[mike777]

Kxx K642 Ax QTxx Vul IMPS


1C P 1S P
1N P 2S p
p 3H p p
??

[gwnn]

Just pass. Double is asking for -530 and 3♠ is asking for -6 imps. Of course leftie is being strange but you don't control their bidding. Pard could have AQxxxx and out in ♠. Plus, apparently spades arent splitting.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the alternative are Pass or 3S.
Against 3S speaks, that you cant be sure,
you have 9 trumps, and the King of Hearts,
so the LOTT says Pass.

With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt

[helene_t]

Pass, you have nothing to protect. One down undoubled will be ok at IMPs.

[FrancesHinden]

At matchpoints you have to double really.
At IMPs you want to double just to tell your opponents they have been absurd in the auction, however it's not the right call.

I would probably bid 3S.

[kenrexford]

I'm not sure if there is sufficient info here.

Q1: What would 1♣-P-2♠ show?
Q2: What would Responder be showing if he doubles 3♥?

[mcphee]

I am not so confident that the re-bid of 2S indicates 6 at all. I see no reason it should if the pair were playing NMF for example and responder held 5-1-5-2 with 6 hcp he certainly is not able to bid 2D, even 5-1-4-3 in the range of 7-8 responder is cooked.

I doubt I would have faced this bidding problem as I prefer to make a direct raise to 2S, although 1NT is perhaps more common. However having failed to raise S you definetly can not bid 3S and dble is reckless. Partner is still there and should they want to compete further can't they dble? Or is the world playing this as penalty, seems to me flexible makes more sense.

[jtfanclub]

mcphee, on Dec 7 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

However having failed to raise S you definetly can not bid 3S and dble is reckless.

That doesn't make sense to me.

If I had raised before, now I can safely pass. Partner doesn't know I have 3 spades, and therefore it would be suicide for him to bid 3♠. So 3♠ is an option only because I haven't raised before.

I normally hate tennis, but here I X. Partner should be short in hearts, and if he decides to bid 3♠ because his hand has no defense (such as ♠AQxxxx and out), that's fine: since I bid 1m...1NT, partner should not expect me to be able to set this in my own hand.

[Apollo81]

3♠

[jdonn]

3♠ for sure. I much prefer raising spades immediately to the 1NT rebid as well, this hand is very suit oriented.

JT sorry but you are on crack if you think partner will pull your double with AQxxxx and out. He will expect you to have four GOOD hearts and a singleton spade with good defense, or not far from that.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Dec 7 2007, 01:11 PM, said:

He will expect you to have four GOOD hearts and a singleton spade with good defense, or not far from that.

Sigh, another case where what I learned isn't 'standard'. I'm used to the balancing X (unlike the direct X) being more flexible. The fact that I'm the only Xer convinces me that what I learned wasn't standard. Again.

I'm still not passing, and I'm still very tempted to X. But I'll go with the more standard 3♠ call. Thanks for setting me straight.

[mikeh]

We already have strong evidence that one of the players at the table is insane: LHO. Why increase the number of asylum inhabitants by doubling?

Double would merely be an expression of annoyance at LHO, not an expression of a feeling that we can set 3♥.

Consider:

1♣ (1♥)  1♠ (2♥)
x  (3♥) P (P) ?

Where the x was a support double.

Would anyone even dream of doubling 3♥ here? Note that this is a better sequence on which to double because partner's pass of 3♥ suggests only 5 spades, which is good news defensively.

LHO is insane, but the odds are good that he is catching an excellent dummy. And why do I see so many posts suggesting partner has AQ of spades? We were not told that we play weak jump shifts, so my partners. on this sequence, are quite capable of holding Qxxxxx x Qxx Jxx. Aren't yours?

Now, yes, he should pull that double, with that hand, but he should sit with many of little better defence, since your auction is consistent with xx AKJ9 Kxx K10xx: that's a double of 3♥!

To me this hand is about selling to 3♥ or bidding 3♠, and I am bidding 3♠, but I think it is extremely close.

BTW, while I usually agree with Frances, I wouldn't double on this hand even at mps. Yes, LHO is an idiot, but I wouldn't be surprised if they make 170! And that we find that, at most tables, LHO overcalled after 1♣. Indeed, even allowing for LHO to be the idiot he appears to be, it is impossible to come up with any hand on which we can expect all the table sequences to have begun 1♣  (P).

I expect RHO has the best hand at the table....

The best construction I have come up with is something like

Axx          x
10987xx   AJx
Kxx         Q10xxx
x             Axxx

[FrancesHinden]

mikeh, on Dec 7 2007, 07:31 PM, said:

BTW, while I usually agree with Frances, I wouldn't double on this hand even at mps. Yes, LHO is an idiot, but I wouldn't be surprised if they make 170! And that we find that, at most tables, LHO overcalled after 1♣. Indeed, even allowing for LHO to be the idiot he appears to be, it is impossible to come up with any hand on which we can expect all the table sequences to have begun 1♣  (P).

Yes, you are probably right.

But I don't think double of 3H shows xx AKJ9 Kxx K10xx, not least because I have already opened that hand a strong NT.

Quote

Sigh, another case where what I learned isn't 'standard'. I'm used to the balancing X (unlike the direct X) being more flexible. The fact that I'm the only Xer convinces me that what I learned wasn't standard. Again.

I'm still not passing, and I'm still very tempted to X. But I'll go with the more standard 3♠ call. Thanks for setting me straight.

There is no standard meaning for double in this auction, because this is a non-standard auction. However, here both opener and responder have had plenty of room to describe their hands, and I would expect double from both sides to be penalties. Double by responder less so, becuase he has already shown a weak hand (signing off in 2S) with, most likely, fewer than 4 hearts. So a double by responder, to me, says "They've been insane and, by the way, I have more high cards than you might expect for this auction along with a suitable heart holding to defend, so feel free to pass unless you have a very suitable hand for play in spades". Double by opener says "I think they have erred. Pass unless you think this is making, by the way I have something juicy like xx QJ109 KJx AKxx

[mikeh]

FrancesHinden, on Dec 7 2007, 01:54 PM, said:

mikeh, on Dec 7 2007, 07:31 PM, said:

BTW, while I usually agree with Frances, I wouldn't double on this hand even at mps. Yes, LHO is an idiot, but I wouldn't be surprised if they make 170! And that we find that, at most tables, LHO overcalled after 1♣. Indeed, even allowing for LHO to be the idiot he appears to be, it is impossible to come up with any hand on which we can expect all the table sequences to have begun 1♣  (P).

Yes, you are probably right.

But I don't think double of 3H shows xx AKJ9 Kxx K10xx, not least because I have already opened that hand a strong NT.

I confess the example I gave was a bit much... I was trying to emphasize how far from a double the posted hand was... and I like your example better. However, giving opener intermediate hearts seems to make the sequence even less believable than it already is. I don't think LHO can have any top trumps, and giving us QJ109 would leave him with 8xxxxx or so... thus, while your example, in a vacuum, is better, I think mine is more plausible on the actual auction.

I would change my example by removing the club 10... I love upgrading 15-17 1N, but I wouldn't do it on 2=4=3=4 with 14 high and no working 10s.

[pclayton]

Would have raised spades immediately. I'd get deported from the U.S. if I rebid 1N on this

A 2♠ rebid for me over 1N shows a 6 bagger, or a 5 bagger where NT is really unsavory.

The 3♥ balance is really, really weird. This numbskull can't over call 1♥? I have a hunch they just walked into their 4-4 fit, the lucky dogs.

I'll bid 3 over 3 now.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Dec 7 2007, 02:44 PM, said:

Would have raised spades immediately. I'd get deported from the U.S. if I rebid 1N on this

You're welcome to move here

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Dec 7 2007, 11:51 AM, said:

pclayton, on Dec 7 2007, 02:44 PM, said:

Would have raised spades immediately. I'd get deported from the U.S. if I rebid 1N on this

You're welcome to move here

LOL, you wouldn't believe where I've been sending resumes this last week.

Maybe Dubai has a bridge team

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Dec 7 2007, 06:31 PM, said:

Double would merely be an expression of annoyance at LHO, not an expression of a feeling that we can set 3♥.

You are, of course, completely right. But I'm going to double anyway.

[ArtK78]

whereagles, on Dec 9 2007, 01:50 PM, said:

mikeh, on Dec 7 2007, 06:31 PM, said:

Double would merely be an expression of annoyance at LHO, not an expression of a feeling that we can set 3♥.

You are, of course, completely right. But I'm going to double anyway.

It is often said that if your opponents don't make a doubled contract occasionally that you are not doubling enough. But don't go out of your way to increase your number of making doubled contracts by the opponents.

Clear pass.

Also a clear raise of 1S originally.