(2H)-DBL-(RDBL)-?

[kgr]

(2H)-DBL-(RDBL)-??

What are:

Pass

2S

3S

4S

What do you bid with 4+S and different point ranges?

 

(1H)-DBL-(2H)-??

Same questions

[Finch]

Pass = a desire to play in 2Hxx

2S = a weak hand with 4+ spades

3S = a less weak hand with 5+ spades

4S = a desire to play in 4S

[HeartA]

pass = no suit to bid: 4-3-3-3 (not 4-card spade), or 2=3=4=4, or 5-3-3-2 (5-card H) or ...

agree with Frances on 2S-4S.

[hatchett]

The sequence (2♥) X (XX) Pass is a matter for agreement. I think pass for penalties and and pass no clear bid are both commonly played. Both treatments have advantages and disadvantages.

I assume a game force with 4♠ can still bid 3♥ here so 3♠ and 4♠ should show 5+♠ normally.

 

 

The sequence (1♥) X (2♥) is more complex. Traditionally a responsive X shows a hand that wants to compete without 4♠; 2♠ shows a hand that wants to compete with 4♠, 3♠ could be just a 4 card suit, invitational values, and a game force with 4♠ can bid 3♥, leaving 4♠ as again showing typically 5+♠ .

 

There is plenty of scope in the second sequence for more advanced treatments. A fairly simple scheme for instance could be

 

after (1♥) X (2♥)

 

X shows 4♠ over which partner can bid 2♠ with a minimum with 4♠, 3m with a 5 card suit and 2NT without a 5 card suit

 

2♠ shows 5♠ and a desire to compete

 

2NT shows both minors (broadly equivalent to the steam age responsive double)

 

3♠ inv with 5♠

 

The advantage of this scheme is that the size of the spade fit is better defined and it enables you to stay low when you only have a 4-3 ♠ fit rather than jumping to 3♠

[helene_t]

After a 1-level opening, the following applies:

Pass: gives partner the choice (weak take-out). Could also be a strong hand with one suit (in case the rdbl was a psyche)

Any number of ♠/♦/♣: weak

Any number of notrumps: both minors.

cue: no sure what that should mean. Maybe a four-card spades and a longer minor.

 

It could probably be argued that the meanings should be different against a preempt but without special agreements I would assume the same treatment as against a 1-level opening.

 

Note that if pass is forcing, RHO can freely psyche the rdbl to avoid a penalty pass. So I think it's a good idea to play pass as penalty, especially if opps are known to preempt on 5-cards.

[hatchett]

Note that if pass is forcing, RHO can freely psyche the rdbl to avoid a penalty pass. So I think it's a good idea to play pass as penalty, especially if opps are known to preempt on 5-cards.

 

(i) He could only psyche the pass occassionally otherwise it would become an agreement

 

(ii) Very few people ask whether LHOs pass would be forcing if they redoubled and then redouble.

 

(iii) Presumably people that redouble opposite a possible 5 card suit have a better hand/trumps.

[kgr]

Pass = a desire to play in 2Hxx

2S = a weak hand with 4+ spades

3S = a less weak hand with 5+ spades

4S = a desire to play in 4S

What do you bid with a less weak hand and 4+S?

e.g :

Axxx-x-KJxx-J8xx

(If this is 4S then make it a bit weaker)

I would think you don't have the room (making Pass = a desire to play in 2Hxx) to require 5+S.

[Finch]

I would play pretty much the same as without the redouble, given that redouble can be a joke, so it depends on your lebensohl agreements.

 

It just strikes me as slightly dangerous to be bidding 3S on a 4-card suit here if RHO is serious about his desire to defend. If everyone really has his bid, you can't both have that hand and have a spade fit, so I would take a good hard look at the vulnerability.

 

I feel strongly that pass must be to play. Otherwise it's easy to psyche you out of your penalty pass by redoubling, a particularly common technique at pairs (ask Mr Berkowitz & Mr Cohen about this).

 

If you have a game force with 4 spades you can cue, of course.

[Chamaco]

I feel strongly that pass must be to play. Otherwise it's easy to psyche you out of your penalty pass by redoubling, a particularly common technique at pairs (ask Mr Berkowitz & Mr Cohen about this).

 

If you have a game force with 4 spades you can cue, of course.

But what would you do with a weak misfit (0-2 spades) hand ?

 

If pass would mean "Nothing to say", then one could pass; but, instead, if pass means "go for blood", then passing with such hand type would not be available ?

 

I am confused about this issue...

[Finch]

But what would you do with a weak misfit (0-2 spades) hand ?

 

If pass would mean "Nothing to say", then one could pass; but, instead, if pass means "go for blood", then passing with such hand type would not be available ?

 

I am confused about this issue...

If pass means "go for blood" then clearly you can't pass with a misfitting 0-2 spades hand. You either bid 2NT (looking for a minor, not lebensohl) or 3 of a minor, depending on your shape.

[SoTired]

1S p p X

XX p = penalty pass, no question about it. Otherwise opener can prevent a penalty situation by always XX.

 

2H X XX p is more ambiguous because advancer is in front of opener. A better question to ask is "What does the XX mean?" How can we know what a pass means if we don't know what the opps XX means. If the XX means, "I have strength and we may have them." Then I would play the pass to mean, "pick a minor (with spades, advancer just bids them)." If the opps say the XX means "run" or "I don't know," then the pass says, "We got them."

[Finch]

Once the meaning of your call depends so crucially on the meaning of their call (pass either means penalties or please bid, depending) you'd better be absolutely certain what you do under all other possible descriptions of the redouble, including

 

"no agreement"

"shows a high card in hearts"

"transfer to clubs"

 

Personally, I prefer to make the meaning of my calls depend as little as possible on the meaning of theirs, in auctions where partnerships are often uncertain of their agreements

 

(so, for example, 1C (short) 2C x: if 2C is a 2-suiter double says 'I want to defend at least one of their suits', if 2C is natural then double is negative ('I have at least one major') which is close enough either way...)

[SoTired]

Personally, I prefer to make the meaning of my calls depend as little as possible on the meaning of theirs, in auctions where partnerships are often uncertain of their agreements

I disagree. The meaning of our calls are based on the meanings of their calls. Why not use that. As a matter of fact, I can think of few auctions where we ignore their call meanings.