Double !

For the purposes of this discussion, I am talking about 2♣ as: 3 card limit, GF balanced or GF clubs. So similar to what you say, except for the invitational part. In my limited openings system, I play 2♣ as any invite with less than 4 card support. So I would bid that and following up with 2♠ after p shows me a minimum with 5 spades. oops i knew that (The GF vs. GI part) DHL

I just wanted to thank you for this link. DHL

Shhh. Be vewy, vewy qwiet. Not allowed to refer to strong jump-shifts. It's like they have become taboo or obsolete. I agree with you that an initial 2S response would get the hand "off your chest" asap, and then let you not feel like you are spending the remainder of the bidding trying to catch up. A philosophy that i was told many years ago still makes a lot of sense to me today: to wit: "Try to describe as much of your hand as possible in the fewest number of bids". Then show the specifics if and when necessary. DHL

I am a strong advocate of 1NT forcing dating back to my old K-S days in late 60's. However, I have always felt that 1NT farcing followed by 3M to show a 3-card limit raise is a weak part of the convention.) I, too,like the idea of a multiple-meaning 2C response. We used to do this eons ago whereby 2C was initially treated as and responded to as one would respond to rev drury until responder's rebids indicated one of a few different types of hands. In your (Matt's) post, I believe that you (Matt) are talking about using a 2C response as either a 3-card limit raise, a balanced invitational hand, or natural with clubs. Or, are you using 2C to show any type of invitational hand? DHL

maybe I am missing something here but why would 3♦ be a help-suit game try after partner opened with 1♦? je ne sais pas DHL BTW, does 2S by opener promise 4-card support so that the partnership is, in most cases, committed to spades? Makes life easier.

In my opinion, 3♠ with the given hand is a psych by definition as well as a tactical bid. The problem, as I see it, is the fact that such a tactical bid is and has been so relatively common that alerting the possibility that the bid might not show a spade suit if the hand has good club support but is still forcing probably should be alerted. Pre-emptor is not proscribed from raising and/ or competing in spades, but pre-emptor will become very suspicious when responder runs back to clubs. Does this constitute fielding the psych, would it be showing location of some cards so that pre-emptor might know what to do in a competitive situation, or would it be considered to be so obvious (to all at the table and on the moon) that responder didn't have spades? If the partnership has engaged in such bidding in the past or has discussed the possibility of such action, then a precedent for the partnership has been set, and IMO the 3S bid should be alerted. My question is how to alert the bid without creating a potential UI situation. "Alert. My partner might be lying." Legal eagles will probably tell me where my logic fails here. DHL

Doesn't the answer to this question at least partly depend on whether or not you'll be able to show what you want to show if you select one approach over the other. Given the two potential scenarios that you present, if you believe that you'll be safe at the 5-level, it would seem to make sense to show the Ace of D first and then the club king (assuming P informs you that spades are under control). I admit that I don't know serious 3NT well enough to fully know the ramifications, but P would now have a chance to show some type of club control and you could show the diamond control (unless 4D is now LTTC). If that's the case, I need to learn how to continue the cue-bidding process after Ser. 3NT. Guess I need to read Fred's articles again. Shows the need for one to really fully understand conventions before starting to use them.!!! Best wishes: DHL

Again, to be consistent with my previous post, I would respond 2♦ and then see what responder/ advancer's rebid is. Depending on the 2♣ bidder's rebid, I now have so many further bids available to seek whatever additional information I might need including additional information regarding the 2C bidder's distribution. Have a good one: DHL

FWIW: I don't believe that any bid other that 2D or 2M should be the initial responses to 2C. The reason is that responder has a variety of rebids after 2D (rev. drury, I assume) to show different types of hands with 3-card trump support (or 4-card support if you play M Lawrence's response structure.) I guess it's a matter of which hand should be easier to describe (usually the weaker of the two) and which hand should be doin' the askin' (often the stronger of the two). My suggestion is to save the NT bids at least until the 2C bidder has had a chance to further describe the nature of the 2C response. The final contract might not be a matter of points or choice of games, but which points and where. One can always bid NT next. Why rush? DHL

let's just say this: the doubler's partner took a very conservative, if not pessimistic, view of his hand in response to a dbl of 1H. It is clear to doubler's partner that someone does not have his/her bid. However, I'm not sure what the implications of assuming that is it partner as opposed to one of the opps is. The primary support that it might be P who is light is the fact that the opps are vul: less likely to psyche a 1-bid or a rdbl. Even so, 3m seems likely to be a good contract even if P has little more than shape. DHL

i wouldn't criticize the north hand too harshly for opening 4♥ in this age of pressure bidding. i just might make the same bid. south's double of 4♠ makes no sense opposite a hand that says lots of offense for hearts, little if any defense. DHL

started playing precision back in 1970. play wei and reese versions, plus my own version that is easy to play but has a few quirks. Am very interested in matchpoint precision, have read viking but can't remember much and not knowledgable about or comfortable with relay systems. Am familiar with currified precision but think that it requires a lot of partnership discussion, find KLP to be very interesting: so wei or reese with asking bids is probably easiest for me to play (with 14-16 1NT) I have no idea how to rank my game. some might say that "rank" is a good description Some might say expurt,some might say beginner,some might say"moronic". I am notorious for being able to find the only line to godown 2 in contracts where everyone else are making over-tricks. Dependson amount of sleep. So, call me advanced plus. How frequently or the time that I play online varies so much. am located on east coast USA DHL

3 diamonds. p will play you for a balanced 12-14 with spade stopper if you rebid 2NT, and any other bid would seem to be overly optimistic or a distortion in the face of a potential misfit. You might try 2S and rebid 3S if you know that P will interpret this as being natural and not some type of cue bid in support of hearts. The latter might be needed to expose a psych: do people psych at total points? DHL

Bid 3 diamonds without some toy, i don't know what else to do. It sounds like you are playing limited openers. If so, then wouldn't 3D be invitational anyway as you could pass 2D with less than a GI hand knowing that opener was limited? DHL

I, too, would bid 5D with a trustworthy partner. P pulled out of 3NT for some reason and has shown (likely) at least a reasonable 6-4 hand. Where are partner's high cards when P is missing AK of clubs and diamond king, and what type of hand caused P to pull from 3NT? (I hope that P doesn't play 4D as some form of minorwood/rkc.) I have a diamond king to show partner: I doubt that we were going to be stopping in 5m on this bidding. So, are we down 1 in 6 clubs, or do we make 7? DHL

I might be reading more into this thread than was intended, but the question of how many spades are needed to respond 1S when P overcalls 1H seems to be the counterpart of the following problem. RHO opens 1C and you something like ♠KJxx, ♥AQTxx, ♦Kx, ♣xx. Your bid: do you overcall 1♥? or make some other bid. If you choose 1♥, then how do you find your 4-4 spade fit if 1S shows 5+ spades? DHL

makes sense to me i suspect that declarer might have played the ace of diamonds at trick one and led a heart, trying for a quick pitch if holding the ace of hearts unless it's singleton and declarer has something like KQJxxxxx,A,x,xxx. Then declarer jettisons the ace of hearts under the ace of diamonds, pitches 2 clubs on the KQ of hts, and loses a diamond, a club and a spade. That would be a clever play! But Iprobably would continue with a diamond and let declarer be a hero should he/she hold that one specific hand. I don't know if this makes any sense: I am quite tired. DHL

is the date different in Europe, or are you trying to tell us something? DHL :rolleyes:

I see the choices on this hand as being between putting a red card and putting agreen card onthe table. I am not quite as confident as jdonn seems to be about partner being able to convert the double to penalty, but the bidding makes it sound that way. My concern is that partner might expect a little more from my hand and with less shape if I balance includinga couple of higher honors to help partner get out of his/her hand without potentially giving away a trick (oh, well, i can always convert 3C to 3D as an elcX). My problem with a 3D balance is 1) this hand could very likely be a misfit, and 2) bidding 3D sort of violates the principle of "if I couldn't make this bid before, what makes me think I can bid now at a higher level, especially when the opps haven't demonstrated that they have a fit yet stopped at a low level" (making balancing a more appropriate action to consider.) Personally, contrary to popular and "expert" opinion, i would have preferred to open this hand 2D. My reasons are three-fold: i have ways to show this hand, it describes my hand in close to one bid (always an objective of mine), and it rates to make life easier on my P in competitive situations. My decision to open or not might have been different had the 4-card major been spades, (there is so much difference between holding hearts vs. spades If my 4-card major). The principle that one should not open a weak 2 bid with an outside 4-card M seems to be too rigid, and I suspect that this contributes to opening 2D being a minority viewpoint. I play relatively disciplined weak 2-bids, but i think the hand should be opened. I like to get in the first shot whenever possible, especially when the action forces the opps to start making decisions at the 2-level. But, then again, besides being a bidding dinosaur, i play a few very unconventional treatments and creations, and i have to use the approach that seems to work better for meormy partnerships as opposed to what the "book" says. The above is my reasoning, faulty as it might be in the opinion of many. DHL

Hey, Yo! To Whom This May Apply: HAPPY FATHER'S DAY to all! DHL

One makes a penalty double of 2 Hearts by placing the red card on the table or hitting the double tab on your screen. you made a limited, relatively descriptive bid that included a reasonable holding in hearts when you bid 1NT. A double at this point, by the limited hand (that didn't snapdragon X or bid 1S over 1H) should show "hey, I have better hearts than i showed, methinks the opps be in trouble, let's defend and see". :) Just make sure that your P doesn't overcall on junk....."Nobody knows the overcalls I've seen. Nobody knows but.............." DHL

I don't care if this person is world class or better. This person is a poor partner in my opinion, and this person has insulted his/her partner by opening this hand. Responder/advancer might take action based on values that opener doesn't have and wind up with a poor result. And if there is anything to be made on the combined hands, opener has insulted his/her partner instead of assuming that partner will bid/ play reasonably. This doesn't even take into account the idea that this person's partner will now doubt the veracity of this person's bids/ partnership trust is seriously injured. DHL

yeah, and to make matters worse i usually wear sandals this time of year Jimmy, ain't that kinda dangerous with all them aleegaters and water mockeesuns around? DHL

bid 2♦ the idea of having to double first and then bid a suit to show a certain number of points is obsolete if not dysfunctional (especially when one plays fairly sound overcalls). If this suit had been a major, then perhaps my opinion would have been different. Partner should be able to depend on you having a good hand for a 2-level overcall and, hopefully, will support with support. With so much shape, there is likely to be more bidding or else the hand is a misfit bigtime, or so i suspect. DHL

re: assigning blame 100% to the person who paired you with this sub. DHL