[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding:
1♦-(2♣)-?
You play 5-card Major with short ♣. So 1♦ of you partner shows at least 4card ♦.
How do you rate Pass, 2♦, take out DBL?
Would you rate these bids different at MP's?

[Kalvan14]

2♦ is certainly the most convincing one. X is a distant second (I'm not bringing 1 trick in defense).

[kenrexford]

I'd pass. You have three cover cards for either major. Opposite a typical seven-loser hand, therefore, you may invite is a major if found. 2D slows down that process. I hope for partner to reopen with a major (I'd then bid game) or to reopen with a double, (I'd then cuebid 3C to ask him to pick the major).

[whereagles]

You can afford to pass this hand. If opps end up in 2M, fine. If they bid to 3♣, you can outbid them after having shown weakness with the previous pass.

[Blofeld]

2♦. Support with support.

[Wiste1]

I would double.
If i pass opps can bid/preempt us out.
And if its go 1♦-(2♣)- p -(p)- x -(p)- ? Whats your bid now ?

[mike777]

Wiste1, on Nov 20 2005, 09:36 AM, said:

I would double.
If i pass opps can bid/preempt us out.
And if its go 1♦-(2♣)- p -(p)- x -(p)- ? Whats your bid now ?

3D now over 2clubs do not wait. Way to weak for neg x.

[pigpenz]

i think it alldepends on how agressive you and your partner are!
pass
2♦
3♦
are all good calls, i dont think i would negative double on this hand.

pass is the least problem
3♦ puts opps under most pressure

[Robert]

Hello kgr

A lot of bidding decisions are based on your partnership bidding style.

As you can see from the assorted answers, different people play different styles.
It is important to know what your partner is showing. Your bidding should rely quite a bit on 'knowing' what you partner is showing.

I played with one little of lady who always had good hands(14-15HCP+ when she opened. If the other pair bid very high, I would double with only a few values because I knew that she would take of the defensive tricks.

Playing with a regular partner, I know to largely ignore their overcalls 'if' I am a passed hand. We normally overcall 8+ at the one level, but if partner is a passed hand KQ10xx is well worth a lead directing overcall. I know not to count of partner for defensive values when they make a simple one level overcall.

The modern game tends to bid very aggressively. I like to bid aggresively with certain hands. With this hand I would bid somewhat slower.

The people that jump to 3D do put pressure on the other pair, however, they only know of a 4-4 diamond fit. You also have slow defensive type cards in the majors.

I expect that some people who jump to 3Ds will not be able to get to a major contract 'knowing' what they are doing.

If you start with a 2D raise, if partner bids a major, you can raise that.
Your ablilty to investigate major contracts is better after a 2D raise. If partner is bidding a 3 card major suit, he can still bid to 4m after your 3M raise.

If you had jumped to 3Ds and he bid a major, when you raised his major bid, he would have to bid 5D to get out of the major contract.

I would prefer to normally make a negative double, however, this hand does not have any defense that even a low level negative double should provide.

If the auction does get higher, partner will often double the other pair 'counting' on you for more defense.

If your fit was in a 5-4 major, I would just jump to 3(if that was your agreement)
I play 1M-3M shows 4 trumps and 7+-9HCP while a jump cuebid shows about
5-7HCP with 4 trumps and a bit of shape(a 'mixed' raise)

You are often fairly safe bidding to the 3 level with nine trumps, 'if' the HCP are somewhat evenly split between the two pairs.

Regards,
Robert

[plaur]

I would bid 2♦.
I dont like pass. I dont have a penalty pass but I do have a normal hand with support. I am not nearly strong enough to X.

[P_Marlowe]

2D.

A neg. double should promise more strength,
at least my partner did asked me that it should
and I comply, but if your partner says a neg.
would be fine, than make a neg. double.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[han]

Passing is out of the question. Whether you double, bid 2D or bid 3D is a matter of partnership style. Playing with Ben or Arend I would double, I've seen them both choose the double in similar situations.

[Winstonm]

2D - if we are to compete strongly our best chance lies in partner holding 5 or 6 diamonds so I want to get the support off my chest immediately without exagerating the playing strength or general strength of my hand.

3D overstates the hand and may propel partner into 3N, expecting longer and somewhat better diamonds.

Dble overstates the stregnth and this is not a hand to compete stongly in only a 4/4 fit unless partner has reversing strenth which he can still show over 2D.

Winston

[mike777]

Winstonm, on Nov 20 2005, 03:04 PM, said:

2D - if we are to compete strongly our best chance lies in partner holding 5 or 6 diamonds so I want to get the support off my chest immediately without exagerating the playing strength or general strength of my hand.

3D overstates the hand and may propel partner into 3N, expecting longer and somewhat better diamonds.

Dble overstates the stregnth and this is not a hand to compete stongly in only a 4/4 fit unless partner has reversing strenth which he can still show over 2D.

Winston

ok WinstonM, perhaps 2d is better than 3d .

[han]

Winston, I would not expect that 2D is less encouraging than 3D. Isn't it fairly common to play 2D as somewhat constructive and 3D as weak/preemptive?


With the inquiry2over1-folks we give up on the 2D raise, but we have 4 different raises of diamonds available:

2S: constructive.
2NT: either very weak or gameforcing. (if GF either a stopper or interested in 5D/6D).
3C: invitational or better. (no good stopper if better)
3D: preemptive but some values. (with no useful honors bid 2NT)

I think that this hand would be close between 2NT and 3D, 2NT is probably better.

[Winstonm]

Hannie, on Nov 20 2005, 03:46 PM, said:

Winston, I would not expect that 2D is less encouraging than 3D. Isn't it fairly common to play 2D as somewhat constructive and 3D as weak/preemptive?


With the inquiry2over1-folks we give up on the 2D raise, but we have 4 different raises of diamonds available:

2S: constructive.
2NT: either very weak or gameforcing. (if GF either a stopper or interested in 5D/6D).
3C: invitational or better. (no good stopper if better)
3D: preemptive but some values. (with no useful honors bid 2NT)

I think that this hand would be close between 2NT and 3D, 2NT is probably better.

Without such dazzling methods, the choices are limited - 3D as a preemptive type raise overstates the length of the diamonds and tends to deny interest in any other suit, whereas 2D not only does not overemphasize the diamonds but allows an easier maneuver into a 4/4 major fit if partner has a stonger hand.

Just my opinions - no W.C. behind this name.

Winston

[kgr]

My partner did choose a negative DBL with this hand.
My hand was:

---

I did open 1♦ with this hand because I considered it too strong for 1NT (15-17) opening. After my partners DBL (which I did count as 8+) I did bid 3NT.
(Even if you know that the DBL could be 6+, can you bid anything else then 3NT?).
Opps did start with cashing 6 club tricks. I was a bit too dissapointed by partners hand and only hoped on ♦'s 2-2. So I did keep too much ♦'s in dummy and lost also 3 ♠ tricks.
Result: -600 (luckily no double).
This was teams. At the other table the bidding was without intervenance:
1NT-2C-2D-All Pass.
...Next time I will open this hand again 1♦.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

a nice 17 count, but I would just open
it with 1NT.

After the neg. dbl from partner I would have
also bid 3NT.

Marlowe

[whereagles]

That's funny... I'd rate this hand closer to 19 than to 17...