Will you bid 2nt?

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=skxhxxxdaq10xcakxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

After 2 pass, your RHO opens 2♠ in 3rd seat, Is 2nt a popular choice now?

[skjaeran]

Being a light opener, I might in fact decide to pass this, since a game our way is heavy odds against.

 

If I've got to act, my bid would be 2NT, since I don't fancy X-ing with three small ♥'s.

[asc]

It's OK for me-my resourses are clear now, and I don't have 4 cards in ♥. Practical bid -especially if we don't use Lebenshol.

[jdonn]

2NT works for me.

[mikeh]

It's a tough job, but it's my job... to bid 2N on these hands. Yes, of course, we'd prefer a longer/stronger stopper, and a better hand... but I'd prefer to be 4 inches taller and 20 years younger.... and neither is going to happen, so I get on with life.

[kenrexford]

What possible other call makes any sense here?

 

Double is sick.

 

Change the majors, and make this a 2♥ opening, and there are some merits. But, in the actual auction, 2NT does not preempt us as to hearts. Instead, it actually allows partner to show exactly how many hearts he has, and he need not worry about showing his strength because we have shown ours already -- he just adds.

 

Add in a heart honor (maybe move over th clube King) to have Kxx in hearts, and I'll still overcall 2NT. The problem will be whether I fib and bid 3♥ in response to 3♣ (which I assume to be Stayman -- systems on).

[Fluffy]

I would double, but NT can be better

[Apollo81]

I would double.

[Halo]

2NT

 

Pass is the only alternative, but that's not how I play the game.

[Echognome]

I also believe it's somewhat dependent upon style. Playing Echo Club or Gnome Club, for example, I will pass as the best partner can have is a poor, balanced 12 count.

 

Playing a natural, sound opening system, such as 2/1, I will bid 2NT as it's too risky to pass.

[jdonn]

I also believe it's somewhat dependent upon style. Playing Echo Club or Gnome Club, for example, I will pass as the best partner can have is a poor, balanced 12 count.

 

Playing a natural, sound opening system, such as 2/1, I will bid 2NT as it's too risky to pass.

Isn't that essentially true in any normal system?

[mike777]

wow is double really that sick? I understand 2nt but double seems to be a reasonable option here and one I might pick. I am not passing.

[Codo]

to call double sick is silly. Only downside: YOu miss a fourth Heart, bad luck.

You missed another spade stopper, so 2 NT is as sick as double.

 

My pd with some 3442 and 10 will never bid when I pass now, so I double now with 2 NT a second choice.

[Guest Jlall]

I like 2N a lot.

[Echognome]

I also believe it's somewhat dependent upon style.  Playing Echo Club or Gnome Club, for example, I will pass as the best partner can have is a poor, balanced 12 count.

 

Playing a natural, sound opening system, such as 2/1, I will bid 2NT as it's too risky to pass.

Isn't that essentially true in any normal system?

Actually it isn't, but I wasn't very good at explaining it. We open lighter on unbalanced hands than most, but we do not open lighter on balanced hands.

[kenrexford]

to call double sick is silly. Only downside: YOu miss a fourth Heart, bad luck.

You missed another spade stopper, so 2 NT is as sick as double.

 

My pd with some 3442 and 10 will never bid when I pass now, so I double now with 2 NT a second choice.

Actually, there are a lot more problems with double than simply missing a fourth heart.

 

Your heart suit is not simple three-card, you lack even a helpful honor in hearts.

Your strength in HCP's and in defense is understated when you double, with insufficient avenues to both clarifying the poor hearts and showing the good overall strength.

 

Besides, who needs two spade stoppers here? I may be out there for occasionally overcalling 2NT with a mere bolster, but a full stop works well enough.

 

The upside to doubling is ease in finding the minor contract, admittedly, when 3♣ or 3♦ is the ideal contract.

[Echognome]

The upside to doubling is ease in finding the minor contract, admittedly, when 3♣ or 3♦ is the ideal contract.

Even though I find the choice between pass and 2NT, I think the upside of double is actually that you have Lebensohl (or variant) available, whereas over a 2NT call, you usually do not have as precise methods.

[pclayton]

I like double. If pard bids 3x, I will know about his strength and can try 3N. If pard bids 2N Lebensohl, I'll be happy we are playing in a suit.

 

If I bid 2N, how can I ever get out in 3 minor, unless we are doubled?

[jdonn]

I like double. If pard bids 3x, I will know about his strength and can try 3N. If pard bids 2N Lebensohl, I'll be happy we are playing in a suit.

 

If I bid 2N, how can I ever get out in 3 minor, unless we are doubled?

I think the analysis between 2NT and double is actually pretty straightforward. For simplicity I'll assume

 

3m in an 8+ minor suit fit > 2NT > 3♥ in a 4-3 heart fit

 

though of course there are no guarantees I think that is your general order of preference if partner is weak. Double is better either if partner passes (very unlikely), or if he is weak and you get to play in 3 of a minor. Double is worse if partner is weak with exactly 4 hearts, or weak with 4333 (also unlikely). If partner has 5+ hearts it's not relevent since you get to hearts either way, although maybe then 2NT is better to hide the strong hand. All told, I certainly don't think double is sick or even close, I simply prefer 2NT. As I think Phil implied could happen, if they double 2NT I will redouble to get us to a minor as I thank them for saving me.

[Halo]

Interesting post. I have to think hard about the fact that double is impossible for me.

[Guest Jlall]

Josh your analysis neglects that partner will bid lebensohl on hands where you can make game and will find it after a 2N bid, AND those hands are much more likely than normal with LHO being a passed hand and RHO preempting. Random balanced 8 counts will happen more than usual and I'd rather be in 3N than 3H or 3m on those hands.

 

Also whenever partner has 4 hearts and a 4 card minor we're going to get to hearts not the minor.

[cherdano]

The upside to doubling is ease in finding the minor contract, admittedly, when 3♣ or 3♦ is the ideal contract.

Even though I find the choice between pass and 2NT, I think the upside of double is actually that you have Lebensohl (or variant) available, whereas over a 2NT call, you usually do not have as precise methods.

Huh? My methods over 2N, and I would guess pretty much anyone's, are a lot more precise than after double, simply because the 2N bidders strength is very well determined, whereas a double is about 13-37 hcp. The only downside is after a 2N bid partner can't sign off in 3♣, and he won't sign off in 3♦ with 4-card support.

 

I think the major downside of 2N is that we may end up in a 25-26 hcp 3N that has no play with a single spade stopper. (Jxx KQxx Kx Txxx). (The major upside is that you may end up in a 25-26 hcp 3N that is laydown.)

[Echognome]

Huh? My methods over 2N, and I would guess pretty much anyone's, are a lot more precise than after double, simply because the 2N bidders strength is very well determined, whereas a double is about 13-37 hcp. The only downside is after a 2N bid partner can't sign off in 3♣, and he won't sign off in 3♦ with 4-card support.

 

I think the major downside of 2N is that we may end up in a 25-26 hcp 3N that has no play with a single spade stopper. (Jxx KQxx Kx Txxx). (The major upside is that you may end up in a 25-26 hcp 3N that is laydown.)

Sigh. I don't understand your argument at all.

 

Maybe you can reread my post where I said "To me the choice is between pass and 2NT." Obviously you have a well defined 2NT that gets across your general hand strength and shape. So this is good as *you* have defined *your* hand well. However, partner does not have as much room to define *his* hand well. This isn't really a contentious point, however, as *by definition* he has more calls available after double than 2NT.

 

In the lebensohl I play with Jason, he can show invitational or better strength in a major, he can show invitational or better strength with diamonds, he can show game forcing strength with clubs, he can show 4 of the other major and GF with or without a stopper, or he can sign off in any suit. Furthermore, he can pass the double. So clearly he has a lot more options over double than he does over a 2NT call.

 

This is the upside I mention with double. The tradeoff is that *our* hand isn't as well defined. How that ends up on average obviously depends on partner's hand. You say that yours and pretty much everyone's methods are more precise than after double and I say you're wrong. I say that it depends on what partner's got over there.

[bhall]

Pass is not as silly as it sounds. If the outstanding high cards are split more or less evenly around the table, both 2S and 2N rate to go down one. Wouldn't you rather be in a plus position? When partner raises to 3N, you are still taking the worst of it in many cases, scrambling for 8 tricks before the roof caves in, though once in a while you will make.

 

The real problem with passing is the possibility that your side has a 5-3 heart fit. Bidding 2N will get you to the right level in hearts in that case. Double may destroy whatever remaining confidence your partner has in your judgement. :(

[whereagles]

Pard is likely to have a tripleton spade. You have to bid.

 

On the plus side, LHO is unlikely to double you because

 

1. he passed originally and

2. a 3rd seat preempt can be weaker than normal

 

2NT or dbl are both ok. 2NT more descriptive, dbl more flexible. I prefer 2NT.