Is partner showing extras?

[clayniac]

At the club last night with a good player, the auction below occurred. Is partner showing extras?

1 ♥ on my left-double by partner-pass-1 nt (8-11 and a ♥ stopper)

2 ♥- 3 ♦ by partner

? Does partner's 3 ♦ bid show extras?

I had a ♦ fit with him, so I bid 3 nt. He said he was just competing; I said it showed extras. Some said he should just overcall 2 ♦ on his first turn (which I also said-and with a nice fit will raise), others said he should double again, asking me to bid, showing support for the other suits.

Partner had ♠KQXX ♥ A ♦ ATXXX, ♣ JXX

Thanks,

Patsy

[Walddk]

He did enough when he doubled and can't bid 3♦ now without showing extras. 3♦ shows a hand too good to overcall 2♦, roughly 18-21 hcp. Opposite the 1NT response, this would also be forcing.

 

You play 1NT as 8-11. I don't think that is mainstream, though. 6-9(10) is more common.

 

Roland

[helene_t]

Partner certainly shouldn't have overcalled 2♦ - the suit is either too bad or way too bad, depending on vulnerability and scoring. Besides, a 2♦ overcall maty loose a ♠ fit. Double is fine.

 

I think 3♦ shows extras but that it's non-forcing.

[whereagles]

This is an interesting auction. Most people would take 3♦ as showing extras, but I think it's better played as competitive.

 

Why? Because with extras you'd have 25 hcp (or close to that) and would consequently bid 2 or 3NT, not 3♦.

[Walddk]

Why? Because with extras you'd have 25 hcp (or close to that) and would consequently bid 2 or 3NT, not 3♦.

I don't agree. If he has a strong hand (18+) with say 4-1-6-2 it is not at all certain that NT is the right spot. You could even have a diamond slam on when 3NT fails.

 

Roland

[gwnn]

This is slight advertisment to Raptor NT :whistles:. Well, not that big of an advertisment, as a T/O X was fine (club tolerance also).

 

3♦ HAS to show extras (a 'GOSH'=good one suited hand). If he thinks he wants to play a suit contract opposite any 4333 by you, he can double again, suggesting some extras (but there might be people who'd play that double as penalty). With this hand, though, he has to pass.

[whereagles]

Why? Because with extras you'd have 25 hcp (or close to that) and would consequently bid 2 or 3NT, not 3♦.

I don't agree. If he has a strong hand (18+) with say 4-1-6-2 it is not at all certain that NT is the right spot. You could even have a diamond slam on when 3NT fails.

 

Roland

With 18 hcp you can make a cue-bid instead of bidding 3♦, no?

 

The point is there is little need for 3♦ to show a strong hand because strong hands have alternative ways to be bid (cue, 2NT, 3NT, etc). It is the competitive hand that has little options but to bid its suit. And competitive hands come up far more often than slammish hands. Especially if opps opened the bidding.

 

Of course, you can always 'steal' 2NT and make it artificial and dump all competitive hands into it. However, 2NT as natural is useful here.

[Blofeld]

The problem with making a cue is that you don't mention your suit ...

 

I'd expect a cue to be a strong hand with something like typical takeout double shape.

[MickyB]

It's certainly gameforcing IMO, but if 1NT is showing 8-11 I think a 4153 16 count should be acceptable (which is nothing like "too good to overcall" by my standards).

[Walddk]

Why? Because with extras you'd have 25 hcp (or close to that) and would consequently bid 2 or 3NT, not 3♦.

I don't agree. If he has a strong hand (18+) with say 4-1-6-2 it is not at all certain that NT is the right spot. You could even have a diamond slam on when 3NT fails.

 

Roland

With 18 hcp you can make a cue-bid instead of bidding 3♦, no?

Apparently, you prefer to torture partner with an unassuming cue bid when you have a natural bid available.

 

♠ KQ64

♥ 7

♦ AKJ873

♣ AQ

 

If I understand you correctly, you now bid 3♥ over RHO's 2♥. How do you expect your partner to know that this shows a strong diamond suit? And what is he supposed to respond with

 

♠ J52

♥ A108

♦ Q95

♣ 6532

 

3NT and 6♦ both require ♣K onside (almost 100% on the auction). I am strongly opposed to using unassuming cue bids when you have natural, descriptive bid at hand. And yes, I do play 3♦ on this action as forcing after a constructive 1NT response.

 

Roland

[whereagles]

Roland, that's fine and you can certainly play it that way. But what if doubler has instead the hand he held? If he's forced to pass 2♥ because "3♦ would show extras", you're going to lose competition.

 

In my opinion, what you gain by adding precision in strong auctions (1% of the time) does not compensate the loss of competition in the other 99% of the time.

[kenberg]

The first double seems completely clear, I can't imagine bidding 2D with that hand. At his next turn he knows you have 9 points, maybe 11, and he has more shape and more points than he might have had for his double. He has reason to expect that 3D will play well and there should be some way to communicate that fact to you. Bidding 3D seems like a reasonable choice.

 

in my view, bidding 3D here is totally diffeent from what it would be if your initial response had been, say, 2C. Of course 2C could be nothing more than the need to respond to the double. When you bid 1N you define your hand within a narrow range and your partner should be able to act on that. So, imo, 3D simply means that given the 1N response by you, and the 2H on his right, he thinks 3D is a good place to play the hand. For him to think that to be the case he probably has more than a bare minimum double and probably five diamonds. As he has.

 

To look at it in a different way, suppose he passes and you have a modest hand (flattish with a 9 or 10 count) for your 1N response. Would you not feel that you have already described your hand and therefore pass it out? I would. Not bidding the same values twice is a fine idea in bridge. So if 3 D is to be reached, he must bid it.

[Walddk]

Roland, that's fine and you can certainly play it that way. But what if doubler has instead the hand he held? If he's forced to pass 2♥ because "3♦ would show extras", you're going to lose competition.

 

In my opinion, what you gain by adding precision in strong auctions (1% of the time) does not compensate the loss of competition in the other 99% of the time.

It's not for doubler to compete. He already showed his hand when he doubled. It was a double within the minimum range, and it's unsound to tell the same story twice.

 

His partner won't be particularly happy to hear him "compete" when he has a 3-4-2-4 shape. It won't be a devastating shock for him that you have a 14 count with a 4-1-5-3 pattern.

 

Roland

[whereagles]

Roland: in other words, you're relegating the most important decision of the deal to the weak hand. I guess this is again that old thing we disagree on; that sometimes the strong hand has to do away with the so-called "partnership discipline" bounds and raise to its responsibilities. Kenberg put this in a nice way, by the way.

 

Anyway, you can play 3♦ as strong if you want, but I pretty much doubt you'll be doing the right thing, statistically speaking.

[HeartA]

I completely agree with Roland on this one. With minimum strength, you doubled and you are done unless pd forces to bid. 5-4-3-1 (short in opp's suit) is one of the typical shape.

[helene_t]

I'm with Whereagles. How often has it happened that you had a minor suit game after one opp opened and partner showed a stop in their suit?

 

Besides, there are plenty of calls available in the rare event that you want to force to game after partner bid 1NT. You can double 2♥, you can cuebid, or you can bid 3NT either directly or via a scrable 2NT. And a very strong one-suiter without a heart stop may have overcalled 3♥.

 

If you play ELC, a double of hearts does not guarantee club support. Hence you could have a minimum double with four spades and longer diamonds. This could go via 2NT (which is primarily competivie with both minors). Then a direct 3♦ bid is invitational.

 

As for 3♣, you can't have it both ways, you must decide if that's invitational or competitive. Unless you give up the scrabling 2NT and play that as good/bad. Then you could play a double as both minors. But I think a double should be somewhat penalty-oriented,

[cherdano]

I strongly disagree with whereagles and Helene. How can you bid a competitive 3♦ with a 5-card suit at the 3-level, AFTER your partner has said most of his values are opposite your singleton? Why play a 5-2 fit at the 3-level?

 

Anyway, doubling-then-bidding a new suit shows a strong hand, too strong to overcall in the first place. There are obvious exceptions to this (1C-X-P-2C-?-2H), but I don't see how the sequence of this thread can be an exception without special agreements.

[cherdano]

I'm with Whereagles. How often has it happened that you had a minor suit game after one opp opened and partner showed a stop in their suit?

Quite often I would say.

[keylime]

3♦ gotta be forcing here showing extras.

[matmat]

i'd tend to think that after you have shown 8-11 with a heart stopper p's 3d bid does show extras and is 100% forcing.

[cnszsun]

I think the question discussed here is strongly related to another question: What kind of hands would you make a takeout double with?

1) typical take-out hand, support for 3 unbid suit. With strong hand, you can raise p's suit or double again to show extras.

2) Balanced hand, stronger than direct NT bid, bid NT next time or raise p's suit to some level.

3) ELC hand, like 4351 after RHO's 1♥, you will correct p's 2♣ to 2♦ and pass otherwise. Of course with extras, you may have to find another bid.

4) GOSH hand, one suited hand too good to ovecall, you will bid your suit next time no matter what your p's response is. But if your p bid 2♣, you have to rebid 3♦ rather than 2♦ to differentiate from ELC hand. (If you don't use ELC, it's a different story).

Unless you never double with strong one suited hand (GOSH), i can't understand why 3♦ here should not be forcing.

[HeartA]

3) ELC hand, like 4351 after RHO's 1♥, you will correct p's 2♣ to 2♦ and pass otherwise. Of course with extras, you may have to find another bid.

Unless you have special agreement with pd, to "correct" pd's 2C to 2D would show a hand with extras, e.g, a hand too strong to have a direct 2D overcall.

[kenberg]

Clearly I am being strongly outvoted here but since I have often bid 3D in situations like this and never had any problem with partner mis-understanding, I don't want to surrender quite yet.

 

Give Patsy a flat 9 count, at the lower end of her range. Of course it could be that she is holding five hearts, but three or four is more likely. This means that the opponents are in an eight or nine card heart fit at the two level and we have the balance of power (23 hcps) . Should we sell to 2H? If not, who should act? Is Patsy, with a flat hand and one more point than the minimum for her first call supposed to make another call? Of course we can construct hands where no one can make anything, but we also can construct hands where we must bid on. Maybe her partner should double 2H rather than bid 3D (which might fetch 2S ), but expecting a flat 9 count to reopen, when the flat 9 count has already made a bid showing 8 in her agreements, is not right. So anyway, is it the general view that we just pass out 2H here?

[the hog]

Without a shadow of a doubt 3D shows extras. Bidding 3D with this hand is an option as it is forcing and not competitive. Sure you may have an agreement with partner to the contrary, but the normal agreement and certainly the situation in a pick up partnership, is that you are showing extra values - and considerable extra values at that. Whereagles has a point, but it is NOT the norm.

[helene_t]

I think the question discussed here is strongly related to another question: What kind of hands would you make a takeout double with?

1) typical take-out hand, support for 3 unbid suit. With strong hand, you can raise p's suit or double again to show extras.[....]

3) ELC hand, like 4351 after RHO's 1♥, you will correct p's 2♣ to 2♦ and pass otherwise. Of course with extras, you may have to find another bid.

4) GOSH hand, one suited hand too good to ovecall, you will bid your suit next time no matter what your p's response is. [......]

Unless you never double with strong one suited hand (GOSH), i can't understand why 3♦ here should not be forcing.

This is basically what I learned at course one (except that we happened not to learn ELC). Now I have a general aversion against putting things into categories (watercooler topic?) and it also applies here. So the style that I have addopted from studying books and master solvers' club-like bidding fora suits me better:

 

I make take-out-doubles with a single continiuum of hand types. A take-out double always shows a flexible hand. It's just that the more strength I have the less flexible it has to be. With an unflexible hand I would bid game directly, make a jump cue asking for a heart stop or make a slightly off-shape Michaels, U2NT or 1NT.

 

This means that the logic "3♦ shows a hand too strong for an overcall so opposite a 1NT response to the take-out double you must have GF values" does not necesarily hold.

 

I would start with a double rather than 2♦ with (almost) any 4063-hand and 10-29 HCP. With any such hand I would like to compete against 2♥. Of course you can't show all possible hands with which you would like to compete without loosing accuracy. Some topics for discussion:

- Should 2NT be scramble or G/B? Or maybe even (arghhhh) natural?

- Should double be pure penalty (3 hearts), penalty-oriented (2 hearts) or just showing extras, cattering for 5+ hearts by p (one heart)?

- Maybe it's a good idea to reverse G/B to reduce the risk of wrong-siding 3♦. Or playing transfers.

 

But in any case, I don't bye the logic that you'll have to sell out to 2♥ unless you have a hand too strong for an overcall. I rarely have a hand too strong for an overcall and I rarely want to sell out to 2♥, Of course partner is still there but his 1NT is also quite descriptive so I don't have to leave the decision to him.