Choose and plan

[paulg]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=s8xxxhkqdakxxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(2♠) Dbl (3♠) ?[/hv]

What's your poison?

 

If you double, then how do you plan to bid after a 4♣, 4♦ or 4♥ response?

 

Paul

[zheddh]

4NT for minors?

[the hog]

X. Bid 4D over 4C, raise 4D to 5 and pass 4H, as this should show 5.

[Codo]

I would bid 5 diamond, with no big sorrows.

 

Pass is out, double shows two places to play, 3 NT a little bid more then 8xxx and what else can I do?

 

If we play in a 4-3 fit, this can be ugly, but at least the short hand will ruff.

[andy_h]

I will double.

 

Over 4♣ I will bid 4♠ which will agree clubs. I guess I will luck out on being in the 4-4 diamond fit if partner is 1345 and if partner actually has 1444 he should probably bid 4♦ knowing that if my 2 places to play were in clubs and hearts I can remove 4♦ to 4♥.

 

Over 4♦ I will bid 4♠ as well.

 

Over 4♥ is a bit tougher. Some decent minimums can most likely take 11 tricks making 5lvl safe like x AJxxx Qxx AKxx or maybe we can still belong in 6♦ with x AJxxx QJxx AKx so I think I will still bid 4♠ even though this may first assume hearts are agreed.

 

I don't particularly like what others have suggested. I think we can still have slam potential as we have extras for our responsive x so I definitely will want to investigate that whilst trying to look for our best fit. If I bid say 4♠ that wastes a whole level of bidding without any suit implied. If we bid 4NT partner will always bid 5♣ with say 1444 or 1534.

[Jlall]

and if partner actually has 1444 he should probably bid 4♦ knowing that if my 2 places to play were in clubs and hearts I can remove 4♦ to 4♥.

Bet you wouldn't be saying that if you were 4234!

[Free]

I'd just bid 4♦

[gnasher]

Does double followed by 4♦ show x44x? Or would that hand double and bid 4♥?

[Jlall]

Does double followed by 4♦ show x44x? Or would that hand double and bid 4♥?

X then 4D shows H+D, X then 4H shows H+C imo.

[mcphee]

I need to start with dble. I do not want to blast 5D when I could easily make 6.

over 4C response I will try 4D and should partner bid 4H I will bounce us to 6C. If they raise D, I will also.

over 4D I will try 4S.

over 4H I will try 6D, I think partner must be 5-4-4 to bid 4H

[ONEferBRID]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=s8xxxhkqdakxxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(2♠) Dbl (3♠) ?[/hv]

What's your poison?

 

If you double, then how do you plan to bid after a 4♣, 4♦ or 4♥ response?

 

Paul

A DBL by Advancer is NOT a Responsive DBL.

 

a) 1M - X - 2M - X = T/O for the minors because

if you have the other Major ( oM ), you just bid it .

 

So analogously:

b ) 2M - X - 3M - X = also could/would/should be T/O for the minors ?

The Root and Pavlicek reference also says the 2nd DBL is NOT a Responsive DBL, but it didn't specifically define it as T/O for the minors.

It was just in their list of auctions that were NOT Responsive DBLs.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sooo, what is my plan ?

I will DBL = T/O for the minors.

If partner ( Overcaller) bids 4H, I agree with Hog that it must be 5+ cards and

we could be in slam territory. Partner has to have shortness in Spades.

If 4S now is RKCB, I'll bid that.

 

If partner bids 4C would 4D next be forcing? then I'd bid that.

If partner bids 4D, I'll cue 4H.

 

- - Don - -

[Fluffy]

This hand is making me hate this game.

 

I am bidding 5♦. If my minors were reversed I would try 4NT, but as it is I don't trust partner to find the right fit with equal lenght.

[Hanoi5]

I like The Hog's approach.

[gnasher]

X then 4D shows H+D, X then 4H shows H+C imo.

I almost agree. I think that:

- Double then 4♦ is non-forcing with the reds

- Double then 4♥ shows four hearts and an unspecified minor, willing to play five of the minor.

[paulg]

X then 4D shows H+D, X then 4H shows H+C imo.

I almost agree. I think that:

- Double then 4♦ is non-forcing with the reds

- Double then 4♥ shows four hearts and an unspecified minor, willing to play five of the minor.

At the table I wondered whether 4♦ would be forcing after 4♣ and it is clearly important.

 

With so little space I think 4♦ has to be forcing here otherwise you are struggling with many strongish hands. A hand that wishes to make a non-forcing 4♦ showing the red suits just has to bid 4♥ directly over 3♠.

[nige1]

This hand is making me hate this game. I am bidding 5♦. If my minors were reversed I would try 4NT, but as it is I don't trust partner to find the right fit with equal lenght.

I agree with all three of Fluffy's statements :(

IMO 5♦ = 10, _X = 9, 4♠ = 7, 4N = 6, 5N = 4, 4♦ = 3, 3N = 2.

[pooltuna]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=s8xxxhkqdakxxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(2♠) Dbl (3♠) ?[/hv]

What's your poison?

 

If you double, then how do you plan to bid after a 4♣, 4♦ or 4♥ response?

 

Paul

Depends on what I think of partner. Is he a player who has his TOX of 2♠? Or is he a player who thinks a TOX of 2♠ is the same as a TOX of 1♠. If the former I X and raise his suit to slam.

[nigel_k]

Great problem.

 

I think we want to play (at least) game in partner's longest minor and 5♦ if equal. If we bid 5♦ his minors could be 3-5 and if we bid 4NT he'll usually choose clubs with 4-4. Double and remove 4♣ to 4♦ suggests red suits.

 

I think double and remove 4♣ to 4NT is the best plan. I hope partner will interpret this as clubs with better diamonds. With primary club support we would bid 4♠ or 5♣.

[Phil]

I'll start with a double. I will probably hear a non-forcing 4♣.

 

Over 4♣, I will try 4♠ which should be a probe for the best game.

[Jlall]

X then 4D shows H+D, X then 4H shows H+C imo.

I almost agree. I think that:

- Double then 4♦ is non-forcing with the reds

- Double then 4♥ shows four hearts and an unspecified minor, willing to play five of the minor.

hmm I think X then 4D non forcing is really strange.

 

How about if X then 4D is forcing doing that, then if partner converts to 4H bidding 5C? Maybe that's how you would bid xx KQxx AKxxx Ax though, but seems kind of cool if it could show this.

[Jlall]

Also I have never been able to get over the fact that this is all really unplayable if you can ever stop in 4 of a minor.

 

For instance, we want to double with 4H and a minor and game going values. But if the takeout Xers 4m response to the responsive double is non forcing, what does he do with a good hand? Seems like he can never bypass 4H with 4 hearts and a good hand, but he can't bid 4 of a minor non forcing with a good hand, so 4H can be a strong hand with 4 hearts, or any hand with 5 hearts? Doesn't seem great. The alternative of the takeout Xer jumping to 5 of a minor if he has 4 hearts and 5 of a minor is bad too if responsive Xer might have 4 hearts.

 

We also have the issue of slam bidding. If the takeout doubler has a strong hand but nothing is forcing and he doesn't know much about how the hands fit since the responsive doubler can have such a wide range of hands for that bid, he is forced to make a non forcing 4 level bid or a non forcing 5 level bid, the latter still having a wide range, or jumping to slam. Not great.

 

We also have the issue that responsive doubler might make a responsive double with a ONE suited minor hand, like AKQxxx of clubs and out, trying to get to 3N. That's great except what if the T/O double hand jumps to 5D expecting responder to have 2 suits? Not great.

 

Which reminds me of an auction Zia and Rosenberg had. It went:

 

2S X 3S X

P 5C p 5D

P ?

 

Rosenberg thought Zia should have diamonds and hearts, and corrected to 5H. Zia had like 6 solid diamonds and no spade stopper and now had to correct to 6D.

 

Basically there are just too many issues to resolve, and too many hand types to resolve. In my opinion the best solution that solves the most problems is to play the responsive double as game forcing. The t/o Xer never has to jump to 5 of aminor now, and responsive doubler can freely bid X then 4D forcing, etc.

 

Unfortunately I haven't sold anyone on this idea, because the fact is you need to get in there with some light responsive doubles and it sucks if you can't stop in 4 of a minor then. If you aren't getting there with working 9 counts you're just putting too much pressure on your partner. I think shrugging and getting too high when youre both min is your best option though. We've all gone down.

 

So basically, I have no Fing clue but this is a really complicated auction.

[Jlall]

Also I think that the people who think X then 4S or X then 4N will be interpretted as choice of games are dreaming.

[paulg]

So basically, I have no Fing clue but this is a really complicated auction.

But it seems so simple, which is why none of us have actually discussed it in depth (as far as I can tell).

 

The actual hand is pretty irrelevant, as both LHO and partner had made calls that the panel would object to (especially the one that did not work), but I thought it was a really interesting situation.

 

Given number of issues raised, I just need to find another couple of 'simple' problems and there'll be enough material for a book!

[gnasher]

If you're willing to play double-4C-4D as forcing, then you can play

 

dbl-4m-4H = hearts + an unknown minor. Aggressor doesn't usually need to know what the minor is in order to decide whether to play 4♥.

 

dbl-4C-4D = doubt about strain - 4-3 or 5-3 in the minors, or a strong 3-card heart holding

[gnasher]

Basically there are just too many issues to resolve, and too many hand types to resolve. In my opinion the best solution that solves the most problems is to play the responsive double as game forcing. The t/o Xer never has to jump to 5 of aminor now, and responsive doubler can freely bid X then 4D forcing, etc.

 

Unfortunately I haven't sold anyone on this idea, because the fact is you need to get in there with some light responsive doubles and it sucks if you can't stop in 4 of a minor then. If you aren't getting there with working 9 counts you're just putting too much pressure on your partner. I think shrugging and getting too high when youre both min is your best option though. We've all gone down.

Are you suggesting this only after they opened a weak two, or after a one-level opening as well?

 

If you would double 1♠ on a 3433 13-count, you don't really want to drive the five-level with a 2344 10-count. Things won't usually be as bad as that, because you can usually rely on the opponents to have nine spades between them. However, if they knew that your responsive double would be game-forcing, they might start making more 3♠ raises.