[kgr]

If you play support DBL is this DBL then always support or can it always be a strong hand without support?

What do you bid with below hands after this start?:
1C-(pass)-1S-(2H)
?

Qx / ♥Qxx / AQx / AKJxx
Kx / ♥xx / KQxx / AQJxx
Ax / ♥xx / AKx / AQJxxx


Any difference if opps have shown a fit?:
1C-(1H)-DBL!-(2H)
?
DBL=4+-card S

[helene_t]

Support doubles promise support, you can't combine it with other meanings.

On the first hand I would venture a 2NT bid if the hearts are all to the right but if LHO overcalled first I would not be so happy about it. 3♥ may be the correct bid but it may wrongside a 3nt contract. Maybe I will make up a 3♦ bid. Or 2NT anyway if I don't want to torture partner.

On the second one, 3♦. And on the third one, 3♥.

[mgoetze]

kgr, on 2014-October-02, 03:59, said:

Any difference if opps have shown a fit?:
1C-(1H)-DBL!-(2H)
?
DBL=4+-card S

Most people play DBL as showing exactly 4 spades, in which case there is no need to play a support double here.

[kgr]

helene_t, on 2014-October-02, 04:12, said:

Support doubles promise support, you can't combine it with other meanings.

On the first hand I would venture a 2NT bid if the hearts are all to the right but if LHO overcalled first I would not be so happy about it. 3♥ may be the correct bid but it may wrongside a 3nt contract. Maybe I will make up a 3♦ bid. Or 2NT anyway if I don't want to torture partner.

On the second one, 3♦. And on the third one, 3♥.

As you say, maybe it is easiest that support DBL always promises 3c-support.
I find my 3th hand most problematic then: A bit weak for a reverse and too strong for 3C. (and the 1st hand difficult if opps hqve shown a fit)
...but probably it still is easier in total if the DBL always promises support.

[kgr]

mgoetze, on 2014-October-02, 19:00, said:

Most people play DBL as showing exactly 4 spades, in which case there is no need to play a support double here.

We play T-Walsh and feel it extends better if DBL is 4+ spades here (and 1S is points without another good bid).

[fromageGB]

kgr, on 2014-October-03, 00:11, said:

We play T-Walsh and feel it extends better if DBL is 4+ spades here (and 1S is points without another good bid).

In that case - 1♣ (1♥) X! (2♥) - opener's double is again exactly 3 card support, the same as it would be without LHO's bid, ie 1♣ (p) 1♥! (2♥).

[fromageGB]

kgr, on 2014-October-03, 00:10, said:

As you say, maybe it is easiest that support DBL always promises 3c-support.

Some play this way, but others prefer that a support double shows one short of what is expected for a real support bid at that level. Take your example a level higher : 1♣ (1♥) X! (3♥) and now X would show 4 card support on the basis that you would want a 9 card fit to compete to the 3-level over their pre-empt in a lower ranking suit. Responder has the option of passing for penalty.

Swap the majors, and if your response is 1NT to show 4/5 hearts over a spade overcall, after 1♣ (1♠) 1NT! (2♠), double from opener in this method would again be 3 card support, because with 4-card support you would want to bid 3♥ as your suit is lower ranking.

[kgr]

fromageGB, on 2014-October-04, 08:28, said:

Swap the majors, and if your response is 1NT to show 4/5 hearts over a spade overcall, after 1♣ (1♠) 1NT! (2♠), double from opener in this method would again be 3 card support, because with 4-card support you would want to bid 3♥ as your suit is lower ranking.

Here 1NT would be natural for us and DBL negative (4cH or 5cH and exactly invite), so the bidding would start:
1♣ (1♠) DBL (2♠); and now:
- 3♥=4c♥, minimum
- 2NT=4c♥, extras
- DBL=support DBL

[kgr]

Here is a hand form RP bidding practice:

---

- West DBL'ed because he felt he had no other good bid; 3♥ would have been 4 card ♠-support and strong; East thought that DBL is 3c♠ and 3♥ is either support or strong.
- East passed because he thought West had a good hand with 6c♦ and 3c♠, but not this good.
How do you bid these hands?

[helene_t]

fromageGB, on 2014-October-04, 08:28, said:

Some play this way[support double promises 3 card supprt], but others prefer that a support double shows one short of what is expected for a real support bid at that level. Take your example a level higher : 1♣ (1♥) X! (3♥) and now X would show 4 card support on the basis that you would want a 9 card fit to compete to the 3-level over their pre-empt in a lower ranking suit. Responder has the option of passing for penalty.

Swap the majors, and if your response is 1NT to show 4/5 hearts over a spade overcall, after 1♣ (1♠) 1NT! (2♠), double from opener in this method would again be 3 card support, because with 4-card support you would want to bid 3♥ as your suit is lower ranking.

What I meant was that if a double is called a support double, then it promises 3-card support. It is not so much that I like that style (actually I am not such a big fan of support doubles), but just a semantics issue. I do think that if a double contains all hands with three-card support and also several other hand types, it risks getting overloaded.

Support double generally applies when partner showed 4+ cards and can still bid the suit at the 2-level after our double. Some generalize it to situations in which partner has showed 5 (i.e. a traditional 1♠ freebid) but I would think that in that situation you can just raise with 3-card support and use the double for something else. I suppose it is reasonable to double with many hands with doubleton support in that situation, but I doubt it is a good idea to define the double that way. In any case such a double shouldn't be called a support double.

At a higher level, when RHO bid above the 2-level of partner's suit, you need to be able to double with many hands that can't do anything else, such as (semibalanced) hands without a stopper in the enemy suit, some one-suited hands, and some two-suited hands that are not quite strong enough to reverse at the 3-level. So I don't think it is playable to require the dbl to show a specific degree of support. But of course partnership agreements can vary with respect to which hands go into the g/b 2NT, which hands bid naturally, and which ones double.

[aguahombre]

kgr, on 2014-October-05, 03:00, said:

Here is a hand form RP bidding practice:

---

- West DBL'ed because he felt he had no other good bid; 3♥ would have been 4 card ♠-support and strong; East thought that DBL is 3c♠ and 3♥ is either support or strong.
- East passed because he thought West had a good hand with 6c♦ and 3c♠, but not this good.
How do you bid these hands?

When we we can bid spades with spades, we then have 3H available for this hand. It says, "I have long Diamonds, am strong, and would like you to do something intelligent." Responder can try 3NT here; that doesn't mean 3H specifically asked for a heart stopper, but certainly bidding 3NT is one of those intelligent possibilities.

[fromageGB]

kgr, on 2014-October-05, 03:00, said:

How do you bid these hands?

Simple methods : 1♦ 1♠, 3♦(6 card, 18+, denies 4 card major) 3♥, 3NT

[aguahombre]

fromageGB, on 2014-October-05, 11:34, said:

Simple methods : 1♦ 1♠, 3♦(6 card, 18+, denies 4 card major) 3♥, 3NT

Did you see the 2H overcall, and then find a way to get his partner on opening lead through you?

[fromageGB]

aguahombre, on 2014-October-05, 16:18, said:

Did you see the 2H overcall, and then find a way to get his partner on opening lead through you?

Apologies, I did miss the 2♥ overcall. As partner has hearts, he knows I won't have much if anything there, so I must have some values in clubs for my strong 3♦ bid, and he would take a view on whether to bid 3NT or pass.
1♦ (p) 1♠ (2♥)
3♦ (p) "pass or 3NT"
In his shoes I would pass, not knowing of the richness in top tricks. So in answer to kgr, we fail too.

[kgr]

kgr, on 2014-October-05, 03:00, said:

Here is a hand form RP bidding practice:

---

- West DBL'ed because he felt he had no other good bid; 3♥ would have been 4 card ♠-support and strong; East thought that DBL is 3c♠ and 3♥ is either support or strong.
- East passed because he thought West had a good hand with 6c♦ and 3c♠, but not this good.
How do you bid these hands?

fromageGB, on 2014-October-06, 08:34, said:

Apologies, I did miss the 2♥ overcall. As partner has hearts, he knows I won't have much if anything there, so I must have some values in clubs for my strong 3♦ bid, and he would take a view on whether to bid 3NT or pass.
1♦ (p) 1♠ (2♥)
3♦ (p) "pass or 3NT"
In his shoes I would pass, not knowing of the richness in top tricks. So in answer to kgr, we fail too.

I don't like the ♦-bid because it can be a lot weaker for us: 6c♦ and 14+HCP (that is why West first DBL'ed)

aguahombre, on 2014-October-05, 09:54, said:

When we we can bid spades with spades, we then have 3H available for this hand. It says, "I have long Diamonds, am strong, and would like you to do something intelligent." Responder can try 3NT here; that doesn't mean 3H specifically asked for a heart stopper, but certainly bidding 3NT is one of those intelligent possibilities.

What would you do if ♥ and ♠ are the other way around?:

---

...maybe this is a stupid question because in our system we now play that 2NT is a good raise and 3H is a raise without extras.
So 3S can still be the stopper ask, and also DBL is not support DBL anymore.
Only my partner prefers that DBL can be ambiguous (3c support OR strong), while I prefer that DBL is always support.
=> Thank you all for the answers, I'll discuss it with my partner.

[akwoo]

The last hand I bid 3♥. I think this is obvious.

The 2nd hand, I would've opened a 15-17 1N. Playing weak NTs, I would pass. Playing strong NTs and having opened 1♣ I'm stuck; I'd probably risk lying with a double.

The 1st hand, I'm guessing between 3♥ and 2N. This may depend on how strong RHO's overcalls tend to be.

[steve2005]

kgr, on 2014-October-05, 03:00, said:

Here is a hand form RP bidding practice:

---

- West DBL'ed because he felt he had no other good bid; 3♥ would have been 4 card ♠-support and strong; East thought that DBL is 3c♠ and 3♥ is either support or strong.
- East passed because he thought West had a good hand with 6c♦ and 3c♠, but not this good.
How do you bid these hands?

cuebid 2♠ that's the default in competition with big hand

[wank]

the problem is you've devoted the 3♥ cuebid which should be available for hands like this to a hand (strong with spades) you can show in other ways: 3♠/4x