xxxx

[gwnn]

xxxx

Axx

Axx

Kxx

 

1♥-p-2♥-x

3♥-?

 

if vul/scoring matters please specify in what manner does it affect your decision.

[bill1157]

pass wtp bid 3[_SP? too dangerous.

Bill

[manudude03]

3♠ for me, closer to 4♠ than pass.

[the hog]

pass wtp bid 3[_SP? too dangerous.

Bill

PASS????

Totally obvious 3S and even slightly tempted to venture 4.

[Jlall]

I don't like problems where no vulnerability or form of scoring is given, you are basically asking us 8 different bidding problems this way. I think I would bid game via 4H vul at imps, and bid 3S white at MP.

 

red/red at matchpoints I'm really tempted to double them, and think I would, but it would depend on the opps and partner's style (I could see myself bidding 3S sometimes). FWIW I think double is penalty and not cards.

 

red/white at MP I would bid 3S usually, maybe 4H depending on partner's style.

 

White/red at imps I would bid 3S.

 

w/w at imps I guess I'd bid 4H but could see myself bidding 3S depending on partner's style.

[aguahombre]

What is double here? If a variation of MOD inviting game in spades, I would do it. If penalty, per Justin, or mushy responsive, then what the heck....4S at all vuls.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, clear cut.

 

Depends of course, how serious you are playing OBAR actions,

for us, the X is a prebal. action, i.e. 3S now is the same as raising

a bal. action, ..., a good way to stop p from making prebal.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Trinidad]

This ranges from a penalty double at pairs against vulnerable opps to 3♠ or 4♠ at IMPs. This is actually a very nice example of how much influence the form of scoring and vulnerability can have on your decision.

 

Rik

[the hog]

Pass, clear cut.

 

Depends of course, how serious you are playing OBAR actions,

for us, the X is a prebal. action, i.e. 3S now is the same as raising

a bal. action, ..., a good way to stop p from making prebal.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

So when partner holds:

 

AKxx

x

Qxxx

QJxx

 

the opponents get to pay in 3H. This ides not look like an optimum method to me. Please don't say thae above hand would x again, because it simply isn't good enough.

[aguahombre]

yep. OBAR strikes fear in center opponent, Mr. Hog seems correct in his analysis.

[pirate22]

step up to the PLATE bid 3 sp regards

[aguahombre]

step up to the PLATE bid 3 sp regards

So, my 4S is stepping up too close to the plate without a helmet?

[pooltuna]

pass wtp bid 3[_SP? too dangerous.

Bill

not as dangerous as pass unless miraculously you expect protection :P

[suokko]

Is double here for penalties?

 

If not then it could be good bid showing doubt about what is the contract. I don't realy like the idea that I have to ruff ♥ to partners hand where the good trumps are. 4-1♠ might be disaster for ♠ contract. Partner might even have 3-1-(45) or 3-2-4-4 shape quite often when biding 3NT looks wining action.

 

Of course in MP you want to hit them for one or two down and they are a lot more likely not to hold their bid than in IMPs. So meaning of double could change depending on scoring.

[DWM]

with "THE LAW" in mind I think 3♠ is a clear bid. They have 9/10 hearts and we have 8 spades. Also Partner should have a opening hand or just below so we should have the balanace of points, or at worst 20/20.

 

Over 4♥ I think double rather than 4♠, trusting opositions first bids suggests to me that game would be low percentage, also if we have game they are more than likley to be at least 2 down.

[whereagles]

Opposite me, a discrete 2♠ is probably plenty. Opposite someone else, 3♠ :)

[aguahombre]

nothing discreet about an insufficient bid.

[whereagles]

Oh sorry. You're right. Didn't see opener's raise. 3♠ then, in all scenarios lol.

[gnasher]

I'd make a responsive double at all forms of scoring and all vulnerabilities. The thought of driving game when we might not even have a fit makes me ill.

[aguahombre]

I'd make a responsive double at all forms of scoring and all vulnerabilities. The thought of driving game when we might not even have a fit makes me ill.

I thought a resp double denied 4 of the focus major. Honestly asking if I am wrong about that.

[cherdanno]

I'd make a responsive double at all forms of scoring and all vulnerabilities.  The thought of driving game when we might not even have a fit makes me ill.

I thought a resp double denied 4 of the focus major. Honestly asking if I am wrong about that.

That's how many people would play it here. I think a responsive double of 2H absolutely denies 4 spades for everyone, one of 2S would deny four hearts for most, and one of 3H denies 4 spades only for some. So you are right and wrong, I think :lol:

 

Btw, I was surprised Justin plays this double as penalty, I would have thought responsive is normal.

[gnasher]

I thought a resp double denied 4 of the focus major. Honestly asking if I am wrong about that.

That's a popular way to play it, and, I believe, more-or-less normal in North America. Lawrence, for example, says that, when their suit is a major, the responsive double denies the other major.

 

Another style, probably the most common in the UK, is to play that it shows two places to play, and one of these might be the unbid major. That enables you to avoid a bad 4-3 fit when partner doesn't have four of them. This style works best if you're allowed to develop the auction in peace, but less well if they bid again (which they probably won't in this sequence).

 

In this sequence, I'd expect partner to bid 3♠ if he had four of them; if I didn't have four spades myself I'd remove to 3NT or four of a minor.

 

On this hand, a responsive double will work well if partner bids 3♠ or passes. If instead we end up in four of a minor, that will be a good thing if he has five of them, but less good if he has only four.