Defending the weak NT

[Echognome]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sqt83ha43dt853cqj]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1NT)* - P - (P) - Dbl**

(P) - P - (2♣) - P***

(P) - ?[/hv]

*12-14

**Penalty

***Forcing

 

How do you proceed from here?

 

What should 2x, 2NT, 3x, and cuebid mean here?

[cherdano]

How much does the penalty double promise?

[Echognome]

How much does the penalty double promise?

I didn't really want to say as part of the issue is how much partner should stretch in the passout seat. I can tell you that the usual here is 15+.

[Codo]

X would be penalty, so I must bid something different, I would start with 2 ♦.

 

If we play neg. X in this situation, the hand would be no problem, I can simply double.

[Echognome]

X would be penalty, so I must bid something different, I would start with 2 ♦.

 

If we play neg. X in this situation, the hand would be no problem, I can simply double.

Partner's forcing pass is equivalent to a "takeout double". So you should either play takeout doubles on both sides or penalty doubles on both sides after you've said it's your hand.

[whereagles]

My hand is very defensive. I'll axe this.

[Codo]

if his pass really shows the other suits, I prefer 2 Spade, majors tends to count more then minors :-)

 

I thought, that his pass basically gives me an option to show my hand, so he may still looks at 2533 with 15+ HCPS or the like....

 

I am in muddy waters anyway. But else you had not asked...

[Chamaco]

Yes, partner's pass in a forcing auction is equivalent to a negative double.

 

My question is: did we limit our hand by passing pard's double ?

 

We have 9 hcp (3 of which are wated, in a suit contract)

 

What about bidding 2S ?

Here's why we need to know how many hcp we promised by passing pard's X:

-IF we have promised values by passing pard's X, then our hand is minimal in context, so 2S is ok.

-IF instead, we might still pass a pen X by pard when we hold a semiyarborough, then 2S is an underbid, and we must choose between 3S and 3C.

 

I do not like any immediate NT bid.

All in all, given the QJ wastage in clubs I'll probably settle for 2S, considering the hand minimal.

[han]

I have always thought that playing that doubles are take-out after they run from 1NTX is a good method, but I haven't had that agreement with many partners.

 

I will assume that our previous pass showed values (at least a 5-count I'd say).

 

Here the pass is really not equivalent to a take-out double Matt. Wouldn't partner pass with (for example) Ax AJxx AJxxx Kx? Partner will pass with almost any semi-balanced hand that can't double for penalty.

 

Without further agreements I'd play that:

 

2X = natural, about 5 to 8- pts.

 

2NT = natural, rare.

 

3C = GF, at least 2 suits.

 

3X = natural,GF, usually a 5+ suit.

 

 

Here I'd bid 2S,this isn't a GF due to the wasted club values. It is a guess whether we find a fit with 2D or 2S, but 2S has the biggest upside when it is right (when partner can raise). Bidding the cheapest 4-card suit also makes sense if that is the agreement.

[Codo]

Everything can work out well, but I doubt that X here (which must be a clear penalty double in this circumstances) is the right bid. Pds bid was

Partner's forcing pass is equivalent to a "takeout double

.

So they tend to have at least a 8 card fit, very possible a 10 card fit.

 

If I must play pen. doubles in this type of bidding, would like to play:

 

2 NT shoud create a GF, unsure about the strain, so this hand, but a little stronger.

3 any is GF with 5+ in that suit

that leaves 2 any for the weak hands.

 

I think, my hand is well inbetween. With QJx in clubs f.e I had made a strong move, hoping to have a stopper in that suit. Allthough with xx in clubs and the Quack in another suit, my hand is worth a Game forcing, but so... no.

 

If pd really promised 15+ HCPs AND we have the agreement, that 2 NT is gameforcing, I would be glad to bid this. But without this tool, I hope, that we won´t miss a game, or that pd is too strong to give up already.

[SoTired]

Partner has made a penalty dbl of 1N when in front of the NT bidder, so with 9hcp, this is a game forcing hand. Partner's pass asks if I can dbl 2C. With only a dblton club, I can't dbl. I think a suit bid here would show a 5-card suit.

 

I bid 3C asking partner to bid a 4-card major. I'll bid 3N over any bid other than 3S.

[Echognome]

A couple of items for thought. If you play forcing pass here, then I believe the pass *IS* equivalent to a takeout double. Would you not takeout double with the example hands given in case partner can pass? Alternatively, if you do not double, then you are never penalizing them with that hand shape. And as such, if you cannot stand a double, you should bid. Same as with a forcing pass. Just as not all takeout doubles are perfect shape, not all forcing passes are ideal shape.

 

Another item for thought is should we not play this as though it went 1NT - (2x) - ? I.e. if you play takeout doubles when opps interfere over our takeout double, then why not keep it consistent? At least you will be on firm footing as to what your bids mean.

 

That being said, it's not so easy. E.g. my regular partner and I treat a couple of auctions differently.

 

E.g. (1NT) - Dbl - (2m) - ?

 

We play pass is forcing, even if partner has passed initially. That is to say, if we have no desire to penalize, then we run immediately as advancer.

 

However: (1NT) - Dbl - (2M) - ?

 

We play pass is NOT forcing. But we treat this as a lebensohl situation.

 

Perhaps it's better to treat both the same, but we find the above works fairly well in practice.