1D-(1H)-X-(2H)-X

[kenberg]

1D-(1H)-X-(2H)-X

 

To the best of my recollection I have never seen this discussed in print.

 

I impose the following conditions:

 

1D-(1H)-X shows exactly four spades

 

1D-(Pass)-1S-(2H)-X shows exactly three spades.

 

Does the given auction still show three spades? If not, what does it show?

 

Argument against it showing three spades: While after 1D-(Pass)-1S-(2H) it is possible and often the case that responder has five spades, after 1D-(1H)-X-(2H) that possibility does not exist.

 

Argument for: It is possible to contest the auction at the two level with a Moysian fit.

 

Mostly, I am asking what a default expectation should be, but hopefully that is the same as what a good choice would be.

[helene_t]

No I think it should show extra values and something like 3154 or 2254, maybe 3253 or 3244 with 18-19 is ok too.

[rbforster]

It's not a support double, if that's what you're asking. A simple rule for support doubles is that they only apply when your partner shows a major at the 1 level that might have 4 or might have 5+ cards. So when your double shows exactly 4 (since 1♠ shows 5+), there's no longer a need for support doubles - just bid support with 4 cards as opener and do something else with 3.

 

I think this is one of those "extras - do something" competitive doubles, but perhaps others have a more precise definition to offer.

[gwnn]

Just to add a point that is in no way related to your question, it's a support double if X shows 4-5 spades.

 

Otherwise it's what Helene said. Usually doubler does have 3 spades, much like a t/o x of their suit openings has at least 3 cards in each unbid major, but it is not mandatory.

[kenberg]

ok, something like this seemed right but I thought I would check back to see what opinion was. I guess, if the opponents pass over tis double, responder could bid 2S on a strong spade holding that he feels might play satisfactorily in a 4-3, especially if the three is someting like Qxx. More often than not if the auction begins like this it will end in a part score by one side or the other and I would hate to rule out the possibility of pushing them to 3H on a good 4-3 spade holding.

[Winstonm]

I think it is a game try - extra values.

 

If we extrapolate from responsive doubles, this opener's responsive double should agree spades. I would think this bid would show the equivalent to a jump to 2S had RHO not interfered.

 

The sequence of 1C-1H-X-P-2S is what has been lost to the 2H raise. I see no other use any more valuable than recapturing this invitational sequence.

[jdeegan]

:ph34r: Always answer a question with a question. So, here goes:

1♦-1♥-dbl-2♥

2♠

this must show 4 cards in spades or or a three card holding playable opposite four average spades along with a ruffing value.

1♦-1♥-dbl-2♥

2NT

what does this show? minors or a big balanced hand?

1♦-1♥-dbl-2♥

dbl

Is this 3-2-4-4 with weak spades or 3-3-4-3 and some decent playing values? Or, could it be 2-2-5-4 or 2-2-4-5? This is the question at hand.

 

Imho, we have to be able to get to 2♠ with a 4-3 fit, good trumps, and a ruffing value in the short hand. Consequenty, under these strictures, the double has to cater to this hand. Trouble is what do you do with good playing hands that are 2-2 in the majors?

All this is why I hate the idea of the initial negative double promising exactly 4 spades of any description. Either try modern methods with all sorts of artificial bids (e.g. bidding spades denies spades), or say that the double shows three spades or four unbiddable spades (worse than Q109x).

[Phil]

Shows extras and no good bid. I would expect 32, 31 or 22 in the majors.

[kenberg]

Shows extras and no good bid. I would expect 32, 31 or 22 in the majors.

If he is 3-2 in the majors then possibly you have no 8 card fit anywhere (a total of 5 hearts and 7 of everything else). Do you bid 2S over the double hoping to keep it low? Or do you only bid 2S only if your spades are good? Suppose you have an 8 count and a 4=3=2=4 shape.

 

I swear I have never seen this very simple auction discussed in print. Surely strong regular partnerships have discussed what it means and what is expected.

 

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me. I have no idea if anyone plays that agreement.

[Winstonm]

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me.

 

Ken,

 

I hadn't really thought too much about it but I attack these kinds of problems as reasoning problems. First, what is the problem? From my perspective, my partner will not know what I hold if I bid 2S - I could have a 3-card spade suit and be competing, 4 spades and weak, or hold 4 spades and enough to invite game but unwilling to bid 3S.

 

What other problem hands do I need to show? If I have a 3136 pattern I can bid my suit. If I am 3145 I could have a legitimate problem - however, if I only wanted to compete I could have bid 2S. So 3145 must be a pretty good hand - but would I make a minor-suit game try with that hand? Unlikely.

 

Besides, if I'm interested in competing in the minors why can't I bid 2N in this sequence? Surely it's not a natural 2N.

 

Basically, I can't find a better use than 4-card spade fit and mildly inviting to game.

[orlam]

Shows extras and no good bid. I would expect 32, 31 or 22 in the majors.

If he is 3-2 in the majors then possibly you have no 8 card fit anywhere (a total of 5 hearts and 7 of everything else). Do you bid 2S over the double hoping to keep it low? Or do you only bid 2S only if your spades are good? Suppose you have an 8 count and a 4=3=2=4 shape.

 

I swear I have never seen this very simple auction discussed in print. Surely strong regular partnerships have discussed what it means and what is expected.

 

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me. I have no idea if anyone plays that agreement.

Lol, I am from the other extreme - without RHO bidding 2H, a jump to 2S just shows a minimum with 4 spades for me, while 1S shows 3 spades. That's how I learned it, all the strong players around here seem to agree it's best, anyway.

[kenberg]

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me.

 

Ken,

 

I hadn't really thought too much about it but I attack these kinds of problems as reasoning problems. First, what is the problem? From my perspective, my partner will not know what I hold if I bid 2S - I could have a 3-card spade suit and be competing, 4 spades and weak, or hold 4 spades and enough to invite game but unwilling to bid 3S.

 

What other problem hands do I need to show? If I have a 3136 pattern I can bid my suit. If I am 3145 I could have a legitimate problem - however, if I only wanted to compete I could have bid 2S. So 3145 must be a pretty good hand - but would I make a minor-suit game try with that hand? Unlikely.

 

Besides, if I'm interested in competing in the minors why can't I bid 2N in this sequence? Surely it's not a natural 2N.

 

Basically, I can't find a better use than 4-card spade fit and mildly inviting to game.

Good. I took you to be saying "That's what I think it should mean" rather than "that's an agreement I have" and then while eating thought "he just told me it shows four spades and a good hand and I respond by saying I wonder if anyone plays that!"

 

We have been going back and forth on enough things that you probably trust my intent.

 

 

Assuming that it is like Phil and others say, denying four spades and showing extras, then I guess either an 18 count or a lot of shape. I have to think a bit to see how things might develop over that. My question to Phil was premature since I have not yet thought about this.

[Winstonm]

Shows extras and no good bid. I would expect 32, 31 or 22 in the majors.

If he is 3-2 in the majors then possibly you have no 8 card fit anywhere (a total of 5 hearts and 7 of everything else). Do you bid 2S over the double hoping to keep it low? Or do you only bid 2S only if your spades are good? Suppose you have an 8 count and a 4=3=2=4 shape.

 

I swear I have never seen this very simple auction discussed in print. Surely strong regular partnerships have discussed what it means and what is expected.

 

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me. I have no idea if anyone plays that agreement.

Lol, I am from the other extreme - without RHO bidding 2H, a jump to 2S just shows a minimum with 4 spades for me, while 1S shows 3 spades. That's how I learned it, all the strong players around here seem to agree it's best, anyway.

That's certainly playable, but I would think around my parts that competing in the Moysian fit would not be encouraged. (Remember Ken said double promises exactly 4S, so in the treatment you suggest you are confirming a 4/3 fit with the 1S bid.)

[Winstonm]

We have been going back and forth on enough things that you probably trust my intent.

 

Ken,

 

Not only do I trust your intent, but I trust your intellect, good nature, and ability to be open minded while at the same time holding an opposing viewpoint.

 

Those seem qualities in rare supply these days.

[kenberg]

Shows extras and no good bid. I would expect 32, 31 or 22 in the majors.

If he is 3-2 in the majors then possibly you have no 8 card fit anywhere (a total of 5 hearts and 7 of everything else). Do you bid 2S over the double hoping to keep it low? Or do you only bid 2S only if your spades are good? Suppose you have an 8 count and a 4=3=2=4 shape.

 

I swear I have never seen this very simple auction discussed in print. Surely strong regular partnerships have discussed what it means and what is expected.

 

The idea that it shows four spades and the values for a jump to 2S if rho had not bid had not occurred to me. I have no idea if anyone plays that agreement.

Lol, I am from the other extreme - without RHO bidding 2H, a jump to 2S just shows a minimum with 4 spades for me, while 1S shows 3 spades. That's how I learned it, all the strong players around here seem to agree it's best, anyway.

Bridge, it is a very interesting game!

[gnasher]

To the best of my recollection I have never seen this discussed in print.

It's discussed in Lawrence's Contested Auctions (pp 309-311). He suggests that it should show a good hand without an obvious bid, but he doesn't give an example for this specific auction. For the superficially similar auction

  1♦ 1♠ dbl 2♠

  dbl

he suggests a 2=3=5=3 shape. This auction is, of course, rather different, in that partner's exact heart length is unknown.

[kenberg]

Thanks for the reference. I have that book and I thought I had read it.

[RichMor]

Ken,

 

I would assume a simple default that just extends the support double concept. Opener can bid Spades with 4 and double the opps' Heart raise with 3 Spades. Just as if the bidding had gone: 1♦ - (P) - 1♠ - (2♥)

 

The 3-card double need not show extra values IMO.

 

RichM

[barmar]

The problem with "extending the support double concept" is that you're knowingly putting yourself into a Moysian fit. Support doubles are usually used only where partner's length is ambiguous, so you could end up in an 8+ fit, and it helps him know how high to compete.

 

Moysians don't usually play so well at low levels. When you're at game level you have values on the side that usually help you keep control while you deal with the trump situation, but at lower levels it's very easy to lose control of the hand. So it's not something you typically want to force your side into if you can avoid it.

[JLOL]

takeout, extra values.

[atlantajon]

Whats the problem?? Take-out with a good hand. My grandmother (that first taught me to play) would get that one.

 

An "X" is 99.9% of the time a form of a take-out. And barring a special agreement to the contrary...I fall back on that idea....

[y66]

Robson and Segal discuss 1C-(1S)-X-(2S)-X on page 185 of the pdf version of their book which is on file, with the authors' permission, at Dan Neill's site (halfway down under More stuff).

 

They describe the second X as a hand that wants to compete but doesn't want to guess the right strain, for example,

 

5 AJ6 K1074 AJ986

 

5 K106 KQ7 AQ8653

 

5 A6 K743 AQ10865

 

They also discuss sequences like the ones jdeegan mentions a few pages later.

[kenberg]

Thank you greatly. That reference, and the whole page of references, should keep me busy for a while.

 

As was observed, 1m-(1S)-X is a slightly different beginning since responder could have five hearts but lack the strength for bidding 2H.

 

In the case 1m-(1H)-X of course (as usually played) he has exactly four spades.

 

Either way, it is interesting to think about what happens.next.

 

In the examples you cite, often opener has a stiff in the opponent's (spade) suit.

 

Consider 1D-(1H)-X-2H where openers shape is 3-1-5-4. Responder is known to hold four spades and will often hold four hearts (on this auction when opener holds♠ a stiff). This could get a little tricky since he cannot be sure of exactly your shape. Opener has extras and both opponents are bidding. Responder may well have modest values, AQxx/ xxxx/ xx/xxx. And now? Pass and lead a D? Bid 2S allowing a scramble if opener is 3-1-5-4?

 

Anyway the majority view holds strongly that the X of 2H is for take-out with even Atlantajon's granny weighing in. I'll buy it but I see there are alternative ideas of interest (to me anyway).

 

Tanks all, especially for the references to Lawrence and Robson/Segal (since it makes agreement easier).

[lexlogan]

1♦-(1♥)-X-(2♥)-X? Seems like responsive double conditions apply (opener, in this case, "responding" to the negative double) -- the opponents have bid and raised a suit, doubler is short in their suit and therefore ought to compete but is uncertain of strain. With 3=2=4=4 or perhaps 3=1=5=4, odds are responder has a 4 card minor, and you'd want him to bid it; if he's 4333 or similar, the 4-3 spade fit should be OK. In other words, the key point for me is not the three card spade support, but the heart shortage with a choice of places to play. 2=2=5=4 (or 2=2=4=5, if that's your style) is also possible; opener can pull 2S to his long minor.

[Winstonm]

1♦-(1♥)-X-(2♥)-X? Seems like responsive double conditions apply (opener, in this case, "responding" to the negative double) -- the opponents have bid and raised a suit, doubler is short in their suit and therefore ought to compete but is uncertain of strain. With 3=2=4=4 or perhaps 3=1=5=4, odds are responder has a 4 card minor, and you'd want him to bid it; if he's 4333 or similar, the 4-3 spade fit should be OK. In other words, the key point for me is not the three card spade support, but the heart shortage with a choice of places to play. 2=2=5=4 (or 2=2=4=5, if that's your style) is also possible; opener can pull 2S to his long minor.

I viewed this much the same way - as a responsive double. But the meaning then depends on how you use 2N. If 2N in this sequence is good/bad, then double may have to take on more duties. On the other hand, 2N could simply be competing in the minors, the 2254, 2155, and 2164 hands. If so, the double is not needed for minor-oriented hands. And if then we wanted to compete in spades with 3 of them we could just bid 2S.

 

So it appears to me its meaning has most to do with the neaning of 2N in this sequence. If 2N is minors, then I see my conclusion as most reasoned. If 2N is not minors - say good/bad - then I like your conclusions best.

 

Edit: thought I'd mention that this sequence seems to me a perfect time to utilize a G/B 2NT treatment.