He doubles then bids

[Hanoi5]

White vs Red, you deal and hold:

 

♠T8x

♥QJx

♦J7x

♣7632

 

Pa-1♦-X-Pa

1♥-Pa-1♠-Pa

???

 

Do you agree with 1♥? What do you bid now?

[Finch]

(i) No.

(ii) I pass. Double-then-bid at the 1-level doesn't show a 2C opening, and that's pretty much what we need to make game.

[awm]

I'd bid 2♠. Something like ♠AKxxxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣AKx will offer good play for game, and I don't think that's even necessarily a maximum for partner's sequence.

[Hanoi5]

Is 2♣ better than 1♥?

[tolvyrj]

Personally i would have bid 2♣ on the first round and now i bid 2 ♠. I dont know what prd has and i dont care, if s/he bids like that my duty is to tell i have trump support.

[gwnn]

I would have bid 2♣, I don't like distorting major suits. I don't mind playing in a 4-2 fit every now and again.

 

I pass 1♠ or 2♠, our hand is very soft.

[menggq]

I agree with bid 1♥ and then pass 1♠.

[jillybean]

No!, pass

[Yu18772]

I would bid 2♣, and pass the ♠.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 2♠. Something like ♠AKxxxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣AKx will offer good play for game, and I don't think that's even necessarily a maximum for partner's sequence.

 

Do you think this hand is likely when the opponents haven't competed?

[Hanoi5]

Is this one likely:

 

AKxxxx

x

ATx

AKx

 

Or this one:

 

♠AKxxxx

♥Ax

♦ATx

♣AQ

 

They led a diamond (normal) and spades were 2-2, one of the round-suits finesses was right, making 5.

[gwnn]

1♠ is a very big underbid.

[the hog]

I think a 1H bid is pretty obvious on the first round. I pass now.

[pooltuna]

White vs Red, you deal and hold:

 

♠T8x

♥QJx

♦J7x

♣7632

 

Pa-1♦-X-Pa

1♥-Pa-1♠-Pa

???

 

Do you agree with 1♥? What do you bid now?

 

I pass because partner had multiple choices of calls over 1♥. viz 2♦, 2♠, 3♠, besides the call he chose. So yeah he has extra values but not enough extras for me to look for game with my hand

[pooltuna]

1♠ is a very big underbid.

 

This is an understatement :)

[benlessard]

1- I like 1H lead consideration are important here.

 

2- its much easier to construct hands where 2S is going down than hands where game is making. So pass is clear.

 

AKQJx with 2A or AK with and stiff ou xx in H.

 

 

I would bid 2S with both hands showned not close imo. I can bid 1S pretty heavy if i got 5 of them with with 6 i feel safe at 2S, also when partner got Qx,xxxx,xxx,QTxx I dont want to play 1S making 6.

[Finch]

Is this one likely:

 

AKxxxx

x

ATx

AKx

 

Or this one:

 

♠AKxxxx

♥Ax

♦ATx

♣AQ

 

They led a diamond (normal) and spades were 2-2, one of the round-suits finesses was right, making 5.

 

The first one is possible but a maximum for 1S.

The second is not a 1S bid, what do you think a 2S bid looks like? You've got 3S available if you want to show an even stronger hand.

[ahydra]

The first one is possible but a maximum for 1S.

The second is not a 1S bid, what do you think a 2S bid looks like? You've got 3S available if you want to show an even stronger hand.

 

For me I'd bid 2C then pass 1S - balanced 4 counts aren't all that great to be honest :)

 

These hands are MASSIVE for 1S. I'd expect something like a decent 14 count to a bad 17 count for 1S. With the first hand I'd probably bid 2S; with the second, cuebid then bid spades. 21 HCP! Not to mention the CQ is almost worth a full trick on the bidding.

 

ahydra

[tolvyrj]

Decent 14 aint possible IMO and not bad 16 either. Both of those cases prd; at least mine, bids 1 ♠ immediately.

My biggest fear is that he has some big 2 suiter. Pass over 1 ♠ in this sequence shows mistrust to prds bidding; wheter it in this particular case is right or not.

With doubleton ♠, maybe, but not with 3 card support.

[dake50]

The point of deviation 1H (only 3-suit) was to get out cheap.

Aren't we out cheap by pass? Did partner have stronger bid(s)?

He chose 2S. Quit.

[olien]

I 100% agree with 1♥. It keeps the bidding low and makes allowances for partner's possible off-shape t/o doubles. I like my partner to be able to double with 4=4=3=2 or similar with less than adequate ♣ support.

 

I don't understand these people that would pass 1♠ because 2 might be too high. These are the same people that would bid 2♣ on the previous round to avoid "distorting" major suit length. Isn't 2♣ likely to propel one too high? Also, because RHO couldn't find a bid over the X, isn't it likely that partner has a strong hand? Say he has a balanced 19 count and I chose to bid 2♣, wouldn't I prefer to play 1NT instead of 2NT? We can't play 1NT after I respond 2♣. Also, say you X and bid 2♣ and partner bids 2♠, would you pass that also? If you would, then you're playing partner to have about 17-19 HCP that don't work opposite yours with inadequate distribution and expecting partner to leap to 3♠ to show that hand which really cramps the auction and can make judging the correct game (3NT or 4♠) more difficult.

 

With these flat hands that are weak I prefer to respond in a 3-card major to a 4-card minor to partner's takeout X. Get in - Get out works well for me and its much easier to get out after a 1♥ bid. It won't be the end of the world if we play a ♥ contract on a 4-3 fit since my QJx of ♥ will make the suit a bit more solid opposite partner's ♥ support. Also, partner shouldn't be leaping around with a 4-card ♥ fit and a hand that's unsure about playing 3NT or 4♥. Partner should give the courtesy of a cue-bid and then support to offer a choice of games.

 

I would give the courtesy raise from 1♠ to 2♠ because my X and bid style is very conservative (my 1-level overcalls are about 7-18 HCP, and I know this isn't "standard"). Also, its unlikely the opponents are going to let us play 1♠, and if they balance are we not going to compete to 2♠ then? For those who play that 1♥ is natural and denies having as many as 8 or 9 points, the raise to 2♠ should show about 4-7(8) HCP and partner can still make game tries opposite that, but if we had a full invite opposite the X and 1♠ bid, could we not just bid 3♠ over 1♠? The 1♥ bid has also left us better placed as after our raise to 2♠ partner will be able to judge that we probably have some ♥ values.

[whereagles]

I'd bid 2♠. Something like ♠AKxxxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣AKx will offer good play for game, and I don't think that's even necessarily a maximum for partner's sequence.

 

You're right. That's WAY over a max. It's a 2♠ jump rebid over 1♥.

 

I'd just pass, since pard is much more likely to have instead

 

♠AKxxx

♥Kxx

♦Qx

♣AKx

[whereagles]

I don't understand these people that would pass 1♠ because 2 might be too high.

 

It's not that 2♠ might be too high. It's just that pard, who's aching to bid, will fire away at what might be a hopeless game at the slightest excuse. And 2♠ might just be the excuse we needs.

 

Sure, in the end one might point out he hasn't a game bid over 2♠, but it's at table where the battle are won.

 

I'm ok with 1♥, by the way. Can also live with 2♣. It doesn't matter much.

[rhm]

Is 2♣ better than 1♥?

Yes

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

Rainer, 2♣ is ok but in the long run I think 1♥ is slightly better.

 

The reason is our weak hand antecipates a strong rebid by doubler, in which case we're better placed if we bid 1♥. Doubler's eventual rebid of 2♠/2NT over a 2♣ advance becomes 1♠/1NT over a 1♥, a whole 1 level below.

 

Sure, opener might be strong with 4 hearts and raise our response. Or his take out dbl is min and he has 3 hearts only. But, as you know, it's very frequent that opener has only 3 clubs, in which case 1♥ surely plays better than 2♣.