Double, Diamond or ?

[SimonFa]

Teams, non vul.

 

♠KQ63 ♥A75 ♦AQ753 ♣K

 

(P) P (1C*) ?

 

*With 4432 they still bid 1C.

 

I thought I had 2 options dbl or 1D, there may be others.

 

(1) If I dbl and then bid diamonds that would show a strong hand above about 17 pts, which the point count manages but is it really that good with a bare K in opponents' opening bid? The supporting cards aren't very good either, a few 9s and Ts might help. However, partner might not read the bare K and be tempted to take the finesse if he needs one, assuming I don't get round to showing it as a strong hand.

 

(2) On the other hand if I bid 1D I give partner a lead if he needs one but the bidding might be too high before I can get in again.

 

Both bids allow us to find a major suit fit, esp spades if they've got hearts.

 

In the end I went for the dbl and hoped that if I didn't get in again and they needed the finesse in clubs I might make my king.

 

I'm interested if there's any better reasoning and if there's a better bid.

 

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Simon

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skq63ha75daq753ck&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=PP1C(Might be 4432)?]133|200| SimonFa 'Teams, non vul. I thought I had 2 options dbl or 1D, there may be others.

(1) If I dbl and then bid diamonds that would show a strong hand above about 17 pts, which the point count manages but is it really that good with a bare K in opponents' opening bid? The supporting cards aren't very good either, a few 9s and Ts might help. However, partner might not read the bare K and be tempted to take the finesse if he needs one, assuming I don't get round to showing it as a strong hand.

(2) On the other hand if I bid 1D I give partner a lead if he needs one but the bidding might be too high before I can get in again. Both bids allow us to find a major suit fit, esp spades if they've got hearts. In the end I went for the dbl and hoped that if I didn't get in again and they needed the finesse in clubs I might make my king. I'm interested if there's any better reasoning and if there's a better bid.

++++++++++++++++++++

I rank 1. Double = T/O Then rebid 2♦ over 1♥.

2. 1♦ = NAT Then double opponent's 2♣ -- if you get the chance.

3. INT = NAT Not ridiculous over a nebulous 1♣ -- Also OK for RAPTOR (= ART 5+ m and 4+ M) but a bit too strong.

'[/hv]

[digiharuka]

Teams, non vul.

 

♠KQ63 ♥A75 ♦AQ753 ♣K

 

(P) P (1C*) ?

 

*With 4432 they still bid 1C.

 

I thought I had 2 options dbl or 1D, there may be others.

 

(1) If I dbl and then bid diamonds that would show a strong hand above about 17 pts, which the point count manages but is it really that good with a bare K in opponents' opening bid? The supporting cards aren't very good either, a few 9s and Ts might help. However, partner might not read the bare K and be tempted to take the finesse if he needs one, assuming I don't get round to showing it as a strong hand.

 

(2) On the other hand if I bid 1D I give partner a lead if he needs one but the bidding might be too high before I can get in again.

 

Both bids allow us to find a major suit fit, esp spades if they've got hearts.

 

In the end I went for the dbl and hoped that if I didn't get in again and they needed the finesse in clubs I might make my king.

 

I'm interested if there's any better reasoning and if there's a better bid.

 

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Simon

 

This is a typical Dbl hand - short in opponent bid suit, at least 3+cards in unbid suits (old style?).

Even without ♣K, it's (become) 15HCP, 5 controls and 5 losers hand, strong hand(in suit contract).

 

(1)You can treat the bare ♣K as a small♣, and no doubt to bid 2♦ if partner bid 1♥ even Pass.

T's 9's is a "+" condition to reach game level, but in this stage you still exploring. Let's partner bid something.

 

(2)If you hold long♦, say 6cards, 1♦ may a good option. Even as weak as ♠Jxxx ♥xx ♦AJxxxx ♣Q.

For this hand, 1♦ seems too weak and may no rooms to show ♠KQxx

[FelicityR]

Your reasoning is good, Simon. 1♦ doesn't necessarily indicate short ♣s and a three-suited hand. (Nor does Dbl. on some occasions convey that precise message but more often than not it does convey shortness in the opponent's bid suit.)

 

If the ensuring auction gets competitive, your partner will be in a better position to judge whether to 'stick or twist'. As you say, the ♣K is likely a dead card so with a passed partner (and an opponent who has bid the suit) I am downgrading the hand slightly. Dbl looks best.

[Cyberyeti]

Easy 1♦ for us, nowhere close to x then diamonds. If partner would have responded to a 1♦ opener, he will respond to this.

[apollo1201]

Hi Simon. Good reasoning.

 

If you X, the hand is not strong enough with this soft texture to bid D next. Most likely you are to respect partner’s decision and only move if they make a positive bid. If they respond 1H, pass, if they respond 1S, maybe 2S, if they bid 1NT easy 3NT. Of course if LHO supports C and partner remains silent, you are worth another X.

 

If you bid 1D, you’ll X what comes next (2 or 3C) but Xing first is probably more flexible in the sense you’ll most often judge better based on what will happen next than if you bid 1D. And partner also probably.

[pescetom]

Off-topic:

 

We use this beer advert slogan as the mnemonic for the default meaning of a lead-directing double (alertable) after an uninformative auction, e.g.

(1NT) - (3NT) or

3♣ - 6♣.

Some experts agree this to ask for a major lead. Tough if partner guesses wrong.

Our argument was that a major suit is fairly likely without a double, after such auctions, so asking for a ♦ lead might be more profitable.

Anyway, some kind of agreement is a good idea, if only because of negative inferences, when you don't double.

If double is lead-directing, should pass be alertable?

 

I thought ♠ was kind of standard after 1NT - 3NT; see also a recent thread .

 

For me pass should be alerted with a similar agreement.

 

I struggle to imagine 3♣ - 6♣ by competent opponents.

[TylerE]

Easy 1♦ for us, nowhere close to x then diamonds. If partner would have responded to a 1♦ opener, he will respond to this.

 

 

You're not doubling to show values. You're doubling because you're 3 suited.

[Cyberyeti]

You're not doubling to show values. You're doubling because you're 3 suited.

 

Yes but, others have suggested double then 2♦, if I double, I'm passing 1♥, and that feels wrong.

 

In the style of overcalls partner and I play, 1♦ over 1♣ since it cuts virtually nothing out, will be a good hand anyway, and I can get my shape over easily (1♣)-1♦-1♥-1♠-2♦-2♥ for example gets over my shape and values nicely.

[SimonFa]

Thanks for the responses, some food for thought. I'll probably stick to the simpler lines as I play mostly online or against by Bridge Baron app.

 

PS Double Diamond beer was disgusting. My father's pub served it and I wouldn't drink it if that was all he had left.

[nekthen]

Thanks for the responses, some food for thought. I'll probably stick to the simpler lines as I play mostly online or against by Bridge Baron app.

 

PS Double Diamond beer was disgusting. My father's pub served it and I wouldn't drink it if that was all he had left.

 

Double Diamond or Worthington E?

[nekthen]

Double then bidding diamonds shows more playing strength. I double and pass any 1 or 2 level bid by partner

[bluenikki]

Yes but, others have suggested double then 2♦, if I double, I'm passing 1♥, and that feels wrong.

 

In the style of overcalls partner and I play, 1♦ over 1♣ since it cuts virtually nothing out, will be a good hand anyway, and I can get my shape over easily (1♣)-1♦-1♥-1♠-2♦-2♥ for example gets over my shape and values nicely.

 

What feels wrong about passing 1♥? What do you play as the upper limit for the simple advance?

 

For me, it's 8 total pts. For robots, it's 9 total pts. In either case, advancer will strain to bid again with decent 6+ total pts.

 

After a take-out double, it's advancer's job to compete for the partscore. Doubler's further action is looking for game.

[Huibertus]

Double. This is a great support if partner proposes to play ♦,♥ and ♠, which is what double implies. On top of that, if partner bids NT, your ♣ K is a great asset and your hand looks good too. Selling all of this as a ♦ hand does not do it justice.

 

You are not going to bid ♦ if partner bids a major, this is nowhere near a strong one-suiter. If partner bids 1♥ I'd pass, a 1♠ or 1♦ response would trigger a 2♣ cue which following a double in my system is invitational+. Anything else partner may bid will lead to a game.

[msjennifer]

Sir,

DOUBLE.The easiest poser. In my personal opinion 1) Easier to respond for partner with a hand with either 4 plus cards major .2) convey that he can lead any suit of his choice comfortably ,if LHO bids NT. 3). I am not THAT VERY ANXIOUS to get a diamond lead .4) if responder thinks it better to pass for penalties one has the excellent ♣K lead.

I,PERSONALLY,may consider a 1NT overcall playing Match points.

Thanks.

[pigpenz]

double you have support for 3 suits

[pigpenz]

if they rebid 2♣ you can double again

[mycroft]

I agree with Cyberyeti, but I double anyway. I bid if the 5-card suit is a major (and double 2♣). And I absolutely pass 1♥, and if they bid 2♣ after, I double again (still takeout, "don't really like hearts").

 

I'm less concerned about being able to compete in diamonds than missing being able to compete in spades.

 

I don't have the context that (1♣)-1♦ "will be a good hand anyway", and I think that makes the difference. But I argue with his continued auction. Mine goes 1♣-1♦-2♣ and partner with a 6-count and a major doesn't know what to do, and if it goes ...2♦-p-p-3♣, now what? Or 1♣-1♦-1♥-?

[Cyberyeti]

What feels wrong about passing 1♥? What do you play as the upper limit for the simple advance?

 

For me, it's 8 total pts. For robots, it's 9 total pts. In either case, advancer will strain to bid again with decent 6+ total pts.

 

After a take-out double, it's advancer's job to compete for the partscore. Doubler's further action is looking for game.

 

Well J10, KQxxx, xx, xxxx would be nowhere near 2♥ and make 4♥ a fair amount of the time (the diamond finesse is 3 or 4 to 1 on), not sure I'd bid 2♥ even with an extra red J.

 

It comes down to personal preference and agreements, but I prefer (1♣)-1♦-(2♣)-P-P-X to describe this, where partner will get the idea that I'm (43)51 much of the time with values like this.

[crapdown4]

Well J10, KQxxx, xx, xxxx would be nowhere near 2♥ and make 4♥ a fair amount of the time (the diamond finesse is 3 or 4 to 1 on), not sure I'd bid 2♥ even with an extra red J.

 

It comes down to personal preference and agreements, but I prefer (1♣)-1♦-(2♣)-P-P-X to describe this, where partner will get the idea that I'm (43)51 much of the time with values like this.

 

I bid 3C, my pard bids 3NT with a club stopper, otherwise he bids something and goes down horribly bwahahahahaha.

 

Actually, I can't conceive of any bid other than double. So I'm a wee bit offshape. That's more than compensated for by having 17 support points (counting the club K as merely a singleton) for whatever partner bids. If he jumps, he's in game; otherwise, he'll make one happy heart or spade. (If he bids 2D, I AM trotting out the 3C cuebid.)

[Cyberyeti]

I bid 3C, my pard bids 3NT with a club stopper, otherwise he bids something and goes down horribly bwahahahahaha.

 

Actually, I can't conceive of any bid other than double. So I'm a wee bit offshape. That's more than compensated for by having 17 support points (counting the club K as merely a singleton) for whatever partner bids. If he jumps, he's in game; otherwise, he'll make one happy heart or spade. (If he bids 2D, I AM trotting out the 3C cuebid.)

 

I'm certainly raising a spade to 2, as little as Jxxxx, x, Kxx, xxxx you're quite likely making 5♠ so make it a little less perfect than that.

[bluenikki]

Well J10, KQxxx, xx, xxxx would be nowhere near 2♥ and make 4♥ a fair amount of the time (the diamond finesse is 3 or 4 to 1 on), not sure I'd bid 2♥ even with an extra red J.

 

 

On the contrary, J10 KQxxx xx xxxx is very close to 2♥. 8 pts, according to Kaplan's valuation in "Competitive bidding ..." A red jack would make it a clearcut 2♥ advance. As it is, advancer will certainly bid again if given a chance at the 2 level.

 

Conservatism by the advancer to a takeout double creates terrible problems. And it does not gain much safety, because the doubler will be tempted to hope that non-jump advance has values.

[Cyberyeti]

On the contrary, J10 KQxxx xx xxxx is very close to 2♥. 8 pts, according to Kaplan's valuation in "Competitive bidding ..." A red jack would make it a clearcut 2♥ advance. As it is, advancer will certainly bid again if given a chance at the 2 level.

 

Conservatism by the advancer to a takeout double creates terrible problems. And it does not gain much safety, because the doubler will be tempted to hope that non-jump advance has values.

 

8 points on which planet ? one where you count doubleton J10 as 2, either the doubleton or the quack, not both.

[bluenikki]

8 points on which planet ? one where you count doubleton J10 as 2, either the doubleton or the quack, not both.

 

Believe it or not, Kaplan added a point for doubleton other than suit opened AND a point for the 5th card in a suit (and 2 more for the 6th).

 

He emphasized that the simple advance was a *negative* bid, like the 2NT response to a strong 2-bid.

 

That method *works*. Look for excuses to show strength when your partner doubles.

[hrothgar]

You are not strong enough to double and then bid Diamonds. This doesn't mean that double is a bad bid. It simply means that doubling and rebidding Diamonds is a poor call.

 

I'm fairly indifferent between

 

Double

1♦

1♠

 

I suspect that I would double, but might very well bid 1♠ if I wanted to shake things up a little