Choices

[Al_U_Card]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sxxhqxxxxdxxcqxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP

1NT-2♠-DBL-?[/hv]

 

2 ♠ shows at least 4 spades and as many or more in a minor suit. Should you run to the 3 level?

(The double is not alerted and "no agreement" is the answer to the question.)

[pigpenz]

no partner bid he sowed the seeds on this one if he wants to run he can

[Chamaco]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sxxhqxxxxdxxcqxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP

1NT-2♠-DBL-?[/hv]

 

2 ♠ shows at least 4 spades and as many or more in a minor suit. Should you run to the 3 level?

(The double is not alerted and "no agreement" is the answer to the question.)

if 2S shows a Raptor hand (4S and 5+ in a minor), I'll run.

If instead length can be equal, I pass

[Guest Jlall]

pass.

[mikeh]

pass: if 3♣ is better, too bad: I cannot reach it. If 3♦ is worse, great, I avoided it

[cherdano]

Very nice hand. Textbook example as for why 2M = M + minor is problematic ;)

[bearmum]

I pass

[luke warm]

Very nice hand. Textbook example as for why 2M = M + minor is problematic :D

"problematic" ... very nice word :D

[keylime]

Pass, and then ditch the defense.

[dcvetkov]

Pass

 

Assume partner knows what he is doing when bidding vulnerable.

 

Put the dummy down and go get a beer

[Kalvan14]

Pass. pard can read the vulnerability, and I have full confidence in his bid.

I play DONT on 1N, so this kind of decision is quite common. Run does not pay (but another thing does not pay: interventions where the 2nd suit is much better than the first, unless you have already decided to run)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Pass.

 

Even if in theory 2S could be 4-4, and I

dont think this is a good idea, the minor

should be a 5 card suit, because if I need

to look at the 3 level, I need to be sure,

that I improve the contract,

you are vul., so partner should not bid complete

garbage.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Pass. pard can read the vulnerability, and I have full confidence in his bid.

I play DONT on 1N, so this kind of decision is quite common. Run does not pay (but another thing does not pay: interventions where the 2nd suit is much better than the first, unless you have already decided to run)

The main difference to DONT:

you still play on the 2 level, if

you run.

 

Marlowe

[Flame]

Pass

[Double !]

Pass!

 

Seems like a choice between homocide and suicide. The hand just became random. Where did you come up with this bidding structure?

 

DHL

[Al_U_Card]

One of my reg's favorite "toys" (MOLSON) I usually play DONT or CANT

[han]

Agree with Arend.

[Kalvan14]

Pass. pard can read the vulnerability, and I have full confidence in his bid.

I play DONT on 1N, so this kind of decision is quite common. Run does not pay (but another thing does not pay: interventions where the 2nd suit is much better than the first, unless you have already decided to run)

The main difference to DONT:

you still play on the 2 level, if

you run.

 

Marlowe

It's true. And actually it is one of the reasons for which I like DONT. Still, the advice not to run applies in both cases (and in particular after a vulnerable intervention)

 

There is the human factor too: I am not so convinced that 1N opener will keep this double, in particular if it is true that there is no agreement. You never know what may happen: yesterday night, bidding goes: (1N)-2♦-(P)-P-(X). Believe it or not, doubler had ♦! It was the classic DONT hand: I had 5♣, 4♥-2-2, and partner had 5♦-4♠-3♥-1♣. My RHO could not keep the double (would have done better passing: 2♦X can be made, but it is a struggle): they ended up playing 3♣X down 3.

So, it is better (on average) to pass with confidence, and hope for the best :ph34r:

[Fluffy]

If double is penalty I'd flee...

 

Wait, if 2♠ shows 4♠ then I wouldn't ever play this convention :)