What to bid?

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sjhaq98dj10caxxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1♠)-?[/hv]

[pbleighton]

2C.

 

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

2C.

 

Switch the minors, and you may get votes

for X, because of ELC.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mikeh]

2♣... what else?

[keylime]

2♣. At least there's six of them.

[vang]

imo, DBL it's worth considering it because of the (lack of) club quality. i may assimilate this hand with J AQ98 Jxx Axxxx.

[skjaeran]

2♣... what else?

Agree. I don't have to like it, but that's what I'd bid. It's veeery close to pass though.

[jdonn]

The answers shock me. Double! 2♣ leads nowhere other than to miss hearts, and hearts is the main reason to bid at all. Why do that just to show such a lousy suit?

 

If it goes 2♠ 3♦ p back to me, the supposedly bad scenario, I am happy with my dummy not sad.

[helene_t]

dbl is my first choice, 2♣ 2nd, pass 3rd, but it's very close.

[pbleighton]

For the doublers, what do you do when partner bids 2D?

 

Peter

[cherdano]

The answers shock me. Double! 2♣ leads nowhere other than to miss hearts, and hearts is the main reason to bid at all. Why do that just to show such a lousy suit?

There is medicine for reducing your blood pressure you know ... :)

I don't mind double but I would bid 2♣. If partner has, say, 3-card support and 5 hearts I still expect him to try and get us to hearts over, say, 1S 2C 3S :P

[mike777]

For the doublers, what do you do when partner bids 2D?

 

Peter

double, I pass 2d.

 

Not going to worry about a disaster every time I am at fav vul and partner is an unpassed hand.....:P

[jdonn]

For the doublers, what do you do when partner bids 2D?

 

Peter

Pass, partner usually has 5 and I'm in a fine contract, even if he has 4 I think I'm making as often as not. I am not even worried about this possibility.

[han]

Double. If it wasn't for the nice hearts I might be passing this hand rather than overcall 2C on ace-empty.

[ArtK78]

2♣. And I don't care if the answer is shocking.

 

Bid what you have. Just because you bid clubs doesn't mean you can't find a 4-4 heart fit later.

[Fluffy]

pass is the book bid, but i would probably bid 2♣ anyway.

[Halo]

Always 2C for me.

[ArtK78]

pass is the book bid, but i would probably bid 2♣ anyway.

What book is that? Remind me not to read it.

[han]

How I became a life master in 16 weeks by not overcalling on empty suits at the 2-level.

 

Maybe a long title but it's a thick book.

[pbleighton]

Not going to worry about a disaster every time I am at fav vul and partner is an unpassed hand.....

 

Not worrying about the most likely outcome, partner playing in a 4-2 or 5-2 fit rather than in your 6 card suit...

 

Wow, can we look forward to this *optimistic* view at favorable in the future? It would be quite a change :rolleyes:

 

Peter

[mikeh]

2♣ doesn't deny hearts, and partner is not barred, either from bidding 2♥ or 2♦ (over which I have a routine 2♥) should LHO pass. Nor is partner barred from making a responsive double if, as is likely, LHO raises spades.

 

So the argument for double seems, to me, to be based on the narrow set of hands on which:

 

1) partner has 4+ hearts and can't show them after we bid 2♣, and

 

2) we have the values (strength or shape) to outbid the opps, or

 

3) we belong in diamonds and partner won't get us there without the double

 

Finding our heart fit is of no use if the opps can outbid us.

 

OTOH, the argument for 2♣ is based on the broader (I think) set of hands on which:

 

1) we belong in clubs, or

 

2) when we belong in hearts, partner can show them, or

 

3) we definitely don't belong in diamonds, and partner will force us there if we double (promising some diamond length when played in the real universe), or

 

4) (and this is a very minor factor) the opps will be bidding hearts if we don't show them via double

 

The old Italians used to survive playing offshape takeout doubles, but my recollection from reading old Bridge Worlds is that they did so despite this approach, not because of it.

 

Finally, it is all well and good to say that we pass 3♦ if partner bids it over 2♠, but consider the following scenarios:

 

1) LHO bids 4♠.. and partner with 1=3=6=3 innocently bids 5♦

 

2) LHO passes, and partner cue bids and then bids 3♦...ok, you say, you bid 3♣ then 3♥... does that tell partner, who thinks he has a gf hand opposite the 1=4=3=5 you've suggested, that you hold a 2=4=1=6 working 11 count?

 

3) LHO passes and partner bids a constructive 3♦ on, say, xxx x AJxxx KJxx. I'd rather be in 5♣ than 3♦... it's as likely to make (for these purposes) and pays a heck of a lot more.

 

4) While we can get to a heart slam after double, we are not so likely to get to a club slam after double, since partner will never play us for a 6 card suit, nor will he realize that we have nothing wasted opposite a diamond suit such as Jxxx(x).

 

Nope, for me, double is a sign of wild-eyed major-fascination :) :rolleyes:

 

OTOH, it might work B)

[han]

consider the following scenarios:

 

2) LHO passes, and partner cue bids and then bids 3♦...ok, you say, you bid 3♣ then 3♥... does that tell partner, who thinks he has a gf hand opposite the 1=4=3=5 you've suggested, that you hold a 2=4=1=6 working 11 count?

First of all, we have a 1-4-2-6 shape, not 2-4-1-6, a huge difference.

 

Secondly, if partner thinks that we are 1-4-3-5 then that's not so bad is it? Off by only one card!

 

Double does more than advertise the hearts, it also shows the short spades. I'd comfortably pass if it goes (1S) - Dbl - (2S) - passed around to me, yet I'd feel like I would have to reopen after having overcalled 2C, but that would show extra values.

 

If partner bids 5D over 4S with 1-3-6-3 shape then we competed in our fit over their 11-card fit, is that a disaster?

 

In this era of off-shape takeout doubles I'm surprised to read your strong aversion against a takeout double with J10 in an unbid minor.

[mikeh]

ooops.

 

1=4=2=6, not 2=4=1=6.

 

Oh well, that's what comes from posting without rereading the OP. I made the original hand fit my argument :rolleyes:

 

I still don't like the double, but not as adamantly as I did the last time I wrote here B)

[cnszsun]

If you double, you will reach a thin but makeable 4♥ contract.

I've had strong desire to do that at the table, but clearly i'm still not used to make off-shape double. So i bid 2♣ and missed game.

[han]

ooops.

 

1=4=2=6, not 2=4=1=6.

 

Oh well, that's what comes from posting without rereading the OP. I made the original hand fit my argument :rolleyes:

 

I still don't like the double, but not as adamantly as I did the last time I wrote here B)

I suspected that might have been the case. :)