temp3600 Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 You hold xx - AQ9xx - Qx - K98x, Red vs Red at IMPs, and the bidding goes : 1D - (p) - 1H - (1S)2C - (2S) - ? What do you bid ?You are not playing support doubles, but opener could've bid 2H with only three-card support and a shape-suitable minimum. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 1, 2006 Report Share Posted January 1, 2006 X to show values. 3C red at imps is not quite enough as its range is about good constructive to bad invite. I'd like to see what partner's third bid is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 My action doubles don't show this shape; 3=5=2=3 is more typical. Much easier if playing good/bad 2N. This is a 'good' 3♣ call. Still, I'm not convinced about this hand's potential once pard has denied 3 hearts. 3♣ for now and I'll hit 3♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 My action doubles don't show this shape; 3=5=2=3 is more typical. Much easier if playing good/bad 2N. This is a 'good' 3♣ call. Still, I'm not convinced about this hand's potential once pard has denied 3 hearts. 3♣ for now and I'll hit 3♠. ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke warm Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 is 3♠ that bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalvan14 Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 2N good/bad would be a great help. Lacking that 3♣. Double is attractive, but I am afraid that pard would rebid 3♦, and now I'd have to go to 4♣ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 Seems a clear double to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joker_gib Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 Dbl Shows values and is flexible Alain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 3♠. Since pard won't have 3 hearts, I'm aiming for 3NT. Not going to cause pard an headache by doubling when there's a clear-cut alternative here. Incidently, double should be for penalties: opener has 9-10 cards in the minors and no hearts. What do more do you want to know about his hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joker_gib Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 3♠. Since pard won't have 3 hearts, I'm aiming for 3NT. It is said that you don't play support dbls so, yes, partner can still have 3♥. Alain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toothbrush Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 I don't see why 3♣ would be better than a dbl. With a dbl, you leave partner more possibilities to explain his strength in ♠. With very good ♠ he can pass it out, with reasonable ♠ he can bid NT and with nothing in ♠ he can bid something else! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 3♠. Since pard won't have 3 hearts, I'm aiming for 3NT. It is said that you don't play support dbls so, yes, partner can still have 3♥. Alain Well, it is also said pard would have bid 2♥ with adequate 3-card support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blofeld Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 I don't see why 3♣ would be better than a dbl. With a dbl, you leave partner more possibilities to explain his strength in ♠. With very good ♠ he can pass it out, with reasonable ♠ he can bid NT and with nothing in ♠ he can bid something else! 3♣ has the distinct advantage of letting partner know about the fit. That said, I think I'm still going to try double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 Hi allHappy New Year This is a very interesting bidding problem IMO, perhaps because I always screw these situations up.The issue pertains to the meaning of doubling 2 spades: specifically, does it imply a good hand with a good raise to the 3-level in one of partner's suits to differentiate from a direct 3m bid by responder which would be merely competitive? If the answer to this question is "yes" (please don't answer "maybe"), does that mean that opener needs to rebid 3C on any hand that doesn't qualify for some other bid, and might be made on 2-2-5-4? In other words, if the double implies an invitational-plus hand with support for one of opener's two suits, what are opener's rebids at this point? (e.g.: does 2NT show a stopper or is it some form of Gd/Bd?) Stuff like this. Would really appreciate further explanations from ye who chose to double. TIADHL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 3♠. Since pard won't have 3 hearts, I'm aiming for 3NT. Not going to cause pard an headache by doubling when there's a clear-cut alternative here. Incidently, double should be for penalties: opener has 9-10 cards in the minors and no hearts. What do more do you want to know about his hand? I also play double as penalties after opener has made a rebid. For the same reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 2, 2006 Report Share Posted January 2, 2006 I seem to be in the minority here. I don't like to double when my partner is likely to pass and I have an undisclosed fit for him. I voted for the overbid of 3♠, but maybe I could be convinced 3♣ is better. Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
temp3600 Posted January 6, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2006 Thank you for your replies ! Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartA Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 I voted for 3S. Double would be my second choice. Surprised to see majority voted for 3C, which is not forcing and too weak, in my view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Once again a case where a bid has relieved partner from the responsibility of bidding yet he still bid - there must be a reason. I would expect a dead minimum of a 6/4 pattern with AK, A but probably more.With the Q of diamonds now carrying full values, anything less than 4C is a distinct underbid in my views and although this bypasses a speculative 3N, I'm not so concerned with this contract when partner has shown shape with his 2C bid - but with a shapely minimum it might be hard to get to 5C without a strong club move. 3S sounds too much like an attempt to get to 3N and paints me into a corner when partner bids 4C over it. So 4C for me - once again out on a desert island without a cocunut tree. Winston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.