1eyedjack Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Can't believe that I haven't thrashed this out in my head before. Playing negative free bids the problem disappears completely. This question is not about whether it is good or bad to play negative free bids. Take it as read that, for this purpose you are NOT playing them. I am also aware of the increasing popularity of using double and beyond as transfers after an overcall. Again, problem disappears, but assume you are not playing that either. In other words, back to classical bog standard. So, in principle, a new suit (at least by a non-passed hand) is forcing, while a negative double followed by a new suit is non-forcing, showing decent shape but limited in high card strength. OK, now consider the auction (focus on East) W.....N......E......S1♣...1♥.....X......P??....P......2♠ It seems to me that if I am prepared to force to 2♠ then, with a limited hand and compensating extra Spade length, it costs little to nothing to start off with 1♠ initially, even if it is (at that stage) forcing, since either route is going to get me to (at least) 2♠ by the time I get to show my true Spade length. Starting with 1♠ rates to have some advantages: I get to show more of my Spades in one go, which (1) may affect opener's rebid (he may be able to support with 3) and (2) protects us slightly against further bidding by opponents. This got me to thinking: If I am going to start with double on a 4 card Spade suit, and start with 1♠ on any hand worth bidding that has 5 or more Spades, what meaning is contained in an initial double and 2♠ follow-up? Possibilities for artificial treatments abound, but if you are that way inclined you might as well revert to using X as transfer to Spades and 1♠ as some other transfer or artificial bid. I guess I am asking ... what is normal standard SAYC expectation with a pickup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_c Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I'd say this doesn't exist unless you've discussed something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I recall a similar sequence in a very old Bridge World MSC... from a time when negative doubles were still looked on with some scepticism by many leading players, and even their users weren't entirely sure what they were doing... the form of negative double most of us use these days is quite different from what Roth espoused when he introduced the concept. Anyway, if memory serves (I bought the collection... I wasn't old enough to play bridge back when this was actually printed) some suggested that the sequence show a strong 4 card suit, interested in a moysian. I don't recall the consensus.. plus this may have been in the days of Morehead, who simply announced what he thought was right, and there was no such thing as a vote. The bid doesn't exist in my vocabulary. I have never seen it in 36 years of play, so I am not going to worry about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Surprised at Mike, I have seen bids like this several times. I have had debates before and the general consensus is that it's either 4 spades 6 of the minor that isn't openers and weak, or 4 spades and a balanced invitational hand so you can stop in 2♠ if partner wants. I like the first treatment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Surprised at Mike, I have seen bids like this several times. I have had debates before and the general consensus is that it's either 4 spades 6 of the minor that isn't openers and weak, or 4 spades and a balanced invitational hand so you can stop in 2♠ if partner wants. I like the first treatment. I suspect you have played in more avant-garde circles than I have.. I rarely travel and the Frozen North is not a hot-bed of bridge theory, at least out in these Kokish-deprived regions. I like the idea.. I may in fact spring it on an unsuspecting partner one day. Actually, in one partnership, we already play that in an uncontested auction, 1minor - 2♠ shows 4 spades, 6 in the other minor and a weak hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dicklont Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Yesterday I had this auction:1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl - 2♥3♣ - 3♥ - 3♠ - pass4♠ - all pass The trump suit was AK109 - Q65Opener had a stiff heart and spades were 3-3, result: an easy +650.This sequence was undiscussed but both players assumed that responder proposed to play in the moysian fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Without agreements, I can logically come to the conclusion that he has 4-card spade suit and longer diamonds, maybe even six. I also assume that responder did not make a mistake in the first round of bidding so he has denied 5 or more spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted March 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Without agreements, I can logically come to the conclusion that he has 4-card spade suit and longer diamonds, maybe even six. I also assume that responder did not make a mistake in the first round of bidding so he has denied 5 or more spades. I would have thought that doubling and then following up with some number of Diamonds would show 4 Spades and and 6 Diamonds. Whatever, I don't feel so stupid about asking the question,now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.