A turn for the worse...

[Guest Jlall]

You hold xx Kxxx x Qxxxxx. Partner opens 1D, you respond 1H, LHO bids 2H, and partner bids 2S. Imps. Your call?

[whereagles]

2NT, regardless of this being artificial or not :P

[jtfanclub]

You hold xx Kxxx x Qxxxxx. Partner opens 1D, you respond 1H, LHO bids 2H, and partner bids 2S. Imps. Your call?

Wrong forum for answers from me, just questions...

 

1. What is the meaning of 2♥?

 

2. Given that 2♥ is natural, what would an X have meant by P?

[Guest Jlall]

2H is natural, X is undiscussed but I would have assumed it was penalty.

[jikl]

Interesting auction, partner has volunteered a bid where there was no need since you had another bid from an unpassed hand (I am guessing this since you would have mentioned otherwise) I think your partner has a strong 64 in ♦♠ with a void or singleton ♥ which means the only fit you have is in ♣, but I would bid 3♦, you can never find the ♣ fit. If partner moves again slow it down.

 

Sean

[inquiry]

You can not pass. You can not raise spades. As much as you like, you can not make a takeout double of your partners 2♠ bid. :P

 

That leaves three equally unattractive alternatives.

• 2NT - is this natural or inbergman? I would guess this is natural now even if you think 2♠ is a reverse
  
• 3♣ has to be clubs, and presumably forcing, or should it be?
  
• 3♦ - partner better have a lot of diamonds on this auction
  

The real question here is does 3♣ scream weakness? With clubs and hearts, you can bid 2NT or 3NT, depending upon your strength when you misfit, and you can raise with a fit, or even cue-bid with great hand and a fit. The logic of 3♣ being non-forcing and 2NT being natural seems sound, but i would not spring this on partner out of the blue, so i will bid 2NT at the table.

[mikeh]

Why can't I pass? Just kidding, in a sense. Partner sure doesn't expect a pass. Bidding over the opps' 2♥ bid is a relatively undiscussed area of bidding theory: do YOU have an agreement with all of your partners, he asked? I sure don't, he said.

 

Partner could be almost any 5=6, in which case pass rates to be best unless he is huge.

 

Partner could be a good hand with 4=5 or 4=6, in which case getting to and stopping in 3♦ is best, or least bad.

 

I THINK, and will now discuss with all my partners, that 2N should be ambiguous (now, that's a nice agreement: Alert! What does that mean? Ambiguous!) I think it should be Ingberman, prepatory to correcting to a passable 3♦, hoping not to get doubled.

 

I think this is a logical extension of reverse theory: given that 2♠ should, in my view, be of reverse strength: not as strong (at the low end) as 2♠ over my 1♥, but as strong as 2♥ would be had I bid 1♠.

 

This permits 3♦/3♠ to be gf.

[Winstonm]

I do not think this sequence is forcing, only highly encouraging...I'm not encouraged...I pass.

[temp3600]

2NT. Without clear agreements, I think it's a relatively safe bid. It doesn't sound very strong. If partner thinks it's natural, I have a stopper. If partner thinks he has to bid 3♣, I have that too.

We might end up in a 5-2 spade fit or a 6-1 diamond fit instead of a 6-2 club fit though.

[Fluffy]

2NT but I don't know how will partner take it. If he bids 3♦ next I'll be in trtouble not knowing if its forcing.

[pclayton]

2N. No different if LHO hadn't intervened, although I don't expect quite as good a hand.

 

Pard should bid 3♣ with any kind of tolerance.

[dake50]

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.

What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

[cherdano]

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.

What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

Undiscussed, I would expect 3♣ to be forcing. What do you want to bid with xx Axxxx xx KQxx (which IMO is a game force opposite partner's 2♠ bid - if you disagree, just make it a little stronger).

[Winstonm]

What would the 2N bidders have done if the auction had been:

1D-P-1H-P-1S-P-?

 

Would you try to escape into the bad 6-card club suit at the 3-level?

 

My experience has taught me that when the auction takes a nasty turn and you are weak, the best thing to do is stop bidding as soon as possible. I can't imagine that 2S in the given auction should be forcing as X, cue bid, and jumps are open for use. As for double, it seems silly to be penalty when at least 9 cards in the suit are accounted for between pard and opp, and more likely 10-11.

[Winstonm]

When you bid 1H, you must have expected an overheating MAY occur. You were certainly prepared to escape to your 6cC.

What has changed? --except a particularly virulent overheated auction. Having other strong bids, 3C must be at best 'partner, only proceed with C-fit'.

When I bid 1H I was prepared to pass a lot of rebids and only planning to escape to my lousy 6-bagger over a 1N rebid. Nothing has changed.

[Guest Jlall]

I had a bad feeling on this one. LHO obviously had long hearts, so that meant RHO probably had partners suits. Combine that with the fact that if I bid it's not obvious what to bid, I chose to pass before things got worse.

 

The bad news was partner was 4-7 in the pointed suits and we went down 4.

 

The good news was that RHO had 5 good diamonds and was going to X 3D (as they did at the other table) for a number.

 

edit: btw I think 2S is clearly forcing.

[helene_t]

Playing Precision I have an easy pass :P

 

Agree with Whereagles and Ben. 2NT is probably an acceptable bid no matter what it is supposed to mean. If Fred's Law (if a bid can be natural it is natural) applies here it's ok allthough Ingberman would be even better. But whether partner alerts my 2NT bid or not (lol) I'll pass his next bid unless it's 3♥.

 

I prefer Winston's approach, though, and even if 2♠ is intended as forcing, pass could be the percentage choice. But as a matter of principle (partnership harmony is more important than results) I never pass a forcing bid, and I think most of my semi-regular partners would assume 2♠ to be forcing.

[Winstonm]

I had a bad feeling on this one. LHO obviously had long hearts, so that meant RHO probably had partners suits. Combine that with the fact that if I bid it's not obvious what to bid, I chose to pass before things got worse.

 

The bad news was partner was 4-7 in the pointed suits and we went down 4.

 

The good news was that RHO had 5 good diamonds and was going to X 3D (as they did at the other table) for a number.

 

edit: btw I think 2S is clearly forcing.

I think this - if rarely used - is what seperates the good player from the great player: knowing when to do the wrong thing for the right reason and not being a 100% total slave to convention: 99.9% slave is O.K.

 

I don't see why 2S would be forcing, still. What else would you do with a hand such as: AKxx, x, AKJ10xx, xx? If partner is on Qxx, Kxxxx, x, xxxx 2S looks as good as 3D.

 

It would seem more logical in this sequence to use double as the stronger hand, allowing a convert by pard if opp has "stepped into it" with a pretty good heart suit while we have no good fit.

 

So I think a better definition of 2S would be forcing opposite most normal responses but not 100% forcing - maybe call it a 90% force.

[pclayton]

What would the 2N bidders have done if the auction had been:

1D-P-1H-P-1S-P-?

 

Would you try to escape into the bad 6-card club suit at the 3-level?

 

My experience has taught me that when the auction takes a nasty turn and you are weak, the best thing to do is stop bidding as soon as possible. I can't imagine that 2S in the given auction should be forcing as X, cue bid, and jumps are open for use. As for double, it seems silly to be penalty when at least 9 cards in the suit are accounted for between pard and opp, and more likely 10-11.

Hopefully we play walsh jumps; where I can bid 3♣. Not perfect, but it gives us a chance of playing in our 6 bagger.

[pclayton]

I had a bad feeling on this one. LHO obviously had long hearts, so that meant RHO probably had partners suits. Combine that with the fact that if I bid it's not obvious what to bid, I chose to pass before things got worse.

 

The bad news was partner was 4-7 in the pointed suits and we went down 4.

 

The good news was that RHO had 5 good diamonds and was going to X 3D (as they did at the other table) for a number.

 

edit: btw I think 2S is clearly forcing.

I think this - if rarely used - is what seperates the good player from the great player: knowing when to do the wrong thing for the right reason and not being a 100% total slave to convention: 99.9% slave is O.K.

 

I don't see why 2S would be forcing, still. What else would you do with a hand such as: AKxx, x, AKJ10xx, xx? If partner is on Qxx, Kxxxx, x, xxxx 2S looks as good as 3D.

 

It would seem more logical in this sequence to use double as the stronger hand, allowing a convert by pard if opp has "stepped into it" with a pretty good heart suit while we have no good fit.

 

So I think a better definition of 2S would be forcing opposite most normal responses but not 100% forcing - maybe call it a 90% force.

Its very convenient to use 2♠ to be able to show AKxx, x, AKJTxx, xx. Frankly, there are even weaker hands where it would be nice to get the spades in.

 

2♠ also needs to be able to show: AKQx, x, AKJxxx, Ax, so it can't be '90%' forcing.

 

I can't see having to 'double' with the 2nd hand to create a force. What is pard supposed to do with: xxx, Axxxx, Qxx, xx?

[helene_t]

Double is just penalty. If you play support doubles, the situation is similar to the more common one in which a new suit was bid in the sandwich: If a reverse is not forcing, GF hands have to make a cue-bid or something like that. If you don't play support doubles but use double to show general strength, it's not so obvious how to handle an overcall in repsonder's suit.

[Winstonm]

Double is just penalty. If you play support doubles, the situation is similar to the more common one in which a new suit was bid in the sandwich: If a reverse is not forcing, GF hands have to make a cue-bid or something like that. If you don't play support doubles but use double to show general strength, it's not so obvious how to handle an overcall in repsonder's suit.

I find this reasoning unconvincing - how can I make a penalty double in a suit in which my maximum holding is 3 cards? Pard's bid shows at least 4 and the natural overcall shows usually 6. If pard's holding is xxxx and doubler's is xxx, we won't get rich against overcaller's AKQJxx. It's just a frequency issue - penalty double in this sequence should be so rare as to be on the endangered species list.

 

When my opponent shows he has more of my partner's suit than does my partner, I really don't see the need for a support double, either. Although they may be on my card, support doubles are not mandatory - common sense still prevails. 4/3 fits with 6/0 trump breaks don't usually fare too well.

 

Provided that the 4th seat overcall is natural in partner's suit, the only definition of double that makes sense to me is non-penalty, some type of value-showing bid. And this also allows partner to convert with a decent trump holding and no good fits, something that could not be done with a reverse.

 

When the opponents' actions give you a third option that did not exist prior to their action, it seems unreasonable not to utilize it.

 

I can't see having to 'double' with the 2nd hand to create a force. What is pard supposed to do with: xxx, Axxxx, Qxx, xx?

 

If you define the X as 100% forcing and takeout, you could then use 2N as Lebensohl or if you wanted to retain the natural 2N then just bid 3D.

 

There are only 2 hand types to consider, actually - the one that is so strong that it must force to game opposite a minimum response and all others. If the hand is not strong enough to force to game, there is no need to create a force - maybe I overemphasized it with 90% - maybe more like 98% forcing, in that unless there is a compelling reason to pass, consider it forcing 1 round. A game forcing hand can always double, jump shift, or cue bid, depending on pattern. If not, then it probably was a 2C opener to begin with.

 

The advantage to this thinking is that you can compete with the somewhat lesser hands and not be forced to the 3-level if partner has a non-fitting dog.

[helene_t]

No, of course support doubles don't apply in this situation. Let me clarrify:

 

If you otherwise play support double, it means that a double on another sandwhich overcalls has a specific meaning and cannot be used to show general strength.

 

Since I assumed that a double in this situation is also used for something specific (namely penalty) you cannot use it as showing general strength either.

 

But maybe you're right that a penalty double is not a good agreement here.

[Winstonm]

No, of course support doubles don't apply in this situation. Let me clarrify:

 

If you otherwise play support double, it means that a double on another sandwhich overcalls has a specific meaning and cannot be used to show general strength.

 

Since I assumed that a double in this situation is also used for something specific (namely penalty) you cannot use it as showing general strength either.

 

But maybe you're right that a penalty double is not a good agreement here.

Sorry....I knew you were way too bright to use this as support - but I didn't understand your meaning...thanks for clarifying.

 

You are right about my only real point here - with what is virtually always 10 cards between pard and opp, to use double as penalty to me makes little sense. I just am saying let's assign a better usage to double - I was actually surprised to see that so many considered it penalty as it didn't occur to me that opener could possibly want to penalize in this sequence.

[han]

I think 2S is clearly forcing, and I think I would have passed.

 

I would not pass 1D-1H-1S or 1D-1H-2S.