[cherdano]

pclayton, on Oct 24 2006, 03:23 PM, said:

I've given this one a lot of thought and I've been converted (hallelujah ).


Here are the advantages in passing:

1. We are likely getting outbid here and any noise I make will only help the spade bidder pick up the trump suit as JL mentions. Unless declarer has a deaf ear, pard's J-4th and QJ-4th becomes very vulnerable and even J-9 5th under dummy's QT8 for instance. At MPs, this is a very serious concern.

2. We might go for a number, even if that number is -200. Frankly, I think we have significant LAW protection here (i.e., a likely 18 TT meaning if they kill us at 3♣ for -200/-500, they have +620; it was all vul right?), but it will be easy for them to saw it off, as the overcaller has an auto redouble, and the auction will develop a doubling rhythm. And if the TT is more like 16, the 3 level will be really ugly for us.

Its item 1 that I'm most concerned with at MP's.

Sorry Adam, you're on your own here

Welcome, Phil!

I think you missed advantage number 3: Passing with hands like this one means that a double shows a stronger hand. So in those cases where it is more likely to be our hand, responder will know when such is the case and can act accordingly. These cases are more important to get right than those where we have 18 hcp and may push them from 2S to 3S in their 9-card fit.

That's the biggest gain IMO.

Arend

[whereagles]

Jlall, on Oct 24 2006, 02:39 AM, said:

Bidding just makes no sense to me, partner is still in the game and it really is looking like its not our hand.

If you don't dbl, there's a good chance opps will end up in a quiet 2♠ which is bound to score well for them. Doubling might push them to 3♠ or leave you play 3x, both of which are probably good for you. I think passing is too passive at MPs.

[awm]

It seems those who don't double expect partner to balance with a bunch of small spades. For example several people suggested that with:

xxxx
xx
Kx
AQxxx

Partner should balance 3♣. I'd submit that this makes you extremely vulnerable to a four card overcall. After all, partner will never bid with a minimum opening regardless of whether he has 2 spades, 1 spade, or 0 spades since his double shows something like 15+ which he probably doesn't have. So do you balance? If the answer is yes, then what if partner has a 2443 hand? Despite the mild fit in clubs, you're quite likely to go for a number. What if partner has 2452 (even worse)? Usually it's not hard for opponents to double this either. If you won't balance, what if opponents have 8 or 9 spades between them? If partner has a minimum 1444 or even 0454 your result defending 2♠ is likely quite poor. I think the risk of being forced to decide whether to balance on these hands, where your only real hope to get it right is to trust the opponents bidding is a lot worse than the risk of going for a number opposite no game when the short hand doubles.

As for the opponents picking up trumps, sure there's a risk. But with length behind length it's fairly often the case that they can't pick up trumps. And I think the general strategy of "don't compete for partscore hands because it might help the opponents figure out the play when they outbid us" is a very poor strategy.

[whereagles]

awm, on Oct 24 2006, 07:36 PM, said:

some suggested with:

xxxx
xx
Kx
AQxxx

Partner should balance 3♣.

Well, that's an obvious 1NT or 2♣ to me, not a pass of 1♠

[Codo]

I gave opener 100 % too, but not for the double, but for his opening bid without spades and with few and soft values. If the bidding had been
pass (1 ♠) pass (2 ♠)

this had been an easy take out double.

Responders penalty doble is a no brainer at any form of scoring. Well maybe not if you are leading by 9-12 imps and this is the last board....