What is your bid?

[Phil]

In all this back-and-forth, I still do not know what Han would bid here, but I appreciate his ambivalence. If he doubles, I await his continuations over a 2♥ response from partner. The idea about inviting is sound however, we are very awkwardly placed in this not-so-unlikely case. Mike, how many of your 65 cases had partner rebidding 2♥?

 

Sarcasm aside, I think this is a very tough hand, but I've always liked the pass / 2♠ over a double approach, and I strongly disagree that partner will have a harder time deciding what to do if we take this route as compared to anything else, since this is a great description.

 

Having said that I realize that I am in really bad shape if LHO raises to 2♠ by passing initially.

[mikeh]

Having said that I realize that I am in really bad shape if LHO raises to 2♠ by passing initially.

Are you? Is double purely penalty? I can't see that as a useful treatment, given that there has been a raise. I would see this hand-type as far more relevant: not necessarily 4=3=3=3...what would we be bidding with 3=3=4=3 and the same values?

 

It seems to me that if we knew LHO was raising to 2♠, we might well prefer pass to double....we surely don't want to encourage partner to bid aggressively with 4 hearts on such hands....and won't he bid aggressively with a stiff or void spade?

 

On the actual hand, of course, an aggressive approach by him in hearts works very well, but on the actual hand, the odds of a raise by LHO seem low....LHO will almost always have a very flat weak hand with, in all likelihood, a poor 3 card spade holding.

 

As for how many hands, in my simulation, bid 2♥, I can't say....I was in a bit of a hurry and didn't look at that nor did I save my sample.

[Phil]

Are you? Is double purely penalty? I can't see that as a useful treatment, given that there has been a raise. I would see this hand-type as far more relevant: not necessarily 4=3=3=3...what would we be bidding with 3=3=4=3 and the same values?

 

It seems to me that if we knew LHO was raising to 2♠, we might well prefer pass to double....we surely don't want to encourage partner to bid aggressively with 4 hearts on such hands....and won't he bid aggressively with a stiff or void spade?

 

On the actual hand, of course, an aggressive approach by him in hearts works very well, but on the actual hand, the odds of a raise by LHO seem low....LHO will almost always have a very flat weak hand with, in all likelihood, a poor 3 card spade holding.

 

As for how many hands, in my simulation, bid 2♥, I can't say....I was in a bit of a hurry and didn't look at that nor did I save my sample.

 

Without any type of advanced discussion, I would think pass/double is penalty. I hope no one suggests "pard can figure it out" because in every case pard will have short spades. Pass/double to show this hand type is a little weird but useful here, but I would say that it is more useful to play x as 2353 type hands that have no useful bid over 1♠, especially since when partner has very short spades a lot of the time he can find a x over 2♠ himself.

 

While we are at it, what's 2N after 2♠?

[mikestar13]

2♠ is the best of of bad lot--partner will likely bid NT with a ♠ stop. I hate 4-3s when short hand has no ruffs, 5♣ seems to unlikely opposite this shapeless mess.