Hit or Run?

[Echognome]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sjxxhqjxdqxxckxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP

(P) - 1♣ - (3♦) - P

(P) - Dbl - (P) - ?[/hv]

 

Over to you.

[Free]

Pass, I have defense, don't like my alternatives, and it's MP so if they make it's not that big a deal...

[benlessard]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

[Edmunte1]

3NT for me

[pclayton]

Pass. If I thought 4♣ could be held to -1 for sure (or not get x'd), I'd pull.

 

My ODR says there aren't a lot of tricks to go around. I hope I'm right.

[pclayton]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

I know Cohen and Bergen claim this - but I don't know anyone that follows this in practice.

[keylime]

I pass here. Aiming for any plus score.

[Guest Jlall]

Pass, might as well shoot for 200.

[ArcLight]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

I know Cohen and Bergen claim this - but I don't know anyone that follows this in practice.

I think they are frequently quoted out of context. While Larry Cohen has written that he hates to double with a void at the 2 level, that doesn't mean he would not do so ever, and this is the 3 level.

[Guest Jlall]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

I know Cohen and Bergen claim this - but I don't know anyone that follows this in practice.

I think they are frequently quoted out of context.

yep, exactly right.

[jdonn]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

I know Cohen and Bergen claim this - but I don't know anyone that follows this in practice.

I think they are frequently quoted out of context. While Larry Cohen has written that he hates to double with a void at the 2 level, that doesn't mean he would not do so ever, and this is the 3 level.

I posted an email that I obtained from Larry Cohen a couple months ago where he explained precisely what you just said. He only uses having a void as one negative factor in the decision to double or not, but he still makes obvious doubles including with a void.

[skjaeran]

It's a long way to 9 tricks in 3NT if I win the ♦Q. So that's not an alternative to me. I'll sit for this, even if I guess it's against the LAW.

[benlessard]

I don`t X with a void at the 2 level but i have no problem with those who does. But to X at the 3 level with a void is one of the easiest way to lose imps i know and i strongly suggest you to avoid it like plague.

 

But since this is MP i suppose X with a void is possible but i really don`t like it.

 

Marshall Miles has a peculiar way of dealing with negative X at the 3 level in `Advanced bidding for the 21st century` very interesting reading IMHO.

[mike777]

For me easy pass. Partner shouldnt X with a void

I know Cohen and Bergen claim this - but I don't know anyone that follows this in practice.

I think they are frequently quoted out of context. While Larry Cohen has written that he hates to double with a void at the 2 level, that doesn't mean he would not do so ever, and this is the 3 level.

I posted an email that I obtained from Larry Cohen a couple months ago where he explained precisely what you just said. He only uses having a void as one negative factor in the decision to double or not, but he still makes obvious doubles including with a void.

Yep excellent quote and thanks...but still a bit confusing on what they advocate...but this helped..and that is important. :)

 

I would not go as far as too say they make "obvious doubles at higher levels".

If that seems vague, I agree.

 

In this case I pass.