From Clee

[JLOGIC]

w/w MP

 

Txxxx Qxx KJx Ax, first seat.

 

P P 1D 2C

?

 

If you bid 2S, no more questions.

 

If you double, what do you bid over 2H? What do you bid over 3C p p ?. If over 3C p p you X and partner bids 3H, what do you bid?

 

Thanks.

[dake50]

Yea. 2S, then 3D or X. Try for a S-fit, limited with a D-fit.

If you start X, you owe another bid with 10 when could have been 7.

Over partner's 2H, 2S. Over (3C) X.. Pass partner's 3H. I'm done.

[the hog]

2S

[gnasher]

I bid 2♠, because all your other questions are too difficult

[Alik1974]

2♠, seems to describe my passed hand.

[helene_t]

Dbl then 2s. If opps bid 3c i pass. If p bids 3♥ over their 3♣ I bid 3♠.

[han]

I usually play that double promises 4+ spades and 2D shows 4 hearts NF. Playing that I'd double.

 

Playing standard ambiguous doubles I would pick 2S. I would not even consider 2S if we weren't a passed hand of course.

[Fluffy]

2♠ is scary, but double is not much better. I don't know what I'do at the table, double looks reasonable.

 

If I double then:

 

-I would pass 2♥ before realicing as a passed hand maybe 2♠ means something different .

-I would pass 3♣, double is close, but I don't like my hand.

-I would not pass 3♥ but not sure where to go, the hand is now pretty good when partner will have 5♦ most of the time, but wich game?, is 3♠ now half a stopper? if I wasn't a passed hand it would be a weak hand with 6 spades. Without discussion I wouldn't try that bid, and go for an agressive 3NT.

 

 

NOTE: for the 3♥ bid I misstook the auction for a vuluntary 3♥ bid from partner over opponent's 3♣. If I forced partner with another double I would pass.

[lowerline]

If you double, what do you bid over 2H?

 

Pass

 

What do you bid over 3C p p ?

 

Double

 

If over 3C p p you X and partner bids 3H, what do you bid?

 

Pass

 

But I prefer 2♠ over double.

 

Steven

[Zelandakh]

If X followed by 2♠ over 2♥ does not show a flexible hand with max values for the initial pass then what else should it be? I think han's methods are good here and it surprises me that more top pairs have not adopted something along these lines. It seems reasonable to me to treat the hand as 4342 and take whichever path is normal for that shape.

[JLOGIC]

If X followed by 2♠ over 2♥ does not show a flexible hand with max values for the initial pass then what else should it be?

 

Indeed, but I still think it's reasonable to pass 2H since our hand is pretty good for hearts and that might be our best spot.

 

FWIW I thought X, pass 2H (close between 2S), X, and bid 3S over 3H. Clee was pretty adamant that bidding 2S initially was right, and I thought X would be more popular.

[Phil]

I usually play that double promises 4+ spades and 2D shows 4 hearts NF. Playing that I'd double.

 

Playing standard ambiguous doubles I would pick 2S. I would not even consider 2S if we weren't a passed hand of course.

 

I thought you played double showed 4+ hearts and 2♥ was spades.

 

Anyway, I would double and pass 2♥.

[mikeh]

If X followed by 2♠ over 2♥ does not show a flexible hand with max values for the initial pass then what else should it be? I think han's methods are good here and it surprises me that more top pairs have not adopted something along these lines. It seems reasonable to me to treat the hand as 4342 and take whichever path is normal for that shape.

I think a major problem with han's suggestion is that it eliminates the ability to compete gently in diamonds. I know: we spurn the minors, yet a number of good players have found that being able to raise partner's suit offers them a competitive advantage :P

 

Note that Phil points out that he had thought han played x for hearts, any length, and hearts for spades any length: which makes significantly more sense to me, tho has problems of its own (as does any method here, and I'd have to play this for a while to see whether it was worth adopting)

 

As for what I would do: I just couldn't bring myself to bid 2♠ on that suit. I'm not saying it's wrong, just that I wouldn't do it when double, tho imperfect, is no more a distortion and is more 'flexible'. I'd also pass 2♥. To me, double then 2♠ would be longer spades, tho since I am a passed hand, a slightly weaker hand as well. J10xxxx Kx KJx xx seems about right.

[PhilKing]

I doubt there is much in at on either street.

 

I would double at pairs and bid 2♠ at teams. After 3♣, I would double again playing standard (and pass 3♥), but bid 3♦ playing (effectively) unbalanced diamond.

[aguahombre]

To me, double then 2♠ would be longer spades, tho since I am a passed hand, a slightly weaker hand as well. J10xxxx Kx KJx xx seems about right.

Glad to see you are not one of BBF throng who adhere to the Dave Ashley (R.I.P.) School of opening 2-bids.

 

PhilKing mentioned the unbalanced diamond style, which (combined with wk NT) might lean us toward no second double after (3C) P (P), but rather 3D.

[Free]

I'd start with Dbl, although 2♠ is a very close second.

 

If you double, what do you bid over 2H? Pass, no problem with playing a moysian

What do you bid over 3C p p ? Dbl, we don't have fit but we do have extras

If over 3C p p you X and partner bids 3H, what do you bid? Pass, there are no alternatives imo

[karaprens]

I would double and pass 2h.

 

And I would have pass over 3c and if I would have doubled pass over 3h too.

[han]

I thought you played double showed 4+ hearts and 2♥ was spades.

 

I am glad to hear that you have been thinking about me, but I don't recall playing that. For the last 3 years I've played double showing 4 spades, 2D (and 3C) showing 4 hearts and 2M natural 5+ forcing. I think my partner learned it from Anton Maas, but I don't know if Maas invented it.

[Free]

I am glad to hear that you have been thinking about me, but I don't recall playing that. For the last 3 years I've played double showing 4 spades, 2D (and 3C) showing 4 hearts and 2M natural 5+ forcing. I think my partner learned it from Anton Maas, but I don't know if Maas invented it.

I suppose you also Dbl when holding 4-4M?

[han]

Yes.

[gnasher]

Yes.

 

What are dbl-2♦, dbl-2♥, and dbl-2♦-2♥ ?

[Zelandakh]

What are dbl-2♦, dbl-2♥, and dbl-2♦-2♥ ?

Funnily enough I was going to ask a similar question for the original auction. After 1♦ - (2♣) - X - (P), is Opener allowed to bid 2♦ with 4 diamonds or 2♥ with 3 hearts?

[han]

You are ahead compared to the standard double because responder promises 4+ spades (while 2D promises 4+ hearts and denies 4 spades), but you are not out of trouble. In response to double we play that opener will typically bid 2H with 3-4 in the majors, and responder will correct to 2S with 4-2 or 5-3 in the majors. With 2443 distribution opener should bid 2D. The 4-4 heart fit can be missed when neither has extras.

 

1D - (2C) - Dbl

2D - 2H

 

is natural and not forward going, but I would not do this with (for example) a 4-4-3-2 shape or even a 4-4-2-3 shape. This means you can end in a 4-2 diamond fit when you have a heart fit. I see no good solution.

[cherdano]

I think a major problem with han's suggestion is that it eliminates the ability to compete gently in diamonds. I know: we spurn the minors, yet a number of good players have found that being able to raise partner's suit offers them a competitive advantage :P

To be fair, we would often make a negative double anyway with 4 diamonds and a 4-card major. So Han only loses the gentle raise on hands that don't have a 4-card major (2353 is not a shape where I enjoy having to raise to the 3-level), or on hands with a 4-card major not good enough for a standard negative X.

[JLOGIC]

In a precision context, I have been playing over 1D (2C) that 2D is neg free bid + in hearts, 2H neg free bid + in spades, 2S inv+ in diamonds, and 3C as 5-5 majors +. I thought this was great when I picked up KQ9xx AKxxxx AT ---. Great, I get to show both majors, don't have to risk a negative double or getting preempted, etc.

 

My partner ends up struggling to make 5D, meanwhile Balicki (also playing negative free bids), made a negative double and got +1100 opposite partners 1156 with AQJ9x of clubs. Sigh :(.