are you worth a game try?

[CSGibson]

[hv=pc=n&s=saq984hk98dk2cqj3&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1s2c2s3h]133|200[/hv]

 

Your partnership style is not to open 1N with a 5 card major. If you X here, it would be a generic game try, 3♠ would be competitive. Do you act?

[MrAce]

It is not for me. I would pass.

[jillybean]

These are the hands I am having most problems with, I can't stop bidding. X for me.

[shevek]

I double for penalty.

3S should be a game try. Don't compete at the 3-level vs a non-fit auction.

Of course, if 3H is cold, partmner should rip.

[CSGibson]

I double for penalty.

3S should be a game try. Don't compete at the 3-level vs a non-fit auction.

Of course, if 3H is cold, partmner should rip.

 

Unfortunately, double for penalty is not an option. Careful reading should tell you that, as its explicitly stated in the OP.

[shevek]

Unfortunately, double for penalty is not an option. Careful reading should tell you that, as its explicitly stated in the OP.

 

Yes I read that. Just pointing out that it is a poor agreement.

This auction is markedly different from

1♠ - (2♥) - 2♠ - 3(♥)

 

where double as a random game try makes some sense.

[ahydra]

3H might well have club support (a kind of FNJ) - otherwise it starts to sound like there's a lot of points in the deck. I don't see much wrong with having 3S competitive here, though perhaps double should be penalty with three suits bid.

 

Anyway, I would make a game try at imps, and settle for a penalty X (passing hoping partner reopens playing these methods) at MPs. Or should I bid 3S since partner might not reopen?

 

ahydra

[han]

I would open 1NT anyway, even when it is not systemic. Hopefully my partner comes to me afterwards and says, I see that you are still opening 1NT with these hands, perhaps we should change our agreements. OK!

[MrAce]

Yes I read that. Just pointing out that it is a poor agreement.

This auction is markedly different from

1♠ - (2♥) - 2♠ - 3(♥)

 

where double as a random game try makes some sense.

 

And how does your "better" agreements allow you to make a game invitation in this auction if DBL is for penalty ?

 

And how are you planning to defeat 3♥ with a pd who only bid 2♠ and when they made such a strong bid ?

 

Imho, the logic which suggests to play penalty dbl here is poor, not the methods of OP.

[Codo]

And how does your "better" agreements allow you to make a game invitation in this auction if DBL is for penalty ?

 

And how are you planning to defeat 3♥ with a pd who only bid 2♠ and when they made such a strong bid ?

 

Imho, the logic which suggests to play penalty dbl here is poor, not the methods of OP.

 

But maybe the penalty in a nonfit auction is of more importance then an invitation?

I would not double with such a poor defence. To double with this hand is a crime, but I have no evidence that the invitation is of a bigger importance then the penalty. Do you?

[MrAce]

But maybe the penalty in a nonfit auction is of more importance then an invitation?

I would not double with such a poor defence. To double with this hand is a crime, but I have no evidence that the invitation is of a bigger importance then the penalty. Do you?

 

No it is not for me, why on earth would i want to lose my game invitation just incase i may hold a hand one day that wants to dbl them when they are making such a strong bid ? You are possibly doubling opponents who were about to bid 4♥ ! And playing this way you are totally disabling your side from making game invitations or a competitive 3♠ bid.

 

I know it sucks and frustrating when one day they bid 3♥ and you hold the nuts to dbl them and you can't, but we should prepare our system with logic rather than our emotions. Playing DBL here as penalty and expecting it to be profitable is way too overrated imo.

[Codo]

So your hand may be strong enough to invite but surely not strong enough to double for penalties? I am not convinced, in my limited experience this situation is quite a rare bird anyway. I seldom play with 50 HCP hands...

[CSGibson]

So your hand may be strong enough to invite but surely not strong enough to double for penalties? I am not convinced, in my limited experience this situation is quite a rare bird anyway. I seldom play with 50 HCP hands...

 

 

Actually, I think this is going to be very common on this auction - with everyone bidding, the offense-defense ratio in people's hands are bound to be pretty skewed in favor of offense - it is very likely that I'll have a distributional invite of spades, rather than a premature penalty double of 3H.

[inquiry]

I like the use of double as game try and 3♠ as competitive, However, just because I have two ways to get to 3♠ doesn't mean I need to pull one of those toys out of the box. I pass: my defense is great, my offense is not, and I have poor shape. Another thing I like is my partner bidding 2♠ here on almost any excuse, which makes bidding on particularily risky with an "apparent" 50 point deck. Who is likely stretching is my partner. And since I see no alert on 3♥ their bidding is not over, unless I give them an "out" by bidding myself (and out that might include an "i double you" when we get to 3♠ when partner is speeding).

 

Siince I am saying what I like, let me add that I don't like that I could not opeIn this hand 1nt (perhaps I should have put a small spade in with my clubs when I sorted my hand).

[Phil]

Pass.

 

Looks like a Walter hand. Lots of HCP - where's our tricks coming from? Frankly, I'm more concerned with the opponents making 4♥ than us making 4♠.

 

Doubling 3♥ for penalty is adjective bridge. I also have an adjective for what I think of a penalty double of 3♥, but its really not printable.

[CSGibson]

Those who passed are the big winners. I made a game try and wound up -1100 in 3♠ doubled. 3♥ doubled their way makes, 4 level does not.

[MrAce]

So your hand may be strong enough to invite but surely not strong enough to double for penalties? I am not convinced, in my limited experience this situation is quite a rare bird anyway. I seldom play with 50 HCP hands...

 

I think you are confusing the "penalty dbl" with "optional" or "card showing" doubles. They are different. Penalty double means penalty. Optional double or strength showing DBL asks pd's opinion to play whether doubled or bid on. Are you suggesting this DBL to be penalty or optional with invitation values ?

 

But anyway, there are a lot of things inconsistent in your reply. You said this hand is not strong enough, but with a better hand you would dbl etc etc...As you said there aint 50 hcps in the deck, which means you will NOT have any stronger hand than this hcp wise in order this auction to make sense with reasonable opponents. In a way you are disproving your own theory. You will, however, have hands that wants to bid 3♠ with message to pd that says "I am bidding 3♠ and i will not be annoyed if you lift this to game" And that is what DBL means to me. While 3♠ means "i want to play only and only here, i am competing"

 

You want to play it penalty ? Then go for it.

[JLOGIC]

Kxx of hearts and QJx of clubs are huge warning signs. Even without the opps bidding those suits, you would have a very marginal game try at best. This is a good instructional hand.

 

Let's put it another way, what are the odds your vul LHO doesn't have the AK of clubs? What are the odds your partner has 9 or 10 points given all the bidding the opps are doing vul. And even if he does, you are likely to encounter extreme distribution. Game trying was a big error.

[Codo]

I think you are confusing the "penalty dbl" with "optional" or "card showing" doubles. They are different. Penalty double means penalty. Optional double or strength showing DBL asks pd's opinion to play whether doubled or bid on. Are you suggesting this DBL to be penalty or optional with invitation values ?

 

But anyway, there are a lot of things inconsistent in your reply. You said this hand is not strong enough, but with a better hand you would dbl etc etc...As you said there aint 50 hcps in the deck, which means you will NOT have any stronger hand than this hcp wise in order this auction to make sense with reasonable opponents. In a way you are disproving your own theory. You will, however, have hands that wants to bid 3♠ with message to pd that says "I am bidding 3♠ and i will not be annoyed if you lift this to game" And that is what DBL means to me. While 3♠ means "i want to play only and only here, i am competing"

 

You want to play it penalty ? Then go for it.

 

I am quite impressed what you are able to read out of so few words.

Okay, penalty is not the right expression, partner surely can run in such situations. But the same would be true for a game try double- he may want to sit for it.

I did never say that I would double for penalties, I called it a crime. I did never call 3 ♠ invitational, this must be competetive, because this is most urgently needed.

The problem is: If we agree that game is possible because of our shape and not because of our HCPs, how can I invite partner to make a good descission whether 3 or 4 Spade or defending is the best spot for us? I cannot show an invitation with club shortness, diamond length or heart strength (or whatever else). I have simply no way to tell partner more then: Hey I want to invite you.

This is valuable, but again, why are you convinced that this message is of more importance then the message: I have good values to beat 3 Heart?

[MrAce]

 

This is valuable, but again, why are you convinced that this message is of more importance then the message: I have good values to beat 3 Heart?

 

 

Because you will never have that hand. Maximum hand you will hold will be this hand of OP (and this is when you play a style that doesnt open 1NT with 5 cards major) and you admitted that this is not good enough to dbl.

 

This is why i am convinced that giving the message to pd that says " i have 6 ♠ and i have more than competitive values, it is ok to bid 4 if you think it is correct" is much more important. If this auction is reasonable you are more likely to hold hands like; (if you think this hand is too weak, help yourself and add something, to me it doesnt need much to make game)

 

KQxxxx

Ax

QJxx

x

 

Now when we speak of "invitation dbl" i believe it is not invitation in the mean of "pd bid 4 if max and bid 3 ♠ if minimum" It means to me, " i have a hand that can actually make game if you have the right cards, i am bidding 3 spade but it is ok to bid 4 if you think you have the cards i need"

 

I admit that pd may not make the correct judgement each and every time, but it is still much better than making wrong judgement, with the idea that if i have a hand that can invite, then i also have a hand which is good enough to defend 3♥ doubled.

 

So your hand may be strong enough to invite but surely not strong enough to double for penalties? I am not convinced, in my limited experience this situation is quite a rare bird anyway. I seldom play with 50 HCP hands...

 

 

Expecting to hold a 16-17-18 hcp hand in this auction, is dreaming imo. Thats why i think we should be sparing our double for the hands that we actually may hold. And it is extremely dangerous way of thinking, to suggest "if we have a good hand to invite, we have a good shot in 3♥ doubled in defense" Not even close. You are saying things that sounds reasonable on paper, but when you come down to reality, it has no ground to hold.

[gszes]

with the system imposed on me I vote

x for game try. we are too weak to make

game level bids on our own and we were

strong enough to open 1n originally not

some ever more popular weakish hand.

 

Noone forced p to bid 2s they have some

values and we have some safety in 3s if

p is not interested. The fact that we

can be significantly weaker for our 1s

bid forces us to act a bit more aggressively

so we dont get pushed around by a bit of

preemption..if p is willing to accept our

game try we should have very good play.

[mikestar13]

Clearly a pass on values, especially considering that 2♠ may be shaded. Make the hand about a queen (maybe a king) stronger and I can see this as an invitation. Double should not be penalty, but should have reasonable defense. With an offensively-oriented invitation, just bid 4♠. There is a great chance in that case it is either a make or a good save.

[SteveMoe]

Voted other because this is a perfect opportunity for Balance of Power Double. We own more than half the deck. South has 3 cards in both their suits (at the 3 level doubler needs only 2 - rule of 23/32). Given your methods, passing seems appropriate as partner will likely never have enough for 4♠. 3N is unilateral.

 

Indeed opening 1N eliminates these issues.