[foobar]

IMPs, white vs. red, partner opens 4H (7-card suit possible and 3N would have shown a better preempt in either major).

What's your call?

---

[el mister]

X - spade and diamond tenace over RHO looks good - we'll wallop 5♣ if we get pard a ruff or two. 5H looks iffy, could easily lack the A♥ and have two club losers.

I'd have passed 4♥ - seems like a bid here is either slam-orientated or obstructing their slam, and neither scenario seems on the cards. What would XX show for most people?

[Zelandakh]

el mister, on 2016-February-10, 03:36, said:

What would XX show for most people?

A typical meaning for Redouble is cooperative penalty, usually with a penalty double in 2 of the unbid suits. I think some also use it to offer partner the chance to bid 5 without being willing to commit.

[billw55]

I double, exit a heart, and expect to take exactly three tricks.

[foobar]

For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix :

---

5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.

[rmnka447]

Double, the hand looks like 4 ♥ is a probable make, but 5 ♣ probably won't. The hand doesn't have the ♣ shortness to pull to 5 ♥. If partner has ♣ shortness and decides to pull the double, chances are that your cards are right to make 5 ♥.

OTOH, if 4 ♥ is allowed to make at the other table, you need to extract as big a penalty as possible to offset the potential swing.

[Cyberyeti]

foobar, on 2016-February-10, 14:38, said:

For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix :

---

5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.

Err - 5♣X won't make on this layout, you won't make more than 9 trumps and a diamond unless E leads a spade, A♥ lead and it won't be made.

[foobar]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-February-10, 15:26, said:

Err - 5♣X won't make on this layout, you won't make more than 9 trumps and a diamond unless E leads a spade, A♥ lead and it won't be made.

Try to set it . A♥ was led at the table and as long as declarer makes the reasonable assumption that the a ruffing finesse against the ♠AQ exists (after initially ruffing a couple of small ♠s and seeing T9 fall), it's impossible to set.

[Cyberyeti]

foobar, on 2016-February-10, 15:46, said:

Try to set it . A♥ was led at the table and as long as declarer makes the reasonable assumption that the a ruffing finesse against the ♠AQ exists (after initially ruffing a couple of small ♠s and seeing T9 fall), it's impossible to set.

Yes OK, you can I think take enough ruffs to exhaust E of spades then set one up after you start with the K, you don't need W to hold AQ, you will catch Qxx with E.

[echo25]

I would redouble 4Hx. However, if I were forced to pass, then I would double their 5C. The probability of voids in 2 suits is small and there is a chance for 500, maybe 800.

[helene_t]

rmnka447, on 2016-February-10, 14:59, said:

If partner has ♣ shortness and decides to pull the double, chances are that your cards are right to make 5 ♥.

I am afraid partner is not allowed to pull this double. The general rule is that a double opposite a preempt is unilateral penalty.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2016-February-11, 05:16, said:

I am afraid partner is not allowed to pull this double. The general rule is that a double opposite a preempt is unilateral penalty.

He's allowed to pull it, but he'd better have a damn good reason, something like an 0850/0940 I'd seriously consider pulling.

[wank]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-February-11, 05:30, said:

He's allowed to pull it, but he'd better have a damn good reason, something like an 0850/0940 I'd seriously consider pulling.

no he's not. if he has a hand to pull a double, he has a hand to bid over 5c.

[creatbid]

In terms of W, S dare double 4♥ when W holds ♠AQ and ♦AQ so S have ♠K,♦K and ♣AK at least. Moreover, S probably has A or KX or void on♥. E has 6cards outside♥ and W holds 4tricks on♠♦. E-W can tolerate 1 loser on♥ and 2 on♣. 4H-X-XX is reasonable. Of course W can pass, but however N will bid 5C.

In terms of E, he will pass 5C without that redouble but may bid 5♥ to indicate 0♣ instead of pass. I can imagine some brave players at the seat of W will gamble 6♥ on 1 more trick on♠♦

Let's come back to the terms of W for 2nd question. W thinks they holds 3suits(except♣) against vulnerable N-S and then doubles 5♣ because only 5♣x-1 scores better for N-S. Although S will get 5♣x-1 by the most reasonable ♥lead, in most situations N-S will get worse result by such unfavorable vulnerability

It's really an interesting hand for everyone to discuss and learn

[rhm]

foobar, on 2016-February-10, 14:38, said:

For those wondering why this made to the Interesting Bridge Hands forum, this is one where the card gods can hand you a royal fix :

---

5♣-X is untouchable on the layout. At the other table, EW got to play in 4♥ after P (!!!!) - 1♠ - P - P - 4♥ (!!!) - AP, making +1 or +2 depending on the opening lead.

Bridge is a game of probabilities.
what are you aiming at?
That there are unlikely layouts?
I encounter this on almost any tournament I enter.
But catering to the unlikely is loosing Bridge.

Here West has a semi-balanced hand. The odds against that everybody else at the table has a void is extreme even given the bidding.
Even though everybody else does have a void, what matters is which one.
For example given the bidding, it would be several times more likely that East has a spade void than a club void. (Why should they have an 11 card fit in clubs?)

Nothing what is really interesting about this deal

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2016-February-12, 03:13, said:

Bridge is a game of probabilities.

Maybe not for you Rainer but I suspect many others will find the smother play and squeeze interesting, if not the bidding decision itself.

[zillahandp]

Already sent this but my txtts vanish. Seems simple pass then x not alternatives

[creatbid]

rhm, on 2016-February-12, 03:13, said:

Bridge is a game of probabilities.
what are you aiming at?
That there are unlikely layouts?
I encounter this on almost any tournament I enter.
But catering to the unlikely is loosing Bridge.

Here West has a semi-balanced hand. The odds against that everybody else at the table has a void is extreme even given the bidding.
Even though everybody else does have a void, what matters is which one.
For example given the bidding, it would be several times more likely that East has a spade void than a club void. (Why should they have an 11 card fit in clubs?)

Nothing what is really interesting about this deal

Rainer Herrmann

I don't think you usually encountered such kind of board, in which 3 players had a void, unless you like goulash matches. Moreover, not all interesting issues of this board are about voids. Do you know by reasonable defence 5♣ will never be made？Do you know why the double you voted against 5♣ scores worse than 5♥？Do you know this board can product a great slam？For example：http://tinyurl.com/hl75nue

Any board can be interesting when the possible result is far from how you expect in advance. I think you should read this board and this topic with a more humble mind even when you think you are much more experienced than foolbar. He didn't aim at anyone by a not nice way while you seemed to indicate his topic shouldn't be here. Maybe you can ask diana_eva to remove it

[bigbenvic]

Style of partners pre-empts really matters here.

With Partner using a loose style, first seat white V red then I pass and pass again.

Facing a more standard and predictable pre-empt (rule of 2 and 3) I re-double to show I thought 4♥ was making (2 Aces and the Qh + partners 7 tricks) and probably bid 5♥ over partners silence.

Would you pass in his seat with a 2740 after partner doubles? I don't know. I think I should be disciplined but there is an argument for a bid - being void in their (assumed) fit, partner's likelihood of a spade trick (barring a ruff from North) and again the chance they might lead a club which gains me back the tempo.

I try to stay passed once I've pre-empted and I'm not sure the reasons to bid are enough to offset that rule. 2 of partners tricks must come from outside hearts so if I push them on it's probably going to be doubled. My main worry is that he'll want a piece of 5♣ and by bidding I deny him, also neither can make at the 5 level and by bidding I turn a good score bad, worse if they find X.