Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Rosenberg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure. Playing for a <1% layout after making a bid that rates to be right about 1% of the time makes sense.
Oct. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course, in practice, forcing pass situation tend to carry even more ‘messages’ (even excluding bids and slam tries):

Fastish pass = ‘I don’t really want to do anything'
Slow pass = ‘I really want to do SOMETHING’
Fast Double = ‘I really want to defend’
Slowish Double = ‘Not sure, but I lean toward defending’

If the Fast Pass is succesfully passed out, you are told ‘There was no hesitation! - you have no complaint.’

If they act over the slow pass, you are told ‘ It’s a Forcing Pass! No UI!'

If they sit for the Fast Double, you are told ‘I respect my partner’s decision here'.

The only ‘protection’ you might get is over the slow double - but will probably be told it's ‘normal tempo’, unless it's really slow.
Oct. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed - I was talking generally. On this hand the forcing pass issue was not relevant - other than causing North to make a silly bid. Both players had an easy double of 5 - regardless of whether pass was forcing.
Oct. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John A: “The big problem with forcing pass is that it;s needed to invert the meaning of some bids in order to have a pass and pull sequence that is slam invitational.”

This is the conventional wisdom, but I disagree that it is “needed”. In a forcing auction where we have shown a fit, one can play the direct bid is the slam try, and pass-pull as not a slam try.
This helps a lot in auctions where the partnership is unclear as to whether it actually IS a forcing auction.

There are theoretical advantages to each method. I've always preferred pass-pull as stronger (though I've played it the other way with some partners).
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken R: That is not what Kieran is saying. He is combatting the argument that EW combined values are not that limited, because West might have a (some other) pretty good hand - but chose to make a simple raise because he knew East is a passed hand.

While I think that argument has some validity, I'd use it more for saying that WEst might have extra defense. If West had a good offensive hand (ne where 4 might be in the picture) I think he'd bid 3.

So, just looking at the EW auction, I don't really feel they are bidding 5 to make.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike M: “ I am not going to worry about opponents' careless bids.”

Nobody is asking you to worry. I'm merely making the argument that the combination of East's original pass and West's gentle raise make it reasonable to treat this as a forcing pass auction.

The following statements are both true:

1) There is nothing about the EW auction that gives me the feeling that 5 is going to make.

2) There is nothing about the N-S auction that gives me the feeling that 4 is not going to make.

So I understand pairs who would want to treat it as forcing.

While it wouldn't fall under any of my own rules for Forcing Passes, I would classify it (as I sometimes do) as ‘not technically Forcing, but I really don’t expect it will be passed out'.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“W is not a passed opponent, W is an opponent who has no good bid over 1. ”

True. But it's also true that West is an opponent who chose a simple raise to 3 when he could have shown a strong raise by bidding 3.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Miroslav: So if Charles (and you) meant trick 4:

You said “low club from dummy at trick (4) then cash all the hearts will not work on 1345 distribution”.

In your play of instead cashing only 3 hearts (both follow) and leading a diamond, what do you do when West plays an honor on your first play?

Btw, if replying, try replying in the same sub-thread - rather than starting a new sub-thread.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Isn't trick 3 a heart return from East?
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I disagree. If FP does not apply, South, with AJx in their suit and xxxx in our suit, should still double. If FP applies, North, with his flat non-offensive hand, should still double.
Oct. 3
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted - missed the description of 3
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you play in 5 that rates to fail by one to two tricks, instead of defending 5 which rates to fail by somewhere between two to five tricks, there's a good chance that BOTH players did something really wrong.

As to the forcing pass, the combination of East's original pass and West's gentle raise to 3 make it unlikely 5 will ever be passed out. Whether it's actually forcing or not should depend on the agreements of the particular partnership.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Marty H: “if I had a big hand with diamonds, I'd have a relatively easy 3H Q-bid.”

It might be “easy”, and partner will know you have a good hand. But partnor will have no idea whether you have 3-card or 6-card - so your bid is not that descriptive.
When you pick up a good hand with diamonds, you are clearly better off having a forcing 3 bid in you arsenal. The best contract could be in clubs, diamonds, NT or even, conceivably, spades. And the right level might be part-score, game, slam or grand slam.

Obviously, a forcing 3 bid won't solvce all problems here, But you are way better off than if you need to bid 3.

I can't say I've gotten decent results with ELC. I've rarely played it and when I did, my memory is that I had one clearly negative result and one maybe positive result. My obsewrvation of others has been similar - some good and some bad.

Just like Support Doubles (in a non-Strong Club context), ELC is theoretically unsound. But I've seen some clear wins for it - especially over 1.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even if that were relevant, it would not be relevant. 5 doubled is down 800 - or 1100 if declarer misguesses at trick one.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe if partner has x, xxxx, AJxxx, Axx and you defend some partial, cold for 6 and with good play for 7, you'll come around to my way of thinking; that the “greatest upside” comes from bidding your longest suit.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hopefully, the tempo of the doubles with these hands will be equivalent to the tempo of the doubles with ‘classic’ TO shape - such as 4-4-1-4 and 4-4-0-5.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ian G: Ok, then that is your judgment. And, whatever you do with that hand, it's one of the downsides of playing WNT.

But your OP asked about the alertability of your double. You might as well have asked if you should alert a double of a 1 opening - since you might have 20 HCP and 4-2-(4-3) shape; or 4-1-4-4; or hundreds of other offbeat shapes.

Whenever we think our hand is too strong to pass, and there is no better bid available, we double. That's reality.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And if it's NOT natural? What meaning of 2 would NOT be alertable.

There should be one meaning for every first round action that is not aletable - and when there is no alert that meaning is what is being shown.
If we're going to have an alert procedure (as opposed to an announcement procedure), we really should have things set up this way by now.
Oct. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ian. Would you double with Kxx, Ax, Jxx, AKQxx? How about AK, AK, xxxx, KJxxx?
Oct. 1
.

Bottom Home Top