6 card suit second position vulnerable

[Fluffy]

Hand 1, MPs, ALL VUL, RHO passes

♠J62

♥K

♦AQJ642

♣852

 

 

Hand 2, MPs, Unvavourable, RHO passes

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣J1094

[Statto]

Voted pass on hand 1, but I think I prefer a weak 2♦ if available.

[the hog]

1D on board 1

2S at this vul on board 2

[han]

What the Hog said.

 

Oh no wait, the opposite: open 2D and 1S, then double 2D!

[rmnka447]

At MPs, I tend to be more aggressive opening hands.

 

Hand # 1 - 11 HCP, but that includes a stiff K and a dangling J. 1 1/2 QTs, 8 losers -- so it looks like a weak 2 ♦ bid to me, but I wouldn't argue too much with a pass.

 

Hand # 2 - 10 HCP, but 2 QTs and a 6 loser hand. I'm counting the ♣ J at a full value as it has supporting intermediates. That's a 1 ♠ opener to me.

[AlexJonson]

I'm almost completely with the voting - 1D. 1S, 2S.

[mike777]

1D

1S

X

[Statto]

Are we not suggesting better ♥ if we X on the 2nd round of the 2nd hand?

[mike777]

Are we not suggesting better ♥ if we X on the 2nd round of the 2nd hand?

 

 

not me. fwiw I just think it should show short d, not long h or extras.

 

pard should know we hve this type hand if we correct 2h to 2s and be this weakish

 

the trade off is we get to play more 2dx or compete more, but pard will not know when we have bigger hand.

 

But then we seldom hve big hands.

[andy_h]

1D, 1S, and double

[rhm]

 

pard should know we hve this type hand if we correct 2h to 2s and be this weakish

 

the trade off is we get to play more 2dx or compete more, but pard will not know when we have bigger hand.

 

But then we seldom hve big hands.

That is the main reason why I would not reopen with a double.

I do not see how you show bigger hands.

For me I would hold at least

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣AJ109

 

when I bid a third time opposite a partner, who has promised nothing.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mike777]

That is the main reason why I would not reopen with a double.

I do not see how you show bigger hands.

For me I would hold at least

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣AJ109

 

when I bid a third time opposite a partner, who has promised nothing.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

 

fair pt I dont promise that....

 

you promise at least that and often more....

 

and so what?

[aguahombre]

That is the main reason why I would not reopen with a double.

I do not see how you show bigger hands.

For me I would hold at least

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣AJ109

 

when I bid a third time opposite a partner, who has promised nothing.

 

Rainer Herrmann

Yes. This is worthy of consideration when deciding whether to reopen with a double vs. rebidding one's suit. Instead of focussing on the possibility partner has a penalty pass, it might be better to focus on what we will be showing later when he doesn't.

[EricK]

My (very limited) experience is that vulnerable at MPs it is better to agree to open this sort of hand at the 2 level. Not so much because it works better on this sort of hand, but because opening at the 2 level on much weaker hands tends to work out badly. So it allows you to pass those hands and still keep the same size range for a weak 2.

 

Conversely, NV I would want to open them both at the 1 level. Not so much because of hands like this, but because I want to be able to open the weaker hands with a pre-empt, and want to keep a tightish range for the bid.

[han]

That is the main reason why I would not reopen with a double.

I do not see how you show bigger hands.

For me I would hold at least

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣AJ109

 

when I bid a third time opposite a partner, who has promised nothing.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

We open 1S, lefty overcalls 2D and we reopen with a double. If partner now bids 2H, he was too weak to make a negative double. If so, where are all the HCP, we have only 10!

 

I think that this scenario is very unlikely, it is much more likely that partner passes or bids 2S. If partner does bid 2H I will convert to 2S anyway and hope to survive.

[phil_20686]

We open 1S, lefty overcalls 2D and we reopen with a double. If partner now bids 2H, he was too weak to make a negative double. If so, where are all the HCP, we have only 10!

 

I think that this scenario is very unlikely, it is much more likely that partner passes or bids 2S. If partner does bid 2H I will convert to 2S anyway and hope to survive.

 

Agree, it seems like its 70-80% that partner has a pen pass of 2d.

[han]

I would enjoy hearing more from the 14 people who voted for reopening with 2S. Are they not doubling because they fear that 2DX will make too often if partner passes?

 

The open 1 or 2 decisions seem marginal style decisions, but the reopening decision is very interesting to me.

[MrAce]

I would enjoy hearing more from the 14 people who voted for reopening with 2S. Are they not doubling because they fear that 2DX will make too often if partner passes?

 

The open 1 or 2 decisions seem marginal style decisions, but the reopening decision is very interesting to me.

 

I think exactly like Rainer on this one.

 

You are asking where are the hcps, and coming to conclusion that it is unlikely scenario that we may have to bid 2♠ when we start dbl. There are hands where pd has long diamonds but not enough to defeat them, which makes it very reasonable for overcaller's pd to pass with some hcps and shortness in his pd's suit. I am bidding 2♠ because i have 6 of them and i dont like my hand in defense. I also think when i dbl and then bid 2♠ anyway shows better hand. Playing this way i wont have to jump or do something different when i hold the same hand with lets say 15-16 hcp.

 

There are other things, premature doubles usually end up with opponents finding their real fit. We have Kx ♥ and if pd is not bidding hearts over our DBL, we are likely to defend 2♥ or 3♥ instead of playing 2♠ or perhaps defending 2♦ undoubled if we are one of those who passes 2♦

 

I am not very strong on this, if you doubled that i would not mind really, but since you asked i am telling my reasons.

[Statto]

I would enjoy hearing more from the 14 people who voted for reopening with 2S. Are they not doubling because they fear that 2DX will make too often if partner passes?

Partly - our hand is not well suited to defence. And even if we defeat 2♦X by 1 trick, it will score poorly if 2♠ was making. Also because X feels more like a 5314 shape than 6214. And X may lead to 3♣ which might not score as well as 2♠. If I'm going to pull 2♥ to 2♠, and doing so doesn't imply a better hand, then all the double does is give us the opportunity to defend 2♦X or play in 3♣, which on balance I think probably won't score as well as 2♠. I have a 6th ♠ and it's a reasonable suit, so I'll show it.

 

Opps may have a ♥ fit. Doubling allows them to find it at the 2 level, though I know either opp can X to imply ♥. Of course opps may compete over 2♠. If they compete to 3♦, partner can double for penalty if a good ♦ holding was the reason for the initial pass. I'd rather defend 3♦X than 2♦X B-)

[the hog]

That is the main reason why I would not reopen with a double.

I do not see how you show bigger hands.

For me I would hold at least

 

♠AQ10842

♥K4

♦9

♣AJ109

 

when I bid a third time opposite a partner, who has promised nothing.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

Totally agree with this comment. I am not one of those who "hope to survive" when doubling on subminimum hands.