multi and counter-multi

[Magyar Ádám]

Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side)
Board 28, NS vuln, East dealer

JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx

East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p

Table result: 5h* -4, +800

The facts:
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,
this is NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert,
treating (and explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,
natural, to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his
suit, intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong


Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,
what is your decision?

Thanks:
Adam Magyar

[Herman De Wael]

Complicated!

Post by Magyar Ádám
Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side)
Board 28, NS vuln, East dealer
JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx
East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p
Table result: 5h* -4, +800
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,
this is NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert,
treating (and explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,
natural, to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his
suit, intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong
Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,
what is your decision?

OK, let's deal with just this one case:

SW have the correct explanations:
2S: counter-Multi
X: shows spades
4H: natural, to play (and an unintended psychic bid)
South passes
4S: natural, and West has not received MI, so this is at his own risk
and a consequence of North's bid of East's suiit.
5H and X: consequences of this.
No correction, obviously, here.

NE have a wrong explanation:
2S: counter-multi, but explained as natural (misexplanation)
X: pass-or-correct, but this misexplanation is a concequence of the
other one
4H: natural, but explained as splinter (another misexplanation)
Now East has to make a call based on misinformation. He chooses to pass,
which IMO is a misbid. His partner has (in his opinion) asked to pass or
correct, so he should now double the conventional 4H to show hearts.
With correct information (negative and heart acceptance) he should of
course double. He knows this cannot be a correct description of the
opponents' hands, all the more reason to clarify the situation for
partner. We should allow him the benefit of the doubt that he would
double (and that partner would leave it in) so if an adjustment is
needed, it will be to 4HX (or 4SX if that is worse).
But the question remains: did East contribute to his bas result by not
doubling 4H which was explained as splinter to him? If we judge this to
be a grave error, then a split score might be the result.

I don't believe that not doubling a conventional bid can ever be a grave
error. After all, the bidding is not over, and doubling should mean
something, else it only serves to give opponents more room. From East's
view, NS have bid 8 spades so partner cannot think he has spades and
there is no reason to double.

I judge that West's call of 4Sp is based on his partner's not doubling,
and (which he would have done with correct information) and therefore
based on the wrong explanation that East has received from North
(natural and splinter). This can never be judged a grave error.

With correct explanation, East will double, West will leave it in, and
South will pass. North might retreat to 4Sp, which will also be doubled.
South who does not understand might well take this back to 5H.
So the adjustment is from 5HX to 5HX, but for the other side.
To make things easy, give them the equal number of tricks (7 to EW)
which is 5 down. (-1400)

Post by Magyar Ádám
Adam Magyar

You're welcome

Herman.

[Matthias Berghaus]

Post by Herman De Wael
Complicated!

Post by Magyar Ádám
Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side)
Board 28, NS vuln, East dealer
JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx
East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p
Table result: 5h* -4, +800
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,
this is NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert,
treating (and explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,
natural, to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his
suit, intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong
Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,
what is your decision?

2S: counter-Multi
X: shows spades
4H: natural, to play (and an unintended psychic bid)
South passes
4S: natural, and West has not received MI, so this is at his own risk
and a consequence of North's bid of East's suiit.
5H and X: consequences of this.
No correction, obviously, here.
2S: counter-multi, but explained as natural (misexplanation)
X: pass-or-correct, but this misexplanation is a concequence of the
other one
4H: natural, but explained as splinter (another misexplanation)
Now East has to make a call based on misinformation. He chooses to pass,
which IMO is a misbid.

Well, no. A bad bid, maybe. See below.

Post by Herman De Wael
His partner has (in his opinion) asked to pass or
correct, so he should now double the conventional 4H to show hearts.
With correct information (negative and heart acceptance) he should of
course double. He knows this cannot be a correct description of the
opponents' hands, all the more reason to clarify the situation for
partner. We should allow him the benefit of the doubt that he would
double (and that partner would leave it in) so if an adjustment is
needed, it will be to 4HX (or 4SX if that is worse).
But the question remains: did East contribute to his bas result by not
doubling 4H which was explained as splinter to him? If we judge this to
be a grave error, then a split score might be the result.
I don't believe that not doubling a conventional bid can ever be a grave
error.

This may be an overbid, but in this case it certainly does not look like
a serious error to me.

Post by Herman De Wael
After all, the bidding is not over, and doubling should mean
something, else it only serves to give opponents more room. From East's
view, NS have bid 8 spades so partner cannot think he has spades and
there is no reason to double.
I judge that West's call of 4Sp is based on his partner's not doubling,
and (which he would have done with correct information) and therefore
based on the wrong explanation that East has received from North
(natural and splinter). This can never be judged a grave error.
With correct explanation, East will double, West will leave it in, and
South will pass.

I agree more or less with what you wrote above, but here I am not so
sure. East is only entitled to the correct explanation, so if he hears
"to play", what is he to do? Opps seems to have a misunderstanding,
since West ought to have at least heart tolerance for his double of 2
Spades. Is he really likely to double? Should be presented to a couple
of East`s peers. If the TD thinks he would have doubled (maybe a
weighted score?), then the rest follows, and 1400 is certainly possible
(I am too lazy to analyze this slaughter...)
Another poll about that 4S by West, but this is likely to return a "what
else" when N/S have a heart fit.

Post by Herman De Wael
North might retreat to 4Sp, which will also be doubled.
South who does not understand might well take this back to 5H.
So the adjustment is from 5HX to 5HX, but for the other side.
To make things easy, give them the equal number of tricks (7 to EW)
which is 5 down. (-1400)

Post by Magyar Ádám
Adam Magyar

You're welcome
Herman.
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Post by Herman De Wael
Complicated!

Post by Magyar Ádám
Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side)
Board 28, NS vuln, East dealer
JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx
East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p
Table result: 5h* -4, +800
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,
this is NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert,
treating (and explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,
natural, to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his
suit, intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong
Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,
what is your decision?

2S: counter-Multi
X: shows spades
4H: natural, to play (and an unintended psychic bid)
South passes
4S: natural, and West has not received MI, so this is at his own risk
and a consequence of North's bid of East's suiit.
5H and X: consequences of this.
No correction, obviously, here.
2S: counter-multi, but explained as natural (misexplanation)
X: pass-or-correct, but this misexplanation is a concequence of the
other one
4H: natural, but explained as splinter (another misexplanation)
Now East has to make a call based on misinformation. He chooses to pass,
which IMO is a misbid. His partner has (in his opinion) asked to pass or
correct, so he should now double the conventional 4H to show hearts.
With correct information (negative and heart acceptance) he should of
course double. He knows this cannot be a correct description of the
opponents' hands, all the more reason to clarify the situation for
partner. We should allow him the benefit of the doubt that he would
double (and that partner would leave it in) so if an adjustment is
needed, it will be to 4HX (or 4SX if that is worse).
But the question remains: did East contribute to his bas result by not
doubling 4H which was explained as splinter to him? If we judge this to
be a grave error, then a split score might be the result.
I don't believe that not doubling a conventional bid can ever be a grave
error. After all, the bidding is not over, and doubling should mean
something, else it only serves to give opponents more room.

And sometimes it only helps opponent remember that it is artificial.
Indeed it will never be called an egregious error. It is always
conceivable not to double. (unless your system specifically specifies
so, like in Rosebkranz)

Post by Herman De Wael
From East's
view, NS have bid 8 spades so partner cannot think he has spades and
there is no reason to double.
I judge that West's call of 4Sp is based on his partner's not doubling,
and (which he would have done with correct information) and therefore
based on the wrong explanation that East has received from North
(natural and splinter). This can never be judged a grave error.
With correct explanation, East will double, West will leave it in, and
South will pass. North might retreat to 4Sp, which will also be doubled.
South who does not understand might well take this back to 5H.

AG : IMO this is beyond "a result that is at all possible". Unless South
is desperately dumb, the result will be 5C*-1 (or could it be -2) after
South takes 4S out to 4NT. 'or redoubles if this fits his style)

NB : there is absolutely no technical merit to counter-multi. It can't
be worse to play 2 of a major as takeout of the *othe* major. Whether
this should be broad- or narrow-ranged is another matter, but surely it
can't be wrong to allow partner to pass, or to make an economical cue-bid.


Best regards


Alain

[ROCAFORT Jean-Pierre]

----- Mail original -----

Envoyé: Mercredi 1 Octobre 2014 16:51:53
Objet: Re: [BLML] multi and counter-multi

Post by Herman De Wael
Complicated!

Post by Magyar Ádám
Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side)
Board 28, NS vuln, East dealer
JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx
East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p
Table result: 5h* -4, +800
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,
this is NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert,
treating (and explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,
natural, to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his
suit, intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong
Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,
what is your decision?

2S: counter-Multi
X: shows spades
4H: natural, to play (and an unintended psychic bid)
South passes
4S: natural, and West has not received MI, so this is at his own risk
and a consequence of North's bid of East's suiit.
5H and X: consequences of this.
No correction, obviously, here.
2S: counter-multi, but explained as natural (misexplanation)
X: pass-or-correct, but this misexplanation is a concequence of the
other one
4H: natural, but explained as splinter (another misexplanation)
Now East has to make a call based on misinformation. He chooses to pass,
which IMO is a misbid. His partner has (in his opinion) asked to pass or
correct, so he should now double the conventional 4H to show hearts.
With correct information (negative and heart acceptance) he should of
course double. He knows this cannot be a correct description of the
opponents' hands, all the more reason to clarify the situation for
partner. We should allow him the benefit of the doubt that he would
double (and that partner would leave it in) so if an adjustment is
needed, it will be to 4HX (or 4SX if that is worse).
But the question remains: did East contribute to his bas result by not
doubling 4H which was explained as splinter to him? If we judge this to
be a grave error, then a split score might be the result.
I don't believe that not doubling a conventional bid can ever be a grave
error. After all, the bidding is not over, and doubling should mean
something, else it only serves to give opponents more room.

And sometimes it only helps opponent remember that it is artificial.
Indeed it will never be called an egregious error. It is always
conceivable not to double. (unless your system specifically specifies
so, like in Rosebkranz)

Post by Herman De Wael
From East's
view, NS have bid 8 spades so partner cannot think he has spades and
there is no reason to double.
I judge that West's call of 4Sp is based on his partner's not doubling,
and (which he would have done with correct information) and therefore
based on the wrong explanation that East has received from North
(natural and splinter). This can never be judged a grave error.
With correct explanation, East will double, West will leave it in, and
South will pass. North might retreat to 4Sp, which will also be doubled.
South who does not understand might well take this back to 5H.

AG : IMO this is beyond "a result that is at all possible". Unless South
is desperately dumb, the result will be 5C*-1 (or could it be -2) after
South takes 4S out to 4NT. 'or redoubles if this fits his style)
NB : there is absolutely no technical merit to counter-multi.

a gratuitous opinion

It can't
be worse to play 2 of a major as takeout of the *othe* major. Whether
this should be broad- or narrow-ranged is another matter, but surely it
can't be wrong to allow partner to pass,

it can be wrong when he has a strong hand and is willing to be allowed another call. otherwise he would need another bid to express this sort of hand. it could lead to a better or a worse scheme of defense but the respective merits are not absolutely obvious.
a practical advantage of this counter-multi is that you can use the same pattern of responses as over weak-2M openings.
jpr

or to make an economical cue-bid.
Best regards
Alain
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

--
_______________________________________________
Jean-Pierre Rocafort
METEO-FRANCE
DSI/D/BP
42 Avenue Gaspard Coriolis
31057 Toulouse CEDEX
Tph: 05 61 07 81 02 (33 5 61 07 81 02)
Fax: [phone] (33 5 61 07 81 09)
e-mail: jean-***@meteo.fr

Serveur WWW METEO-France: http://www.meteo.fr
_______________________________________________

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Post by ROCAFORT Jean-Pierre
it can be wrong when he has a strong hand and is willing to be allowed another call. otherwise he would need another bid to express this sort of hand. it could lead to a better or a worse scheme of defense but the respective merits are not absolutely obvious.
a practical advantage of this counter-multi is that you can use the same pattern of responses as over weak-2M openings.

But this is true of "reverse-counter-multi" too, of course

- plus you stay out of trouble in many cases (typically when you can
play 2H instead of 3)
- plus you disallow artificial doubles from n°3 (like game-try in the
excluded major)
- plus you get to cue-bid 2S instead of 3S when partner has hearts.

In fact, the best defense is probably :
- double as takeout of hearts
- 2H as takeout of spades

In both cases the range can be rather broad because partner can use an
economical mini-cue.
Obviously having your cake and eating mine.


Best regards


Alain

[Sven Pran]

Magyar Ádám
Teams, screens are in use (North and East on one side) Board 28, NS vuln,

East

dealer
JTxx
x
ATx
KJTxx
AKxxx Qxx
xx A9xxxx
K9xx Qx
xx xx
x
KQJT
Jxxx
AQxx
East South West North (explanations below)
2d 2s x 4h
P p 4s p
5h x p p
p
Table result: 5h* -4, +800
2d: Multi, weak 2 in a major, or 20-22 BAL
2s: According to south, counter-multi (take-out double of spades) Indeed,

this is

NS's agreement. However, north forgets this, and does not alert, treating

(and

explaining) it as a natural overcall in spades
x: according to west, shows spades. According to east, pass with spades, bid
3h with hearts
4h: according to north, splinter, agreeing spades. According to south,

natural,

to play.
4s: west thought they have spades, and wanted to save. At the other side of
the screen, they realize that something went wrong, since passing a splinter
and than not letting it play is more than unusual.
5h: He thought they are in trouble, had no idea what 4s was, and bid his

suit,

intended as natural
x: now the other side also sees that something went wrong
Supposing that NS's agreement is that 2s is a take-out double of spades,

what

is your decision?

[Sven Pran]
In my world West's double of 2S is "pass or correct" which implies that he
has spades, some values and possibly some hearts. The explanations given are
OK.
East now has misinformation that South has spades.
West on the other hand has misinformation that North/South have "superfit"
in hearts and as a consequence of this misinformation and the auction that
East/West have spades.

The 5H bid by East makes it clear to everybody that something has gone very
wrong.

I shall definitely at least roll the auction back to 4S in West going one
down for +50, but I am inclined to roll the auction further back to 4H in
North (undoubled, or North might escape disaster, for instance with SOS
Redouble) going three or four down for -300 or -400.

[Vigfús Pálsson]

North/South gave misexplaination. No doubt about that and score has to be adjusted.
Weighted score.

4HxN -1100 50%
4SxS -1400 50%

We can not give some score 100% weight
We can argue about what contract and what weight, but the result will always be very bad for N/S

Greetings from Iceland

Vigfus Palsson

[Sven Pran]

Vigfús Pálsson
North/South gave misexplaination. No doubt about that and score has to be adjusted.
Weighted score.
4HxN -1100 50%
4SxS -1400 50%
We can not give some score 100% weight
We can argue about what contract and what weight, but the result will

always

be very bad for N/S

[Sven Pran]
The Director cannot disregard the probability that N/S will find refuge in
5X from either of your alternatives. In 4HX and 4SX they will certainly know
that something has gone wrong and quite likely run for possible escape.