rogerclee

As other mentioned this is definitely penalty without discussion. I think this is better than a takeout double for two reasons: 1) It only gains to play this double is takeout when we are exactly 44 in the majors and could not make a takeout double of 1♣. Certainly there are lots of hands that fit this description, but the utility of having a responsive double here is less when we didn't double or overcall over 1♣. 2) When you pick up a penalty double, the gains will be much higher than the gains from being able to make a responsive double. I think responsive would only make sense if the hand type turned out to be much more frequent. I should add that if the balance was 1M instead of 1♦, then it would be very clear to play this double is penalty.

Very nice, cheers man! I'm rooting for you.

lol ok

No, it is a curiosity. There is nothing curious about this hand either.

There is nothing advanced or expert about this hand.

Results: 1) I cuebid 4H, partner bid keycard: AKQx Kxx AKxxx x. Presumably whatever move you make will get you to slam. Didn't think this was really close as to whether to move or not, but wasn't sure which move people would like. 2) I cuebid 4D, but I really think 4H is right in retrospect. At the table my thoughts were that a 5th trump with partner, or a club void with partner, would both be great and might produce slam. However, with maximum hands that have 4 trumps and 1 club that are probably going to move over 4D, we usually won't have good play for slam. Kxxx AQJx Kxxx x is not even a good slam on a non trump lead. On that note, I think even the HT could sway me, because if we ever get to ruff 3 clubs it might give us some extra chances to pull trumps if there's stiff jack of hearts, or partner might have the jack of hearts himself. Anyways, I thought this was a really tough one. 3) On this one I felt like I was worth a move, maybe this is influenced by my thinking that balanced 18s and 19s almost always bid 3H, with the exception of really prime ones like Phil mentioned. I thought a likely hand type for partner was 2452 with 19-21. Another possibility seemed like a strong hand with stiff spade K (depending on your view, but I think it's mainstream not to splinter in stiff K on this auction, maybe not?). I chose to move with 5D. In retrospect after reading hte posts maybe a pass is better. 4) This is the only one where I really felt much differently than most people. I felt like our hand was huge, even if the DQ was not working (which it might be but probably rates not to be) our 4th trump is very big and our club fillers are very big. Bidding 4D seemed like a stand out action to me. Partner's actual hand was Ax AKJxx A AKxxx, and I think this is pretty typical of a hand that partner cannot move over our 4H bid with where slam is excellent. In fact, having shown no values and not shown much of a fit, I cannot imagine partner moving very often at all over our 4H bid. Our hand is so much better than it could be that I really feel like we owe partner a move.

Hmm, interesting Phil, did you change the hand from real life to try and actually give partner his reverse since he didn't have one? Here is a link to the real hand: http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1223755219 Interesting how partner only had the HJ instead of the HQ :D Also, I would say that trying to disprove a bid based on the actual hand when it does a full 530 points better than the bid actually chosen by well known bridge professional and world class player Phil Clayton is pretty foolish, especially when 3S is going to make for -140 anyways, so 3N does not fare much worse than pass anyways (yes, I am aware a diamond lead beats it, but world class player Phil Clayton did not lead a diamond so it seems impossible!). Also, I would say trying to disprove that a bid is correct based on 1 sample hand which you had to try to CHANGE because your intermediate partner did not know that 3D was a reverse, thus nullifying the merit of your sample hand all together is pretty foolish! But that's just me, Roger Lee, and as you have told me before on this forum, I am not good enough to "insult" you.

Disagree, this is a splinter. If you jump to one level higher than the splinter, and it cannot be natural, in general, it is exclusion. If you can't splinter anymore, and you jump to one level higher than the cuebid, and it is clearly not natural, it is exclusion. It is pointless to splinter opposite a weak hand. You are just wrong. You honestly think exclusion is much more useful?

Disagree, this is a splinter. If you jump to one level higher than the splinter, and it cannot be natural, in general, it is exclusion.

Why is this such a small target? You are apparantly giving partner very few spade/heart cards, and you are not giving him credit for ever having the HK or SA, so what values is he going to have? Sure there are combinations where we are off a club card, or we have all the diamond honors except the ace, but I don't think it's at all unlikely he has the necessary cards. We do probably have 25+ HCP, and sometimes they are making 3S anyways. I think it is really pessimistic to pass with this hand opposite a reverse. Your point that partner might be 5-6 and thus light is taken though, but in that case again they are probably making 3S at least anyways.

2N shows 18-19 balanced to me or the equivalent. I really hate passing out 2S with that hand, partner can easily have 7-8 points, and could have some 9 counts. Also totally disagree that 2N would show 4-6, I really feel strongly that you have to balance with this hand.

lol. lol. lol. With all due respect Frances I have no idea why you would think this. I suppose you are implying that partner will double with 2245, 2146, 1246 etc, but I just don't really agree with this. You are really overloading your double by doing this since you are also doubling with normal 1345, 2335(18-19 bal), 1336, perhaps even some 2326 just to make a 3D bid show 5-6. It seems greatly preferable to me to bid 3D naturally, especially when I'm 4-6, rather than have a huge range for my double. For starters it might be hard to sort out the level of heart fit you have, even if they don't bid 3S, because a 3H bid from partner over your double is not forcing. Secondly, it might be hard to figure out when you have a real diamond fit or not, especially if it is a 4-4 fit when you have such an overloaded double. It can be crucial for both game and slam bidding to be able to sort this out. It seems like you are really giving up a lot to make a 3D bid in this auction promise 5-6 and I don't understand why you are doing it, or would think that it is normal.

lol.

I would pass. Both a 4N overcall and double are reasonable options. I would expect south to pass a double and bid 5C over a 4N overcall.

And perhaps in that scenario, the point is to go up with the ♦A, cash the ♣A playing the ♣J from hand and then lead the ♣9 from dummy, trying to persuade South that you had a singleton ♣ and so not rise with his K on the second round. ;) Calling for the 9 of clubs from dummy would be super awkward and unnatural/fishy unless you always call for 9s when dummy has 98. It would be better just to play ace of clubs, club. If you were going to do this, but better still is Matt's suggestion I think (and if that fails, revert to jack of clubs to the ace, club).

Close for me between doubling and bidding 1N, don't like 2N.

I play doubling 1♣ = 16+ as takeout of clubs for the same reason.

Agree totally with jdonn, don't even consider these to be very hard. On hand 2 I am not even close to being cold yet if partner has the SA.

IMPs, All White, Third Seat ♠x ♥K98xxxx ♦AQx ♣Qx 1♣ - (Dbl) - 1♥ - (1♠) 2♣ - (2♠) - ? Support doubles are on.

No, lol.

Uh, thought it was an easy 3N then read the poll options... Gotta be honest I still think it's an easy 3N. We all agree partner has reversed right? He has forced to the 4 level opposite a minimum preference and bid a new suit at the 3 level that we have not implied any length in so 3D must logically be forcing and thus a reverse. I don't understand doubling (they could easily just be cold if they have any shape at all which seems likely given their vul 3S bid), or passing (we have a spade stopper and a pretty decent hand). Doubling would be much more attractive with more defensive values like KQ of hearts instead of the ace.

All of these hands are MP: 1) Jxxx AJx Qx xxxx. 1D from pard, 1S by you, 4C from pard (splinter). BID? (if so what?) 2) Ax Kxxxx Ax xxxx. 1H from you, 4C (splinter) from pard which has a max of 13 HCP. BID? (if so what?) 3) Jxxx Axxx KJxx x. 1D from pard, 1H by you, 4H from pard. BID? (if so what?) 4) xx 9xxx Qxx QJ9x. 2C from pard, 2D by you (waiting, not positive or negative), 2H kokish by pard, 2S forced by you, 3C by pard (H+C). 3H by you, 4C from pard. BID? (if so what). Also, in hand 4 do you think 3H then 4H by you would show extras since you didn't jump to 4H the first time, or could 3H then 4H sequence be a doubleton like xxxx KT xxxx xxx (perhaps with a small club being a small diamond).

lol 1N

Minors, 22(45)ish.

To add to this, I think the second pass is even more ridiculous than the first.