show support or neg double

[boboose]

Partner deals and opens 1 D vul vs not. Opponent overcalls 1H and I hold 10942,53, 10652, AJ6. If I decide to bid such a poor hand, is it more important to raise Ds or bid a neg. double?

[mycroft]

This hand, I would double. If partner bids (or can bid) 1♠, you're great. If they bid 1NT, you're probably fine. If they bid anything else, you'll either return to diamonds or pass.

 

If partner had to bypass diamonds to bid my suit (say 1♦-1♠ to you with 53 T942 T652 AJ6), I'd feel worse about it, in case they felt they had to bid their three card heart suit with no other good bid (note: this double doesn't deny 5 hearts the way your situation denies 5 spades). But I'd probably still do it, because I can sit for anything.

 

If partner opened clubs and I had something like 53 T942 T652 AJ6, I'd be less happy because the chance of an 8-card fit is much lower if partner does not have hearts.

 

Finding a major fit is a huge draw. Offering multiple places to play is a huge draw.

[TylerE]

Neither with that balanced rubbish.

 

Await further developments.

 

I might be slightly persuaded towards a !D raise if the opening ABSOLUTELY PROMISES 4+, but I still think it's bad.

 

In general I think aggressively competing on hands like this is a *big* long term loser as you won't be able to have constructive auctions when you have a bit more.

 

About the only competitive auction I'd feel comfortable wading into on these values would be a 1♠ overcall, if I had 5 of 'em. But I don't.

 

So pass for now, and hope the opponents either get overzealous, or partner can balance and THEN we can try to find a spot.

[helene_t]

I would always prefer double to a single raise, unless I have such a great diamond support that I don't want to play spades anyway. The 2♦ bid doesn't prevent opps from bidding 2♥ so it has little upside.

 

It's a bit different if a 3♦ bid is an options since that does obstruct opps. At this vulnerability I wouldn't bid 3♦, though, even if 1♦ promises 4.

 

If you start by double and 2♥ is passed back to you, you haven't shown you diamond support so maybe you should bid 3♦ now. With this weak hand and adverse vulnerability I would pass at IMPs, but probably 3♦ at MP, assuming that partner takes this as purely competitive and not showing values.

[mikeh]

If I were going to bid, which I would NOT do red v white, I would double.

 

However, red v white is the wrong vulnerability on which to compete fir a part score, since -200 (when partner reasonably enough takes us seriously) is a disaster at mps and an annoying needless loss at imps.

 

Note that if there is a game for us, partner needs a BIG hand and our pass does not bar him from bidding. Then, having passed, we can be (in context) aggressive since now we hold a maximum, whereas if we bid, well be spending the rest of the auction trying to apply the brakes.

[Douglas43]

I agree with TylerE and mikeh. Playing Acol (i.e partner does not have a weak NT hand and guarantees 4+ Diamonds) I might stretch to 2D, mainly to help partner count the suit in defence. It's worth agreeing a minimum for a negative double with your partner and sticking to it.