Another protecting decision

[paulg]

I don't really like this problem, can we move onto the next one please?

 

I normally play that a fourth seat cue bid would show a better hand than this. In particular the suits are both pretty poor.

 

Two hearts is a fair option, the power of the hand making up for the poor suit, but I do appreciate that the hand is a little too good for this (given I'd bid 2♥ with a six-card suit and a 9 count).

 

Double is also a fair option but there is the issue of what to bid over a club response, perhaps the most likely continuation being two spades from opener and 3♣ from partner. Now we will have to select between three hearts and three spades!

 

A very good problem imo. I'll plump for double - after all the worst does not always happen.

[aguahombre]

If we evaluate the hand for an opening bid, we find that we have 14 HCP + 10 cards in two suits. Applying the rule of 20, this hand is an ace better than a minimum opening bid. Since we're in the balancing seat, we're entitled to 'borrow' a king from partner. As such, I would bid this hand as though it were a 19 count in direct seat. So no, I don't think doubling and bidding is a HUGE overbid. What if partner holds:

 

♠xxxx

♥Qxx

♦AJx

♣xxx

 

You might easily be able to take 11 tricks in hearts assuming ♥K and ♦Q are with the opener. Yet even after the "HUGE overbid" you're not likely to find game.

But we might after 2S, if partner has the vision to realized how strong his hand is opposite the reds. She would inquire which minor, then bid 3H if clubs and 4H if diamonds.

 

I don't really like this problem, can we move onto the next one please?

 

(Then follows several lines in furtherence of the thread, followed by:

 

A very good problem imo.