[the hog]

MrAce, on 2014-June-23, 09:10, said:

Well i think those who says double will be so bad can explain you. I voted 2♠ but at these colors it is very close imo. I would not mind double as much as they do.

As Helene says the number of trumps + purity + void vs vulnerability.

---

I just made up this hand. You can make 4♥ (probably +1 ) and the fate of 2♦ doubled depends on very good defense. If you are that good in defense you can set them i guess. Otoh change some spot cards then double may be the winner, The reason for people bidding here instead of double is probably to avoid a random result. At least that was my intention when I voted for 2♠

I think many Easts would open this 1D anyway so as to be able to show both minor suits with less than reversing values. This would certainly be so in all partnerships of which I have been a part, certainly if 3145 in shape.

[gordontd]

the hog, on 2014-June-24, 00:55, said:

I think many Easts would open this 1D anyway so as to be able to show both minor suits with less than reversing values. This would certainly be so in all partnerships of which I have been a part, certainly if 3145 in shape.

Players who open these hands 1D are unlikely to ever see an auction develop this way, so probably have less to fear from doubling.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2014-June-23, 09:10, said:

Well i think those who says double will be so bad can explain you. I voted 2♠ but at these colors it is very close imo. I would not mind double as much as they do.

As Helene says the number of trumps + purity + void vs vulnerability.

---

I just made up this hand. You can make 4♥ (probably +1 ) and the fate of 2♦ doubled depends on very good defense. If you are that good in defense you can set them i guess. Otoh change some spot cards then double may be the winner, The reason for people bidding here instead of double is probably to avoid a random result. At least that was my intention when I voted for 2♠

Your point is well made, 3N is also going to make, quite likely +1, +2 if the defence slips by clearing the diamonds.

I would bid 3♦, I'm still thinking about whether I'd pull 3N to 4♣(probably not in a short club system) or 4♥ or leave it in.

[MrAce]

the hog, on 2014-June-24, 00:55, said:

I think many Easts would open this 1D anyway so as to be able to show both minor suits with less than reversing values. This would certainly be so in all partnerships of which I have been a part, certainly if 3145 in shape.

I don't know why would anyone open this hand 1♦ when they have a perfectly balanced hand and an easy rebid of 1 NT. Perhaps they are masochists and love to play 4-2 fits when 5-2 was available and/or 1NT was available. I would have sympathy if it was 1345 3145 and they don't like to rebid 1 NT with stiff. Maybe that is just me and I am old fashioned to think that 2245 2254 hands are balanced, I dunno....Or is there a new fashion that I am not aware of 1 NT rebid promising stoppers in all suits?

[gordontd]

MrAce, on 2014-June-24, 04:01, said:

I don't know why would anyone open this hand 1♦ when they have a perfectly balanced hand and an easy rebid of 1 NT. Perhaps they are masochists and love to play 4-2 fits when 5-2 was available and/or 1NT was available. I would have sympathy if it was 1345 3145 and they don't like to rebid 1 NT with stiff. Maybe that is just me and I am old fashioned to think that 2245 2254 hands are balanced, I dunno....Or is there a new fashion that I am not aware of 1 NT rebid promising stoppers in all suits?

By most definitions this hand is semi-balanced, but even if you prefer to consider it balanced I think it's quite a stretch to call it "perfectly balanced".

[MrAce]

gordontd, on 2014-June-24, 04:07, said:

By most definitions this hand is semi-balanced, but even if you prefer to consider it balanced I think it's quite a stretch to call it "perfectly balanced".

Yes I know it is semi-balanced. But you haven't seen yet the hands that i treat as balanced Compared to them this one is perfectly balanced

[relknes]

2♠ is the standout, forcing for one round in my mind. I can see the case for NF, I suppose, but it just seems to take up too much space in a contested auction to have to jump to force. I like to make descriptive bids when they are available, reserving a double in situations like this for hands with less clear direction, and 2♠ seems like a good description of the hand.

[bluechip10]

eagles123, on 2014-June-23, 04:19, said:

---

Scoring MP

P is a bbo pickup self rated expert think sayc but might have been 2/1

what do people do here

Thanks

Eagles

I like 3D here. West needs very little from pard to get to a slam. The cuebid will not be passed and conveys the strength of the hand. If pard has a four card spade suit, she will bid it. If pard's strength lies in clubs, then she will rebid the club suit. Then there is the preference to bidding 3HTs. Once a trump suit is confirmed, then I look to slam. If pard bids 3nt, then we know that her points are probably in diamonds. So, duplication of values doesn't excite me. To me, bidding after pard's call of 3NT is the problem for me.

[beowulf]

eagles123, on 2014-June-23, 13:55, said:

As predicted i did double and did end up with a terrible result... why P passed with like 4 good spades and 3 diamonds i will never know lol

You made what amounts to a cooperative double, asking partner to pass with a good holding in ♦ otherwise to bid. At this level, a good holding is probably KQTx or similar. Certainly not three cards. And definitely not while holding four of the unbid major.

OTOH, you should only double (IMO) cooperatively when nothing else is reasonable. Here you had lots of reasonable options: 2♠ (the popular vote), 3♦, some number of hearts, etc. You could even have raised clubs if you were so inclined.

So, both of you acted injudiciously and it sounds like you got a very bad result because of that.

[Oof Arted]

Are we playing 'Bridge'?? If so what the hell is wrong with 3♦ by West showing ♠'s and asking if P has ♦'s stopped for 3 NT

[aguahombre]

Oof Arted, on 2014-June-25, 12:20, said:

Are we playing 'Bridge'?? If so what the hell is wrong with 3♦ by West showing ♠'s and asking if P has ♦'s stopped for 3 NT

On some planets "Bridge" is bidding our suits in a natural and forcing manner. So, I consider 2S to be "Bridge" and other bids to be something invented by Oof Arted or similar.

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2014-June-25, 14:33, said:

On some planets "Bridge" is bidding our suits in a natural and forcing manner. So, I consider 2S to be "Bridge" and other bids to be something invented by Oof Arted or similar.

I'm with oof, I consider 4603 perfect for 3♦ rather than 2♠ which would tend to suggest that clubs are not in the frame. If I was 4513 (and maybe 4522) I'd X, so 2♠ to me suggests 4531/4540/4621/4630 whereas 3♦ suggests either something so big I don't care how you take it or 4603.

[whereagles]

Strongly oppose to the idea that 3♦ shows spades. Even more so if it asks for a stop at the same time. How is partner supposed to guess all that?

[Cyberyeti]

whereagles, on 2014-June-25, 16:29, said:

Strongly oppose to the idea that 3♦ shows spades. Even more so if it asks for a stop at the same time. How is partner supposed to guess all that?

I don't think it asks for a stop, I think it shows a takeout double I don't want you to pass.

[the hog]

whereagles, on 2014-June-25, 16:29, said:

Strongly oppose to the idea that 3♦ shows spades. Even more so if it asks for a stop at the same time. How is partner supposed to guess all that?

I agree Nuno. Perhaps for those who play "Brudge"" on planet Bizarro, 3D might be the bid here. (We have a couple of Bizarro denizens in this thread). It might even show a spade suit for those. In the real world however, people bid the suits they have and don't make up meaningless nonsense which they then claim fits the posted hand.

[MrAce]

Oof Arted, on 2014-June-25, 12:20, said:

Are we playing 'Bridge'?? If so what the hell is wrong with 3♦ by West showing ♠'s and asking if P has ♦'s stopped for 3 NT

LOL

[Trinidad]

I don't know where anybody gets the "feeling" that 3♦ shows 4603 (or something big). Is partner suppose to feel the same? My partner would think: "Why is he torturing me with these silly cues when he can just bid his hand naturally?".

I had (note the past tense) a partner who would cue left and right and I was supposed to be able to figure out that this time the cuebid obviously meant something completely different from last time, since ... well ... this time he held this hand and last time he held the other.

So, there are some simple rules about cuebids:
1) They mean what we specifically agreed them to mean. (e.g. limit raise or better, stop ask, etc.)
2) When we don't have a specific agreement (as in 1), they show a strong hand, that cannot be bid in a natural way.

The reason for rule 2) is simple: Partner will not get confused with natural bids, but vague cuebids that don't have specific meanings are confusing. In addition, cuebids often eat lots of bidding room, like in the auction that we have here. So if we can, we just bid naturally.

In this case, we can simply bid 2♠, and follow up with a bid in clubs. If partner is somewhat awake, he will know that we don't have a 4513 shape. (We would have doubled, instead of bidding 2♠.)

Rik