void for partner and Minors

[kgr]

SAYC, 2/1 promises 10+ (also after intervention) and negative DBL's.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=shqjxdkjxxxcqjxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

The bidding:

1♠-(2♥)-?

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=shqjxdkjxxxcqjxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

The bidding:

1♥-(1♠)-?

 

What bids do you consider and how do you rate them?

Will partner expect some support for his M if you DBL or bid NT?

[mikeh]

Bidding notrump over the overcall would be nausea-inducing. A friend of mine, many years ago, played a session of bridge on LSD. He described the difficulty of bidding or playing while the spots on the cards melted and slid off. I would need to be on LSD to contemplate an immediate notrump bid with either hand. I hope that adequately conveys my impression of those calls.

 

Both seem to me to be clear negative doubles (although the second hand is perhaps not so clear: it is close to a pass). You may well want to rebid 2N, especially on the first hand, should partner rebid his major. I would not like it then, but it is not unreasonable: the alternative might be playing in a 5-0 fit: picture partner with a minimum 5=3=3=2 or 5=3=2=3, with no ability to bid 2N.

 

On the second one, I double and pass 2♥, since partner will more often bid 1N with flat balanced hands (some experts advocate that 1N by partner does not even suggest a stopper, just a flat hand and no convenient bid) and he will also, on some hands, be bidding a chunky 3 card minor if his ♥ are weak. I would not worry about how many hcp I hold on such a sequence. Counting hcp is a useful tool for all players, but it is hardly the be-all and end-all of bidding valuation. Neither of these hands are worth their point count.

 

To completely answer your question, a bid of notrump should convey tolerance for partner's major while denying real support. A negative double should (almost) always deny primary support. I added an 'almost' because there are some (genuine) experts who believe that in certain low-frequency auctions, the negative double followed by raise of the major is an effective tool for certain in-between hands. As for the degree of tolerance promised, most partner's will expect some tolerance, altho a stiff would surprise few. A void is a reason to downgrade, but the example hands are, in my opinion, just a touch too good to pass and no other bid makes sense. The problem with passing these hands is that on a good day the hand belongs to your side in one of your suits, and you may never catch up after a pass.

[Guest Jlall]

Would X with both of these despite my rule "beware of making neg Xs with a void in partner's suit." He will expect some tolerance, but as mikeh said a stiff would be no surprise. On average he'd probably expect 1.6 card support. Still, you don't have too many options with these hands.

[Walddk]

On the second one, I double and pass 2♥, since partner will more often bid 1N with flat balanced hands (some experts advocate that 1N by partner does not even suggest a stopper, just a flat hand and no convenient bid).

I agree with double on both. Regarding rebidding 1NT with a stopper in their suit, I think you need to be flexible. If you have a stopper, fine, if you don't, it's still ok if your pattern is notrumpy.

 

♠ 985

♥ Q75

♦ AQ92

♣ AJ10

 

1♦ (1♠) double (pass)

?

 

I see no alternative to 1NT (I don't like 2♥ at all). Should responder expect a spade stopper? I think not. If he is weak, he will pass and it shouldn't be that bad, and if he is game going there is no need to rush to 3NT unless he has a spade stopper himself. He can bid 2♠ to ask if I am serious about notrump.

 

With the hand above I would now bid 3♥, and he can take it from there. With the hand below I will bid NT. "Yes, I have spades stopped".

 

♠ A104

♥ J85

♦ KQ84

♣ K104

 

Roland

[Chamaco]

Is there anyone who would contemplate PASS for the second hand ?

Is it so horrible ?

 

In many textbooks on neg X, they mention that a double that virtually forces the bidding at the 2-level, such as this one, should guarantee 8+ hcp (at the 1-level, requirements are less strict)...

 

but here, it seems to me that QJ in opps suit as well as the void in pd suit, make the hand very borderline (e.g. I am driven to consider it more like a 7- count rather than an 8 count) ?

[Walddk]

Is there anyone who would contemplate PASS for the second hand ?

Is it so horrible ?

 

In many textbooks on neg X, they mention that a double at the 2-level should guarantee 8+ hcp (at the 1-level, requirements are less strict)...

 

but here, it seems to me that QJ in opps suit as well as the void in pd suit, make the hand very borderline (e.g. I am driven to consider it more like a 7- count rather than an 8 count) ?

Pass is definitely not horrible. You make a couple of valid points, and it is indeed a borderline double. However, the fact that I am 5-5 and not 5-4 pursuades me to act.

 

Roland

[joker_gib]

I will dbl on the first (auction can finish here) and pass on the second (auction will not die here and I hope to come back later if possible : 2NT over 2♠)

 

Alain

[Guest Jlall]

Is there anyone who would contemplate PASS for the second hand ?

Is it so horrible ?

 

In many textbooks on neg X, they mention that a double that virtually forces the bidding at the 2-level, such as this one, should guarantee 8+ hcp (at the 1-level, requirements are less strict)...

 

but here, it seems to me that QJ in opps suit as well as the void in pd suit, make the hand very borderline (e.g. I am driven to consider it more like a 7- count rather than an 8 count) ?

Passing goes against my general philosophy in bridge; get in early and then get out. I much prefer bidding at the 1 level to passing then guessing later.

 

Also, while the QJ of spades are bad, being 5-5 is good. You might be only 4-4 to make this double. To me the extra shape more than compensates for the spade holding (which may not even be that bad).

 

All that being said, I would not classify a pass as horrible. X is definitely flawed.

[Chamaco]

Passing goes against my general philosophy in bridge; get in early and then get out. I much prefer bidding at the 1 level to passing then guessing later.

 

Justin,

firstly thanks a lot for your advice.

Your contributions on hand evaluation are great for us improving players.

 

 

Secondly:

do you think it is too conservative to consider (as I did here) that, I am not going to try guessing later ?

 

 

In other words, my initial pass is made with the intention of passing anything even at a later round unless pard makes a move: basically I would bid this hand just as if I had no QJ in spades (a 5 count), UNLESS pard shows a real reverse, in which case I'll move towards game.

 

I am discovering I am becoming more conservative than i was a while ago at least in likely no-fit auctions.

 

Also, while the QJ of spades are bad, being 5-5 is good.

 

Again, I have another hand evaluation doubt here:

it is true that 55 is great, but this shape seems to warn heavily that pard's rebid will be the dreaded 2 HEARTS, or, worse, 3 hearts...

 

I have a hard time having a plan if pard rebids his suit... unless I pass in a 5-0 or 6-0 fit....

[Guest Jlall]

Secondly:

do you think it is too conservative to consider (as I did here) that, I am not going to try guessing later ?

 

 

 

I am discovering I am becoming more conservative than i was a while ago at least in likely no-fit auctions.

 

Also, while the QJ of spades are bad, being 5-5 is good.

 

Again, I have another hand evaluation doubt here:

it is true that 55 is great, but this shape seems to warn heavily that pard's rebid will be the dreaded 2 HEARTS, or, worse, 3 hearts...

 

I have a hard time having a plan if pard rebids his suit... unless I pass in a 5-0 or 6-0 fit....

This is usually the best strategy if you pass immediately (continuing to pass). For me this would be too conservative though, sure partner may bid 2H over our X but he may also bid a minor (it does happen SOMETIMES!). Sometimes he will bid NT and we'll find a good partial etc. I do think that these small partscore hands are worth fighting for, especially when the risk is relatively low.

 

I had a hand last night. Kxx J KJxx QT9xx. 1S on my left, 2H by partner, 3S on my right. I briefly considered passing, partner will usually bid 4H and my SK is worthless and my hand is junky, and I just have a stiff heart. I rejected that though on the basis that maybe 4H will make, or maybe he'll bid a minor. Maybe we will miss a game if I don't bid. Partner did in fact jump to 5D and make, and would have sold to 3S. This was just a 1 hand sample of course, but it felt very gratifying.

 

To me these hands are similar. The moral is it pays to be optimistic in bridge, especially when it comes to competing and trying to find games.

[luis]

DBL in the first one I think it's quite clear.

 

Pass in the 2nd one, I like to bid but broken suits and a void in pd's suit coupled with QJx in the opponents suit are really not my idea of a negative double.

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers.

I bassically wondered if a negative DBL promises some support for partner's suit. My partner had a similar hand patern last Monday at te club evening (I don't even remember if it was the 1st or the 2nd one).

I conclude from the responses that negative does not necessarily promise support but that you need extras without.

 

Bidding notrump over the overcall would be nausea-inducing. A friend of mine, many years ago, played a session of bridge on LSD. He described the difficulty of bidding or playing while the spots on the cards melted and slid off. I would need to be on LSD to contemplate an immediate notrump bid with either hand. I hope that adequately conveys my impression of those calls.

:P

On average he'd probably expect 1.6 card support.

Interesting. I'll tell this to my partner. He will be impressed. :)

 

BTW: my partner did pass and I did rebid 2♠ with something like :

AKJTxx ATxx AJ x

2S was the end contract.

[mike777]

Thanks all for the answers.

 

:P

On average he'd probably expect 1.6 card support.

Interesting. I'll tell this to my partner. He will be impressed. :)

On average most people are dead or dying. :)

I may have killed off a few in the last few days of my terrible play :).

[luis]

Actually a negative double denies support, that's one of the reasons they are called "negative" doubles because you deny:

- a biddable suit

- support for pd

- a penalty double in the opps suit

 

Luis