Double !

1♠ see what P does. and what opps do.

PASS any other bid is just looking for trouble.

This, IMO, is a matter of partnership agreement. If playing equal level conversions, then double seems to be reasonable. If not, or if unsure, then 3 diamonds is safer. Partner is going to need either a good fit or some good cards over there to help take care of some of your losers, so chances are P will be able to find a bid over 3D if there's a game to be made. Double is good when lho decides to up the ante by bidding 4 hearts. Matter of what you choose. Interior sequence in diamonds is also good for potentially setting up the diamond suit. :)

The major liability of playing step/ control-showing responses is the risk of wrong-siding a contract, especially a major. It is also necessary to have special responses built in for responder (advancer?) to show certain types of hands with long suits. :ph34r:

Time Out, please: Let's translate the bidding into actual words. 2 Clubs = "partner, I (in my way of bidding) have either a balanced hand of 22+ HCP (or the equivalent) or a hand that has 9+ tricks in an as-yet unspecified suit (or 2-suiter [3?]). Please bid something so I might show you which type it is and we will make any further partnership decisions based up my rebid. Please note that I would probably have opened this hand with a strong 2-bid 50 years ago. By the way, if you have something of potential value such as controls, hcps, a good suit of your own, feel free to tell me because that will provide additional tricks should I need to clarify my hand one level higher. If you don't have anything to clearly tell me at this point please bid 2 diamonds (or 2 hearts if you play it as a double negative) and I will then clarify my hand." Pass = "partner, I hear you when you say you have a super hand over there, and that you want a chance to clarify and tell me what it is. Right now I don't know what your hand is, how strong it is, or what we can make. And, "quite frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn". I know better than you where the hand should be played, and I am going to make a unilateral decision for the partnership without knowing anything more about your hand other than the fact that it is worth a 2 club bid in our system."

The question here is, what is your agreement regarding hand and suit quality for your 4m opener? You have 8 card suit but 7 losers. You need agreement to differentiate quality of the bid. I would expect partner to use an approximate holding of KQ8th in my hand as the template from which to base further bidding or decisions. Some play more, some less, some play 7-card suits. In first and, especially second seat, be careful about straying too far from your template.

you pays your money and you takes your chances. bottom line IMO: When partner says BID, then BID!

agree!

IMO, it's the dbl of 2 spades that should be negative because opener can't have a hand to make a re-opening dbl safely. If opener can make re-opening double, then double of 2H overcall perhap can be penalty, dbl of 2C stayman, of 2 diamonds = negative if 2D shows D's. and.........how do you all play dbls of 2-suited overcalls? The point? One can't just says neg or pen X's: IMO, it depends on the bid made and its meaning.

A topic that I haven't personally ever seen discussed is whether or not the 1NT bidder is permitted to re-open after a sequence such as 1NT- 2H- p- p- ? given the right shape (eg: 4243). If the answer is YES, then I would suggest that this could be a consideration in determining whether or not to play negative doubles after 1NT -2X-?

"Take the Last Train to Clarksville, and I'll meet you at the station. You can be there by 5:30 'cause I've made your reservation, don't be slow, oh no, no, no. Oh no, no, no"

just checked results: after overcall of strong NT, 7 played double as penalty, 4 played double as being negative. over weak (12-14) NT, 6 said that they played double as being negative, 4 said that they played it as being penalty, and, alas, 0 played double as being stolen bid.

Seems I ran a brief poll about this a while ago. Opinions, if my recollection is close to accurate were relatively split between penalty and negative doubles, with stolen bid double a distant third. I shall try to go back and find the thread. :unsure:

6D is a nice contract disagree with 3 spade bid would opt for 2NT instead. 3S, IMO, sorta denies spade stopper assuming 2S was fsf.

This hand is more than meets the eye at first. I admit that bidding 2NT either just didn't occur to me when I answered, or it seemed to be such a distortion. This seemed like a clear-cut 2 diamond bid to get more info from partner. The more I've thought about it, the more curious this hand became to me. One issue not discussed is how to reach a club slam if partner has something like K 5th of spades and K5th or KQ4th of puppy tracks (clubs). Since BBO Adv. plays wolff, what is 3C/2NT on this auction? I am assuming that 3D/2NT is just checkback. So, how will partner show the above (admittedly constructed) hand if opener rebids 2NT without going past 3NT? Just the same, if 3NT is correct contract, then 2NT does have the effect of likely right-siding the declarership. IMO, both 2D and 2NT have advantages and liabilities. At mp, 2NT is starting to look more interesting. Ho, Hum have a nice weekend everybody

There is another side to this, I think. If you bid anything other than 3 spades, partner will never play you for this hand be it during bidding or defense. Bidding 3 spades is defensible as it only suggests 3-card support, you have a top honor for partner to lead to should partner be on lead, you don't have great shape, (I think the impact of having 4 hearts is compelling), and doesn't say anything about your offensive-defensive potential other than to say you do wish to invite game given partner's 2 spade bid. To put it another way, bidding 3 spades is a "partnership bid". Give the hand more shape such as fewer hearts (making 4,5,6 hearts by opps conceivable) then pressuring with 4S might be better. Your ODR will have changed. Oh, well, just a humble opinion by a tired school psychologist at the end of a very long school year (it's not over yet!)

not wimpy but, what do you want partner to lead at trick 1?

Double normally shows ♣ shortness. normally would agree in this case i would like a little more solidity in spade suit to rebid 3S over 2C. My suggested sequence seems to me to be a reasonable compromise. I am certainly not firmly committed to this bid, and upon reflection, realize that other suggested bids are certain reasonable. But the reasoning behind the bid makes sense to me. (Now, that's scary.) Doubling first might just be the results of years of conditioning to make card-showing doubles. I keep telling people, I am a bidding dinosaur.

yes please post the data if not too much trouble thanks

Oh, great....sigh Now we need a poll to determine what kinds of hands people bid wjs on. Some play it like a mini-weak 2, about 3-7 with 6-bagger, some play it as weaker and less disciplined. Isn't it nice to know that there is such a thing as Standard? lolololololololololol Forgive me if this was intended as a joke and I'm just being a pedantic dud, but I believe one of the stated purposes of the quizes is to reach a consensus about BBO Advanced and such treatments. Suspect this in large part the reason for selection of this particular problem. Senior Rebound amigo c'mon, you know me better that actually I was serious about the fact that different people play the same bid usin different criteria Jocularity was also intended.

Double ! in a heartbeat (actually, in tempo) also lead diamond honor I want to see dummy absolutly agree that spade 9 is a very important card

if we lived by those rules this forum would have only 'bout a third of the posts it has Luke talk about skepticism............

well done Dog: Madonna couldn't have sung it better!

would win first trick with King, then play ace, then queen, the lowest of the 3 honors (to avoid loser on loser). How would you all interpret that sequence of plays? (made under an assumed name, of course).

voted for 2NT probably wrong again, it just seems like a good chance that the combined hands will take the same number of tricks at NT as in diamonds.