Your call

[mikegill]

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=skq9xhxdaqxxxxxca]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

2♥ preempt on your right. You are playing equal level conversion. 3♦, X, 4♦ (leaping michaels) or something else?

[mike777]

3D

 

Will take a risk and bid my 7card suit. This may confuse partner.

[pclayton]

3D

 

Will take a risk and bid my 7card suit. This may confuse partner.

Partner will only be confused after writing +150 on his private and wondering why we aren't in 3N or 5♦ when he holds xxx, AJxx, Kxx, xxx.

[mike777]

3D

 

Will take a risk and bid my 7card suit. This may confuse partner.

Partner will only be confused after writing +150 on his private and wondering why we aren't in 3N or 5♦ when he holds xxx, AJxx, Kxx, xxx.

If partner held that hand I am more worried about being minus 100 then plus 150 I would hope. :P

[pbleighton]

X, then 5D if pd bids 4C.

 

May not be prudent :lol:

 

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

X, looking for the spade fit, since we hopefuly

play lebensohl as well, I will have a chance to

see if game has a chance,

altough it is unclear, at least for me, what:

 

(2H) - X - (Pass) 2NT

(Pass) 3D (???) ...

 

shows, one does break the tranfer.

 

Maybe X is not a good idea after all.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mike777]

Again this presupposes that 4-4 fits will play at least as well as a 7-1. I repeat I think 7-1 fits will very often play better but oh well.

[P_Marlowe]

Again this presupposes that 4-4 fits will play at least as well as a 7-1. I repeat I think 7-1 fits will very often play better but oh well.

Hi,

 

it maybe true, that 7-1 plays better than 4-4, but the 10 trick game

needs 1 trick less than the 11 trick game.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[moysian]

if you play lebensohl, double works really well. If pard bids 2n, you can bid 3d, which shows diamnds and extra values. If P has modest values and 5s, he'll not be afraid to try 3s. Similarly, he may raise D, or if he has the d K and a heart stopper(s), he may find 3N.

 

Of course, LHO can help(?) our cause by raising H (realize that OPPs may hold the balance of points, and be on target to score 4h). Partner will show spades if he long in that suit. If he passes a 4h raise, you can try 5d, expecting some help there.

 

Then, there are those situations where partner holds good values, and you belong in slam. Again, I think your hand is such that the partnership can feel its way to the best slam (even if partner starts off bidding clubs).

[whereagles]

Since I'm playing ELC, this seems like a clear-cut double to me.

 

Oh.. and this particular 7-1 does not rate to play so well as the 4-4. With better diamonds, maybe B)

[mikegill]

In my experience, 7-4 hands are never as good as you think they are, and they belong played in the 7 unless partner has 5-card support for the 4. It also works if partner has a good fit for the 7, or if you have a running 7-card suit and a way to get to it late, or if your side has overwhelming strength. Certainly in a 4-4 spade fit you could be in trouble on any 4-1 breaks, and if you are doubled you can easily lose control and go down a bundle. Granted that if partner has the spade A and/or the diamond K, your hand improves tremendously in value. Partner is odds on to hold one of these two cards certainly.

 

The problem is that if partner has the right cards he won't know it much of the time. You're pretty much ice for 6S opposite AJTxx xxxx x xxx, 6D opposite Ax xxxx KJ xxxxx and you're frozen for 4S opposite JTxxx xxx x xxxx, or 5d opposite xx xxx Kxx xxxxx. The problem is that partner isn't going to get excited on any of these hands, and you're never going to be able to scientifically decide anything. If you double and partner bids 2S, he could have xxx xxxx xxx xxx, and if you raise to 4 you could go for a telephone number, or he could have the hand where you're cold for 6.

 

I think double and 3d are the only real choices. Here are what I see as the main advantages and disadvantages:

 

3D - clearly an unberbid, but is certainly most likely to lead to a positive score. Now this is red IMPs, so just a plus score isn't always good enough, and if this were white IMPs, maybe that would be good enough. 3d will get you to spades when partner has 5 and a goodish hand, and probably give you the best chance at reasonably bidding slam if it's there. This bid will also be better over interference. For example, which auction would you prefer to be in. (2H) - 3D - (4H) - P - (P) - ? or (2H) - X - (4H) - P (P) - ?. The first auction you can just bid 4S or even double and partner will have a good chance to do the right thing. On the second auction, who knows what you should do. Partner could still have 5 spades and a weak hand and now you're just guessing. Even if the interference was 3H instead of 4. Wouldn't you rather have shown your diamonds?

 

X - This hand seems closer to a power double in diamonds than a 3D bid and so this is a better representation of the playing strength of the hand. Over a 2S bid, you have a nasty rebid problem. You could just raise to 4 and hope. I could be convinced this is right, but it is certainly a high variance action. Bidding 3D here doesn't seem to help, partner still can't judge what to do and ditto for raising 2S to 3. With 5 spades and a decent hand he will rebid them over 3D, but he'll certainly not take a call with some hands with 5 spades where you're cold for game. If partner bids 3C, showing some values, then are you really just going to bid 3D equal level conversion? Maybe that's all this hand is worth if partner has a fistful of clubs, but you could certainly be missing game (nor does partner have to have a fistful of clubs). So then 3H? Are you passing 3NT by partner after that? Even if partner jumps to 3S here, or bids 2NT lebensohl then 3S, it's not clear he has 5, depending on your agreements.

 

At matchpoints, I think there is a much stronger argument for doubling. Diamonds has to make a whole lot more tricks to be better than spades. Probably spades must be breaking badly for this to be the case, which is against the odds. At least we'll get to spades at matchpoints, even if we don't get to game when it's right.

 

My jury's still out on this one. My first answer was 3D to this problem, and I'm still leaning that way, but I could definitely be convinced.

 

Mike

[awm]

I like double here. If partner bids clubs I'm prepared to correct to diamonds (ELC). If partner bids 2♠ I will try 3♦; this shows a strong hand (else just overcall 3♦) and must include spade tolerance as well (usually three spades). Playing leaping michaels a strong one-suiter bids 3♥, so double and then bid a new suit always implies some sort of tolerance for any unbid major.

 

I'd expect that this sequence gets me to the right strain virtually all the time. The more difficult situation is when LHO raises and 3♥ or 4♥ comes back to me. In the first case I'll bid 4♦, and partner will normally correct to spades with five of them. In the second case it's a little more awkward; I'll try double again since I want to avoid the five-level if possible.

 

The main point is that I don't think double and then bid diamonds over spades says "I have a big hand with just diamonds" because I bid 3♥ with that. Basically I'm treating this hand as though it were 3♠+6♦ instead of 4♠+7♦, but this just roughly conforms to people's comments about 7-1 versus 4-4 fits.

[kfgauss]

I like double here. If partner bids clubs I'm prepared to correct to diamonds (ELC). If partner bids 2♠ I will try 3♦; this shows a strong hand (else just overcall 3♦) and must include spade tolerance as well (usually three spades). Playing leaping michaels a strong one-suiter bids 3♥, so double and then bid a new suit always implies some sort of tolerance for any unbid major.

 

I'd expect that this sequence gets me to the right strain virtually all the time. The more difficult situation is when LHO raises and 3♥ or 4♥ comes back to me. In the first case I'll bid 4♦, and partner will normally correct to spades with five of them. In the second case it's a little more awkward; I'll try double again since I want to avoid the five-level if possible.

 

The main point is that I don't think double and then bid diamonds over spades says "I have a big hand with just diamonds" because I bid 3♥ with that. Basically I'm treating this hand as though it were 3♠+6♦ instead of 4♠+7♦, but this just roughly conforms to people's comments about 7-1 versus 4-4 fits.

This is reasonable, but my impression has been that 3H tends to show a solid minor, not just a one-suited minor hand.

 

Bidding 3H with e.g. Ax x AQJxxxx AKJ (or similar) leaves you with no clue what to do over partner's 3NT.

 

Of course, you have to take a loss somewhere, and guessing over 3NT with this sort of hand isn't so terrible.

 

I do think that over preempts, correcting to a major suit after doubling shows a flexible hand (else you just jump in the major to some level). For minor suits, I'm less certain what the meaning should be.

 

Andy

[awm]

I think 3♥ is normal on a hand that would bid 4m (strong single-suited) if not playing leaping-michaels. You're at least as well-placed after the 3♥ bid as you would be if you'd bid 4m directly. In any case doubling without even tolerance for spades tends to fix you when partner bids 4♠ over a 3♥ or 4♥ raise, doesn't it? Partner could have a good hand with four-five spades (slam could be on and pass could be disaster) or a weakish hand with 6-7 spades (better pass).