I'd double also. Partner is pretty broke so shouldn't remove without a good amount of shape.

ahydra

[pescetom]

I would double too, but it's pretty much a gamble that partner will leave it in.
By agreement I should have tolerance for takeout to spades, so this hand is borderline and we might well pay the price.

[nullve]

apollo1201, on 2018-October-14, 01:00, said:

friendly IMP duplicate at home

Any alcohol involved?

It really looks as if someone, most likely West, has psyched. But if so, what can I do except cut my losess and pass? At least I can beat 4♥, but if I double (= takeout), partner will probably bid something and we'll reach a silly non-makeable contract most of the time, perhaps doubled.

In the event that opps haven't psyched, partner is most likely is void in hearts and might be able to balance if it's right, even on a yarborough.

[The_Badger]

I'd rather collect 50s than put partner on the spot. The last thing I want is the opponents collecting 100/200s. The whole hand could be something like...

---

[nullve]

Or

---

But

(1♥)-P-(4♥)-X
(P)-4♠-ap

is the wrong way to reach 4♠, and

(1♥)-P-(4♥)-P
(P)-4♠-ap

looks pretty insane at these colours, too.

[Cyberyeti]

This is why you're not allowed to bid 3♠ silencing partner then change it to a double

[apollo1201]

nullve, on 2018-October-14, 04:50, said:

Any alcohol involved?
In the event that opps haven't psyched, partner is most likely is void in hearts and might be able to balance, even on a yarborough.

No alcohol yet, but it will explain later on how the balancing happened 😉

By the time I was to bid, someone brought in warm foie gras toasts and glasses of wine. By the time we finished and resumed game, vulnerabilities somehow had rotated and I had passed (!). Everyone around the table had the gut feeling sth fishy was happening but partner now green vs red took advantage and balanced with 4S which I suspected after passing came from a 2-suited, 4NT, 5C and T9xxx - xx Jxxxxx here it was...for 12 tricks, à good laughter and a redeal.

[661_Pete]

FWIW, and OK not everyone would agree: for me any double at 4-level or above is always for penalties... or Lightner if we play that system (but Lightner only works if other suits have been bid).

I have heard of cheating methods involving how one orientates the 'X' card.... Not in my vocabulary, I hasten to add . When bidding in live bridge, I always lay a card on the table with the tab pointing to my right. I expect others at my table to do the same....

[661_Pete]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-October-14, 07:37, said:

This is why you're not allowed to bid 3♠ silencing partner then change it to a double

I've often wondered about Law 27.B.3 but now I see the logic behind it. Certainly another example of cheating!

On the other hand, it would give the West the opportunity to accept your 3♠ in accordance with Law 27.A.1. Especially if he/she has psyched!

[Tramticket]

661_Pete, on 2018-October-15, 01:59, said:

FWIW, and OK not everyone would agree: for me any double at 4-level or above is always for penalties

Hi Pete, what trump holding would you like to hold for your penalty double of a four-level pre-empt? Given that the opening bid is likely to be an eight-card suit, this will only leave five other trumps to be shared between three hands. on rare occasions you might hold all five missing trumps, but even then declarer will hold three more than you. This all goes to prove that you might have to wait a long time before making a successful penalty double of a four-level pre-emopt based on long a strong trumps. The 1M, 4M operates much the same as an opening 4M. Now the opponents have a likely 10-card fit and there is even less chance that you have a trump stack.

So even a penalty double is likely to be a strong hand with lots of high cards rather than a trump stack. This doesn't look too different from most people's idea of a take-out double. The philosophy in responding to a double of a four-level pre-empt should be to tend to pass for penalties unless you have a clear-cut bid and expect to make. This is particularly true if the opponents open 4♠, since any contract your way will require you to make 11 tricks. When the suit is hearts, partner is more likely to bid spades - so there is a slightly lesser likelihood that partner will pass for penalties. For this reason, you would like to have spade tolerance for a double of 4♥ (as others have noted). You don't have a three-card spade suit, but at least it is a good quality doubleton.

[Tramticket]

The_Badger, on 2018-October-14, 05:26, said:

I'd rather collect 50s than put partner on the spot. The last thing I want is the opponents collecting 100/200s. The whole hand could be something like...

---

If partner has zero points AND a 6+ card spade suit and is prepared to bid 4♠, you will probably fail. But if you always imagine the worst, you will never bid and the opponents will keep pre-empting and keep you out of auction where you have game (or slam) values.

[GrahamJson]

If my interpretation of Law 36 is correct then the best action is to redouble 4H. You are then obliged to substitute a legal call, i.e. double, and partner is forced to pass. What can possibly go wrong>

[Tramticket]

GrahamJson, on 2018-October-15, 03:33, said:

If my interpretation of Law 36 is correct then the best action is to redouble 4H. You are then obliged to substitute a legal call, i.e. double, and partner is forced to pass. What can possibly go wrong>

Nice try, but caught by Law 72.C

[dsLawsd]

All quite amusing.
But, roll back to your first pass and change your call to double- you are too strong to pass.
Later if you double I guarantee partner will do the right thing!

[pescetom]

Tramticket, on 2018-October-15, 04:04, said:

Nice try, but caught by Law 72.C

As I read Law 72 you need a moderately courageous Director to assert that you "could have been aware" (even if that also implies that you could not), and even then he can only adjust the score - well worth a try for an unethical player.

[miamijd]

661_Pete, on 2018-October-15, 01:59, said:

FWIW, and OK not everyone would agree: for me any double at 4-level or above is always for penalties... or Lightner if we play that system (but Lightner only works if other suits have been bid).

Pete, I'm sorry, but I would say that less than 1% of expert players would agree with you. When the opponents preempt at the four-level (either with a 4-level opening bid or on an auction like this one) X is card-showing. With an unlikely trump stack, you just pass and take your plus score unless you have a true rock-crusher.

The hand in question is rare, in that you have both all your side's three trump and all or almost all of your side's strength. It's close, in my opinion, as to what to do, but I think X will win more often than pass.

You are certainly strong enough to X with your 20-count, but you have to realize it will practically NEVER be left in. Unless he is 4144 with some secondary honors, partner is going to bid something. That is quite likely to be OK, however. Since the opponents have a likely 10-fit (could be 9 if RHO is shapely), your side should have a big fit, too. Maybe partner has 6-7 spades. Maybe he has KJxxx of spades and Qxxx of clubs. Maybe he has 6+ clubs. Maybe he'll bid diamonds. Maybe the opponents will push to 5H over his bid. Who knows -- but the good things that can happen outweigh the bad.

It's certainly true that your partner could have something like 4045, 5044, or 5035 and bid 4S. Now if the opponents X, you'll have a guess as to whether to pass, bid 4NT (pick a minor), or bid 5D, and if the opponents pass, you're going to be in the wrong spot.

If you pass 4H, you are likely (but not certain, as one of the opponents might have a club void) to set 4H a trick or so, but you might well miss a game or even a slam.

At IMPs, I think it has to be right to X, because passing risks huge losses (a double game swing, +50 vs +400 or +920), whereas X generally won't end up with a telephone number (if the opponents X 4S, you probably should run). At MPs, I think it's a closer call, but I'd still X. Just understand, however, that you AREN'T going to play 4HX.

Cheers,
Mike

[sfi]

pescetom, on 2018-October-15, 14:39, said:

As I read Law 72 you need a moderately courageous Director to assert that you "could have been aware" (even if that also implies that you could not), and even then he can only adjust the score - well worth a try for an unethical player.

Adjusting under law 72C is clear. As a director, I would be also happy to use law 72B to rule that South's actions intentionally infringed the laws. I am then authorised by law 90A to impose additional procedural penalties.