Pass or double?

[Phil]

I pretty much always neg X with 3-4 and an invitational hand. If the auction goes say 1S 2D X 3D p p 3S, imo that's what I am showing.

 

The usual reason for supporting immediately is to avoid getting preempted before I get to raise, but with a hand like this I'm not particularly worried about that.

I don't negative double with support in most partnerships, but I use 3♦ to show a low ODR raise and usually three trump. 2N is a higher ODR raise with usually four trump. Both are limit +.

 

So if I called this a 3 card / low ODR raise, I would definitely make a forcing pass (if available) with this since I have zero wastage.

 

If I wasn't playing this I would make a negative double with this hand type and reserve a cue bid for my second meaning above.

[cherdanno]

I pretty much always neg X with 3-4 and an invitational hand. If the auction goes say 1S 2D X 3D p p 3S, imo that's what I am showing.

 

The usual reason for supporting immediately is to avoid getting preempted before I get to raise, but with a hand like this I'm not particularly worried about that.

I don't negative double with support in most partnerships, but I use 3♦ to show a low ODR raise and usually three trump. 2N is a higher ODR raise with usually four trump. Both are limit +.

 

So if I called this a 3 card / low ODR raise, I would definitely make a forcing pass (if available) with this since I have zero wastage.

Phil you are really off-base here to make a forcing pass.

 

Yes AK in side suits can be neutral in terms of ODR, but here

- you have the worst possible shape, and

- the worst possible trump holding, and

- Axx in their suit! Either they have 9 trumps only, or you have A in their suit facing a void with partner, both of which would be screaming for defense. xxx AKxx xxx Axx would already be a much more reasonable forcing pass (but still a double in my view).

[Phil]

I pretty much always neg X with 3-4 and an invitational hand. If the auction goes say 1S 2D X 3D p p 3S, imo that's what I am showing.

 

The usual reason for supporting immediately is to avoid getting preempted before I get to raise, but with a hand like this I'm not particularly worried about that.

I don't negative double with support in most partnerships, but I use 3♦ to show a low ODR raise and usually three trump. 2N is a higher ODR raise with usually four trump. Both are limit +.

 

So if I called this a 3 card / low ODR raise, I would definitely make a forcing pass (if available) with this since I have zero wastage.

Phil you are really off-base here to make a forcing pass.

 

Yes AK in side suits can be neutral in terms of ODR, but here

- you have the worst possible shape, and

- the worst possible trump holding, and

- Axx in their suit! Either they have 9 trumps only, or you have A in their suit facing a void with partner, both of which would be screaming for defense. xxx AKxx xxx Axx would already be a much more reasonable forcing pass (but still a double in my view).

I would be surprised if partner held a diamond void, since its not as likely as a stiff and the fact our LHO doubled instead of raising. Many GF hands that everyone seem so hung up on in this discussion that are reserved for FPs are usually nothing more than useful 11 counts once duplication is taken out.

 

I'm getting back to my old habits of backing a position I never even supported in the first place :angry: , and I need to stop that. Instead of getting a sensible discussion about an alternative view, we waste time with discussions about 'reasonableness'.

[Fluffy]

I'm getting back to my old habits of backing a position I never even supported in the first place :) , and I need to stop that. Instead of getting a sensible discussion about an alternative view, we waste time with discussions about 'reasonableness'.

Don't listen to them phil :), I love your arguments, I would seriously though about making a forcing pass with this 3 bullets if we were vulnerable, but the shape is too horrible.

[neilkaz]

For me even if pass is forcing this is a WTP double. Good defence..poor offence.

[mcphee]

I do not believe this should be a F pass situation as you have no idea why partner bid game.

 

I also prefer neg dble rather than the cue bid.

 

Double , I have no interest in bidding 5.

[aguahombre]

Neg double the first time might or might not have been our choice. But, now aren't we better off having bid 3D? Aren't we more comfortable doubling after having shown spade support? Aren't we better off knowing partner chose not to involve us further by bidding 3H, 4C, redouble, 3NT, or 4D?

 

Ok, maybe partner would have bid 4H after neg double (redoubled), and that would make things different.

[barryallen]

Make things easy for partner, he could have a hand where he is left with a very difficult decision, impossible to get right by your silence. Passing makes him guess where there should be no guess. You have very good defensive values and you should let partner know that fact, double.

[pooltuna]

I do not believe this should be a F pass situation as you have no idea why partner bid game.

 

I also prefer neg dble rather than the cue bid.

 

Double , I have no interest in bidding 5.

you have to draw the line somewhere on FP and partner opening the bidding and me qbidding support, regardless of whether you agree that is the right call, should push us over that line. This is really a non-issue for this hand as I agree the double is clear.