Take it out?

[gnasher]

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sakj73h10dj10854ck4]133|100|Scoring: IMP

2♥   2♠   4♥   dbl

pass[/hv]

Partner's double is takeout-oriented, and implies that he thinks we might have game on, but doesn't have enough shape or strength to commit to bidding.

 

What would you do, and is it close?

[Edmunte1]

Yes, 5♦, not close for me.

[OleBerg]

Yes, 5♦, not close for me.

Me 2

[brianshark]

Partner's double should be closer to penalties than take-out. With the minors he can bid 4N and with ♠s he can bid 4♠. What does he do with a good hand with no fit against opponents who are likely to be sacraficing? In practice, pard probably has values and not much of a spade fit.

 

I still think I'm bidding 5♦ though for fear of a double game swing, but this really is a guess. If it's a double fit, we want to be on the 5-level and if it's a mis-fit, we want to be defending 4H. It's hard to tell, but I reckon if I bid it confidently enough, the opps may take the tempting push to 5H favourable (Clayton's law) by which time pard is already informed of my ♦ suit and can hopefully judge what to do.

 

I do consider it close though. I could well be talked into passing 4Hx.

[Sambolino]

agree with brian

[655321]

Since partner has made a takeout double, and I hold a 5-5, I am definitely bidding and not passing.

 

However, I am not confident about what to bid. Partner could very well have 3 card spades for his double. Or, he might not. Anyway, I think I would bid 4♠, with 5♦ as a close second choice.

 

Not sure why, when the original poster kindly tells us double by agreement is takeout oriented, that we should assume double is 'closer to penalties than take-out.'

[SoTired]

5D, not close.

 

The idea that partner has hidden spade support in order to make an unagreed "values" dbl cannot be right. I would be very disappointed if partner showed up with 3s on this auction.

[andy_h]

I'm going to bid my hand. 5D.

[pclayton]

5♦ seems clear, but its easy to see how some perfectos with ♦AKxxx / ♣A give us slam.

 

What's 4N? Pick a minor? That seems a little redundant to me. Even if it were, I think I'm not good enough for 4N...5♣...5♦.

[gnasher]

5♦ seems clear, but its easy to see how some perfectos with ♦AKxxx / ♣A give us slam.

 

What's 4N? Pick a minor? That seems a little redundant to me. Even if it were, I think I'm not good enough for 4N...5♣...5♦.

Yes, 4NT would be pick a minor, presumably with 5044, 5134 or 5143, and yes 4NT-5♣-5♦ would show a slam try.

[mikeh]

 

Partner's double should be closer to penalties than take-out. With the minors he can bid 4N and with ♠s he can bid 4♠. What does he do with a good hand with no fit against opponents who are likely to be sacraficing? In practice, pard probably has values and not much of a spade fit.

 

Am I alone in the world in playing that 4N here (by advancer, instead of double) would be keycard in spades, given that double is takeout oriented? it seems to me to be more useful this way than having 2 takeout bids, with double presumably more penalty oriented than 4N. I'd play it as minors if partner opened 1♠ and rho overcalled 4♥, but this auction, altho superficially similar, is different by enough to make me use keycard here.

 

Given that, 5♦ is a standout... I'd like a better hand for the sequence 4N (pick a suit) then 5♦, which should inferentially be a 5.5♦ call.

[gnasher]

Am I alone in the world in playing that 4N here (by advancer, instead of double) would be keycard in spades, given that double is takeout oriented?

Probably not, but I think it's wrong. The auction is difficult enough without having to make the same bid on xx x KQ10xx AQxxx and Kx xxx AQJx Qxxx