[pescetom]

MP. Mixed field, 2/1, good opponents.

---

Your call here? Please answer the poll and discuss/explain here as necessary.

Situation undiscussed, but if you want to assume and explain some agreement you are used to playing, that is fine.

[LBengtsson]

5♥, shortage in opps suit, two ♣ entry possible, three trump. partner understand that you have forced to bid. if east hold trump stack and X then opps. trump under declarer. any bid here could be right but 5♥ looks best bid except if you have agreement that X or 4NT or 5♣ or 5♦ have special meaning with partner. pass is cowards bid.

[nige1]

PesceTom 'MP. Mixed field, 2/1, good opponents.Your call here? Please answer the poll and discuss/explain here as necessary.Situation undiscussed, but if you want to assume and explain some agreement you are used to playing, that is fine.'
+++++++++++++++++++
Board rotated to make partner West. I rank
1. Double = Cards. The Hand is both attacking and defensive; but 2+ quick tricks; and 4 tricks are easier than 11.
2. 5♥ = NAT a close decision.

---

[LBengtsson]

nige1, on 2021-May-05, 11:18, said:

PesceTom 'MP. Mixed field, 2/1, good opponents.Your call here? Please answer the poll and discuss/explain here as necessary.Situation undiscussed, but if you want to assume and explain some agreement you are used to playing, that is fine.'
+++++++++++++++++++
Board rotated to make partner West. I rank
1. Double = Cards. The Hand is both attacking and defensive; but 2+ quick tricks; and 4 tricks are easier than 11.
2. 5♥ = NAT a close decision.

---

I also agree here. X looks slight best. shows values. but the bidding starts with 4♠ partner passing. I think there is more pressure on 4♠ bidders partner to work out if 4♠ bid is usual pre-empt or pre-empt with values. I think it makes difference if 4♠ bidders partner has called on first round or has not. his pass limits hand immediatetely. as nige1 say 'it is close'. the state of the match would influence my decision.

[pescetom]

LBengtsson, on 2021-May-05, 15:01, said:

as nige1 say 'it is close'. the state of the match would influence my decision.

Third last board, both pairs are considerably lower than their legitimate expectations.
Dealer who passed is also more conservative than his partner who bid 4♠.

[johnu]

I ran a rough simulation. The problem with simulations is trying to define what different hands people might overcall 4♠, instead of just overcalling 1♠, 3♠, or maybe even doubling first before bidding spades. If your opponent preempts like a Marty Bergen, than my simulations probably don't match reality.

I ran a few different simulations and my impression was:

The chances of getting +800 (or more) for down 3 doubled is around 1/6, roughly the same as 4♠X making. You are roughly equally like to get +200 or +500. Many of the times you get +800 there is a slam your way.

You can make 5♥ about 2/3, and slam about 1/4. Of course, there is nothing preventing opener from taking out the double to a makeable contract, but there were relatively few hands in my sampling where it looked obvious to me.

So, at MP specified by OP, bidding looks like a winner. At IMPs, I would double, even without the simulations.

[mikeh]

This is a hand with significant potential. xx AQ109x Ax Qxxx makes for a decent slam, and of course he could have a much better hand (or worse, of course).

5H is the sort of action that kills slam unless he has a monster. We’re under pressure and would bid 5H with a worse hand but longer hearts

In my partnerships, we play 4N as takeout after a 4M overcall, with 4N being keycard if they overcall 4m.

Here, I’d bid 4N, if playing that gadget. I will pull 5C to 5H, showing a hand too good to bid 5H immediately.

Pulling 5C to 5D would show a diamond slam try, but my suit is too weak.

I just hope his micrometer is adjusted pr3cisely as mine is🥸

[nullve]

My distribution-around-the-table guesstimate:

LHO: 2(43)4
Partner: 2524
RHO: 8(21)2

If correct (but close is often good enough), then there are only 18 total trumps and therefore only 18 total tricks if LoTT holds.

If there are only 18 total tricks, then I want to defend 4♠X.

If there are as much as 19 tricks (although I have no indication that there are), then defending 4♠X is still right if they are divided 10-9 in our favour.

So I'd double (takeout in principle, although partner will apply LoTT and frequently pass) and let partner decide.

[mikeh]

nullve, on 2021-May-06, 06:04, said:

My distribution-around-the-table guesstimate:

LHO: 2(43)4
Partner: 2524
RHO: 8(21)2

If correct (but close is often good enough), then there are only 18 total trumps and therefore only 18 total tricks if LoTT holds.

If there are only 18 total tricks, then I want to defend 4♠X.

If there are as much as 19 tricks (although I have no indication that there are), then defending 4♠X is still right if they are divided 10-9 in our favour.

So I'd double (takeout in principle, although partner will apply LoTT and frequently pass) and let partner decide.

The LOTT becomes increasingly unreliable as the distribution gets wilder. It is often out by 2 on these hands.

[nullve]

mikeh, on 2021-May-06, 07:34, said:

It is often out by 2 on these hands.

Often maybe, but not on average.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2021-May-05, 16:19, said:

I ran a rough simulation. The problem with simulations is trying to define what different hands people might overcall 4♠, instead of just overcalling 1♠, 3♠, or maybe even doubling first before bidding spades. If your opponent preempts like a Marty Bergen, than my simulations probably don't match reality.

I ran a few different simulations and my impression was:

The chances of getting +800 (or more) for down 3 doubled is around 1/6, roughly the same as 4♠X making. You are roughly equally like to get +200 or +500. Many of the times you get +800 there is a slam your way.

You can make 5♥ about 2/3, and slam about 1/4. Of course, there is nothing preventing opener from taking out the double to a makeable contract, but there were relatively few hands in my sampling where it looked obvious to me.

So, at MP specified by OP, bidding looks like a winner. At IMPs, I would double, even without the simulations.

Thanks. I too ran a rough simulation, probably rougher than yours. I got much the same odds about 4♠ making (18%) or going down 3 (19%), but I only got 52% for 5♥ making, a marked difference. Probably my criteria for one or all of pass, 1♥ and 4♠ were less realistic than yours. My 4♠ criteria were rather Bergenish (8+hcp, 7+ spades, at least one singleton/void) but then so was West's actual hand (I tried predealing it and the odds of 4♠ making plummeted to 10% but also 5♥ dropped to 45%),

[pescetom]

nullve, on 2021-May-06, 06:04, said:

My distribution-around-the-table guesstimate:

LHO: 2(43)4
Partner: 2524
RHO: 8(21)2

If correct (but close is often good enough), then there are only 18 total trumps and therefore only 18 total tricks if LoTT holds.

If there are only 18 total tricks, then I want to defend 4♠X.

If there are as much as 19 tricks (although I have no indication that there are), then defending 4♠X is still right if they are divided 10-9 in our favour.

So I'd double (takeout in principle, although partner will apply LoTT and frequently pass) and let partner decide.

I was in North and went through much the same reasoning about total tricks being probably 19 at most hence opponents 1 or 2 down. My level of faith in this 'Law' is somewhere between yours and mike's, I see it out by 1 more often than not but 2 is not frequent although it happens.

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2021-May-05, 23:51, said:

This is a hand with significant potential. xx AQ109x Ax Qxxx makes for a decent slam, and of course he could have a much better hand (or worse, of course).

5H is the sort of action that kills slam unless he has a monster. We’re under pressure and would bid 5H with a worse hand but longer hearts

In my partnerships, we play 4N as takeout after a 4M overcall, with 4N being keycard if they overcall 4m.

Here, I’d bid 4N, if playing that gadget. I will pull 5C to 5H, showing a hand too good to bid 5H immediately.

Pulling 5C to 5D would show a diamond slam try, but my suit is too weak.

I just hope his micrometer is adjusted pr3cisely as mine is🥸

Thanks for the 4N suggestion, which is one thing I was hoping to hear. How should partner interpret double, knowing you have this alternative?

[pescetom]

Here is the full hand and auction.

---

Had South bid 5♦ then a slam would be on, but he didn't feel it was realistic.

Almost every other West bid 3♠ and then it was plain sailing for NS.

4♠Wx-1 was of course a lousy score for NS, with most tables in 5♥S+1, plus a few in a red slam making.
6♥S goes down on a small spade lead and diamond shift, but luckily for the TD nobody found that one

[Winstonm]

I would have made a card showing double - in the actual hand I think a cowboy playing unilateral gunslinger got off a lucky shot instead of going off 1100 against air. Happens.

[Gilithin]

Any love for a 5♦ FNJ here from anyone or is that suit too thin?

One simple method that noone has mentioned yet is 4NT to play in 5X, 5m FNJ, 5♥ slam try.

[nullve]

pescetom, on 2021-May-06, 09:59, said:

luckily for the TD nobody found that one

Why?

[johnu]

pescetom, on 2021-May-06, 09:07, said:

Thanks. I too ran a rough simulation, probably rougher than yours. I got much the same odds about 4♠ making (18%) or going down 3 (19%), but I only got 52% for 5♥ making, a marked difference. Probably my criteria for one or all of pass, 1♥ and 4♠ were less realistic than yours. My 4♠ criteria were rather Bergenish (8+hcp, 7+ spades, at least one singleton/void) but then so was West's actual hand (I tried predealing it and the odds of 4♠ making plummeted to 10% but also 5♥ dropped to 45%),

I use Dealmaster Pro where you can specify honor card combinations by suit. I gave West fairly robust spades. That concentrates HCP in the spade suit, so South has a smaller chance of having useless spade honors.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2021-May-06, 09:30, said:

Thanks for the 4N suggestion, which is one thing I was hoping to hear. How should partner interpret double, knowing you have this alternative?

Double is transferable values. So definitely less interested in hearts than is this hand. I’d double with many hands but roughly speaking about opening values, no good 6 card suit and no primary support for partner. Opener is expected to pass but may bid with extra shape: 5431 is not extra shape, in this context

[pescetom]

nullve, on 2021-May-06, 13:42, said:

Why?

Do you think it could be found legitimately?