[kenberg]

---

I was discussing bidding on a hand where I knew all four hands and what could be made by whom. I had an opinion but I am not so sure that I was right. I'll give you only one hand.

I do not know the vul or the form of scoring and I imagine it matters.

Let's say non-vul and imps, and I will leave it to you to consider variations on this. What's your call?

So far the bidding is "standard": The double was support, the 3♠ was pre-emptive. The opponents should be assumed to be not wild and crazy guys.

Upon reflection, I think E, not S, was the dealer and started with a pass, if this matters in your choice.

[bluecalm]

I don't like those agreements (playing wide range support double along with wide range openers), there should be a way to show strong hand.
I would prefer bidding 2NT.
Anyway, now I pass, what else ? I am not even close in strength to play at 4 level.

[pooltuna]

 bluecalm, on 2011-February-05, 09:29, said:

I don't like those agreements (playing wide range support double along with wide range openers), there should be a way to show strong hand.
I would prefer bidding 2NT.
Anyway, now I pass, what else ? I am not even close in strength to play at 4 level.

Hamman eggs in one basket?

[Phil]

I agree with the support x, because I have a 2N rebid which is a pretty good description of this initially, but LHO has foiled our plan.

3N is too much of a position and banks on RHO having both spades. Pass is an even bigger position. Is partner really suppose to bid 4♥ on x Qxxxx xxx Axxx? Or bid 4♦ on x Jxxx xxxx AQxx?

[aguahombre]

 Phil, on 2011-February-05, 10:30, said:

I agree with the support x, because I have a 2N rebid which is a pretty good description of this initially, but LHO has foiled our plan.

3N is too much of a position and banks on RHO having both spades. Pass is an even bigger position. Is partner really suppose to bid 4♥ on x Qxxxx xxx Axxx? Or bid 4♦ on x Jxxx xxxx AQxx?

All true, but what WOULD you do? I dunno either. Blucalm's opinion about support doubles with too wide a range is valid as well. But I don't even use them with any range, so will just await a good solution to this problem from those who do.

Does another double describe this hand?

[manudude03]

Agree with double and would double again, do something stupid partner .

[gnasher]

I'd double again, for takeout, even though my shape is some way from what partner will expect. I'll correct 4♣ to 4♦, but really I'm hoping he'll bid 4♥.

I'd probaly make the same call on a 1354 16-count, so this only works because we can rely on the opponents to actually have a spade fit.

[kayin801]

I would X because partner shouldn't pass with his singleton spade and sometimes has 5 hearts, completely agree with what gnasher said.

Edit: if partner bids 4♣, should we correct? Partner should (if the opps are to be believed) have 1 spade, and will bid 4♥ with 5 hearts and 4♦ with 3 diamonds (or will he bid 4♣ on 1435?), so if he bids 4♣ he will be 1426?

I think 3NT is awful.

[mtvesuvius]

I'm tempted by 3N but I think it is too much of a position, I'd double again. If both spades are onside and partner has only 4♥, we still have a reasonable chance of making 4♥

[JLOGIC]

Passing is awful, x Qxxxx xxx xxxx is a great game (if stuff isn't 3-2 then 4S makes). There are just a ton of hands if you give partner a stiff spade where game is awesome that partner wouldn't have considered bidding over 3S with. Partner having a stiff spade also makes him quite likely to have 5 hearts, and if he doesn't then a diamond fit is very likely. At the very least if our game is down it might be a save vs 3S!

[CSGibson]

Double. Extra values, no clear direction, seems to describe this hand well. Correcting clubs to diamonds.

Also, there are no words sufficient to describe my dislike of 3N. Even if Qxx turns out to be a stopper, which is not a good percentage, then we still have to have 8 more running tricks.

[aguahombre]

 kayin801, on 2011-February-05, 12:06, said:

I would X because partner shouldn't pass with his singleton spade and sometimes has 5 hearts, completely agree with what gnasher said.

Edit: if partner bids 4♣, should we correct? Partner should (if the opps are to be believed) have 1 spade, and will bid 4♥ with 5 hearts and 4♦ with 3 diamonds (or will he bid 4♣ on 1435?), so if he bids 4♣ he will be 1426?

I think 3NT is awful.

Any of you folks who would remove 4C to 4D after doubling care to address Kayin's concern? 1-4-2-6 would seem to be the only situation where a smart pard would bid 4C.

[1eyedjack]

I think I have to double again if my initial double just showed a bunch of crap with 3 card support.
But if my initial double showed extras with 3 card support (my preference) then I would pass now.
I am closer to passing regardless at IMP than at MP.

[nigel_k]

Double. But I don't know what to do if partner bids 4♣ since I'm not sure he would, or should, bid 4♦ with 1435.

[AlexJonson]

Why can't I bid 4D with my very good diamonds and good heart support.

[Phil]

 aguahombre, on 2011-February-05, 11:16, said:

All true, but what WOULD you do? I dunno either. Blucalm's opinion about support doubles with too wide a range is valid as well. But I don't even use them with any range, so will just await a good solution to this problem from those who do.

Does another double describe this hand?

Details, details....

Yes, I make a 2nd double.

[kenberg]

 Phil, on 2011-February-05, 17:50, said:

Details, details....

Yes, I make a 2nd double.

OK, for you and other doublers, if partner now bids 4D what is your choice?

[nigel_k]

I would definitely pass 4♦.

[Phil]

I'll bid 5♦. I don't need much - its cold if pard can cover 2 of the 3 ♥/♣ losers. Even then, there's a good chance that I can pitch one loser on a slow winner in the other.

[y66]

Pass now.

I think pard would've bid 4H if he had 5 of them so I'll play him for x Qxxx xxx KJxxx. With more he might have bid 4C or 5D.

Edited.