Phil Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 1N pass 2D 2SPass pass x The expected spade length for x is closest to: 0-11-22-33-44-5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 I would think that this double is a balance of power double presumably showing ♠ shortness and at least 7-8 HCP. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 I would think that this double is a balance of power double presumably showing ♠ shortness and at least 7-8 HCP.I would assume the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted July 25, 2016 Report Share Posted July 25, 2016 2-3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted July 26, 2016 Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 Using an optional double in combination with transfer rebids makes a lot of sense here. Optional is probably more useful than takeout even without the transfer rebids although that structure has some issues that need to be sorted out as you need a way of bidding 3♥ competitively as well as constructively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo1201 Posted July 26, 2016 Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 X shows some values but allows partner to convert it to penalties so shouldnt be too unbalanced and too short in S. I guess 2533 is ideal.15(43) is more risky (unless we're happy defending 2SX), and 35(32) also because partner is less likely to transform and might escape to your 2-cd minor... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 I think 2-3 is right. If partner had a giant spade stack, he might have whipped 2S already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted July 26, 2016 Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 X shows some values but allows partner to convert it to penalties so shouldnt be too unbalanced and too short in S. I guess 2533 is ideal.15(43) is more risky (unless we're happy defending 2SX), and 35(32) also because partner is less likely to transform and might escape to your 2-cd minor... It looks more competitive to me. I wouldn't expect P to pass unless he had an unusually good DOR (defence-offence ratio :P). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 26, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2016 Qtx Kxx akxxx qx. Would you pass at MPs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shyams Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=zh-CN&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bridgebase.com%2Fforums%2Ftopic%2F74749-%2526-36825%253B%2526-20010%253B%2526-21152%253B%2526-20493%253B%2526-26159%253B%2526-20160%253B%2526-20040%253B%2526-24847%253B%2526-24605%253B%2526-65311%253B%2F&edit-text=&act=url Google translate works well enough! Linking back because the other thread is a Chinese version of this original post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 I think 2-3 is right. If partner had a giant spade stack, he might have whipped 2S already.But maybe we don't play double by opener as penalty? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 27, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 But maybe we don't play double by opener as penalty? Possible I guess but not mainstream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 I think 2-3 is right. If partner had a giant spade stack, he might have whipped 2S already. I am mostly worried that doubling them with 4-1 spades can hardly be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 Possible I guess but not mainstream.I would have thought that a competitive double (basically 3 hearts and an interest in competing) was at least as popular as pure penalty here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted July 27, 2016 Report Share Posted July 27, 2016 Qtx Kxx akxxx qx. Would you pass at MPs? I rarely play MPs, but my instinct is to bid if they're NV, since taking them one off is unlikely to score well. Less sure what I'd do when they're vul. (But I'm a conservative SOB in the constructive auction, and wouldn't have opened that a 15-17 NT) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegar56 Posted July 29, 2016 Report Share Posted July 29, 2016 1N pass 2D 2SPass pass x The expected spade length for x is closest to: 0-11-22-33-44-52♦ = transfer to ♥ ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted July 30, 2016 Report Share Posted July 30, 2016 2♦ = transfer to ♥ ? yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 Opener assumes 2-5 in the majors and bids accordingly. Responder might have more spades, but that's his business. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jallerton Posted August 2, 2016 Report Share Posted August 2, 2016 Opener assumes 2-5 in the majors and bids accordingly. Responder might have more spades, but that's his business. I agree. This is what Opener will assume when making the initial decision on whether to defend 2♠x. A more interesting question, worth discussing in any regular partnership, is what Responder's bids of 2NT/3♣/3♦/3♥/3♠ mean instead of double. There is more than one plausible way to play, but as usual the most important thing is to be on the same wavelength as partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2016 I rarely play MPs, but my instinct is to bid if they're NV, since taking them one off is unlikely to score well. Less sure what I'd do when they're vul. (But I'm a conservative SOB in the constructive auction, and wouldn't have opened that a 15-17 NT) It was the first round of the finals of the LM Pairs. Pard held this hand but we hadn't explicitly discussed x. I had xx QTxxx xx AKxx. Declarer had AKJxxx AJ8x void Jxx. It takes a club lead followed by a spade shift to beat it but partner naturally led a high diamond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted August 3, 2016 Report Share Posted August 3, 2016 I think the question to ask is: what should this double mean? What hand has the most difficulty expressing itself in this situation? Opener has not denied a fit for hearts with the pass. What can responder do with a hand unwilling to sell out to 2S but not good enough to try for game? x, Kxxxx, KJx, Jxxx for example? To me, that is the best use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted August 3, 2016 Report Share Posted August 3, 2016 What can responder do with a hand unwilling to sell out to 2S but not good enough to try for game? x, Kxxxx, KJx, Jxxx for example? If you play transfer rebids you can try 2NT with that hand. If you use 2NT as Lebensohl then you can still say 2NT but with a different meaning. If playing double in the suggested way, you do not need it as a natural call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted August 3, 2016 Report Share Posted August 3, 2016 If you play transfer rebids you can try 2NT with that hand. If you use 2NT as Lebensohl then you can still say 2NT but with a different meaning. If playing double in the suggested way, you do not need it as a natural call. Yes. Every bid assignment creates a hole, a hand that cannot be bid, and the point of designing a system is to make best use of the available bids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 I would think that this double is a balance of power double presumably showing ♠ shortness and at least 7-8 HCP. Yes. Now here I would take a hand example. This hand is from 2016-Spingold final segment of 1 of 4. [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=Welland&s=ST863HA54DQT7CK63&wn=Helgemo&w=SA5HQ9876D85CJ752&nn=Auken&n=SQ9742HKT2DK932C9&en=Helness&e=SKJHJ3DAJ64CAQT84&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=PP1NP2DP2HPP2SPPD!P3CPPP&p=C3C2C9CTD4DTD5D2S6SAS7SJC5&c=9]400|300[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanoff Posted August 5, 2016 Report Share Posted August 5, 2016 What of the related auctions where you pass or use Stayman rather than transfer ?Or they reopen with an artificial bid such as 2C=H+another. a. 1NT P P 2S P P X b. 1NT P 2C 2S P P X c. 1NT P P 2C P 2H(3+) X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.