[geller]

IMPs, Both Vul, Dlr: W. You, North, hold ♠AQJ965 ♥-- ♦AT6 ♣AJ98. RHO opens 1♥. What call do you make?

[FrancesHinden]

I still bid 1S, but I don't mind double; it's right on the edge. If I double and LHO raises hearts, partner won't be able to bid a minor easily anyway, while 1H 1S 4H P P x may get us to the right spot.

Don't feel very strongly either way; either could work well.

4S is horrible.

[pclayton]

I'll double. This hand has a lot of playing strength, plus there are some attractive alternate strains.

[mikeh]

I'd rather bid 1♠, altho it is very close. What tips the scales for me is the prospect of LHO bouncing in ♥s. He may not: it is as likely that partner holds, say, Kxxxx in ♥ as that LHO does.

But if he bounces, and our hand suggests that there is a significant possibility that he will, I think I am better placed after 1♠ then double than I am after an original double.

Consider the second auction: over 4♥ do I bid my 6 card suit...not great texture, tapped at trick one, potentially a disaster... or do I double again...to be passed out either when they make or (more likely) when 4♠ is a better spot?

Typically, 1♠ then double is a good 6=1=3=3, and this hand is fairly close.

Give me the ♠10, and it is even closer: I think I would probably double with that card... it is just enough to make me happier about bidding 4♠ if I had to...happier, not happy.

[neilkaz]

This hand has considerably more playing strength than a normal 16HCP overcall so I upgrade it and dbl and then rebid ♠. Perhaps we belong in a minor instead, and possibly is a slam ?

[inquiry]

i am firmly in the minority 1♠ then dbl camp.

[FrancesHinden]

neilkaz, on Jan 8 2007, 04:47 PM, said:

This hand has considerably more playing strength than a normal 16HCP overcall so I upgrade it and dbl and then rebid ♠. Perhaps we belong in a minor instead, and possibly is a slam ?

The great thing about this hand is that we all agree that we might belong in a minor instead, and possible in a slam.

The 1S-then-double crowd think that sequence has a better chance to getting to a minor when it's right after LHO raises hearts aggressively. Double-then-4S doesn't show a 3-suiter, it shows a huge hand with spades and partner will pass with xx xxx xx Kxxxxx opposite which 7C has good play.

The doublers first think they have a better chance of getting to the right spot if LHO doesn't raise hearts aggressively as partner will know we have a very strong hand. If we overcall 1S partner won't realise that something like, ooh, xx QJ10x QJxx Qxx gives us good play for 4S and we might play in 1S.

They're both right. Can we look at LHO's hand before selecting our call, please?

[pbleighton]

Double. We may belong in a minor, and my 1S overcalls are never this good. I don't like 4S, in spite of the fact that in other situations I am more likely to bid 4M unilaterally than many other players. This hand has too much going for it.

Peter

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I would double, it is less risky, since you hold the spades,
and the suit is good enough to bid it, regardless of the level
the bidding comes back.

But 1S is also ok, it is a style issue.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

Just a thought on the double. There is a real chance that those who double, hoping to bring the minors into play immediately, are going to be faced with a modest or big ♥ raise and a responsive double or lebensohlish 2N rather than a pure one-suit bid such as ♣s or ♦s.

Now, who amongst us would actually bid our ♣ suit??? I suspect we'd all bid ♠s. So, ironically, the best chance to actually find our minor suit fit may turn out to be to bid 1♠ and then say double

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Jan 8 2007, 01:17 PM, said:

Just a thought on the double. There is a real chance that those who double, hoping to bring the minors into play immediately, are going to be faced with a modest or big ♥ raise and a responsive double or lebensohlish 2N rather than a pure one-suit bid such as ♣s or ♦s.

Now, who amongst us would actually bid our ♣ suit??? I suspect we'd all bid ♠s. So, ironically, the best chance to actually find our minor suit fit may turn out to be to bid 1♠ and then say double

I don't think this is a bad argument against double.

If pard can trot out 5 minor (or 4N) over 4♥, this is great news. Its a lot less likely pard could after we overcall 1♠. If partner passes (likely), I will chance 4♠, which is a pretty good description.

OTOH, if we initially overcall and hear the same bounce, we won't be on the same ground. We can double certainly enough, but pard rates to leave it in with a lot of non-descript 23-?-? hands.

[Echognome]

<digression>

FrancesHinden, on Jan 8 2007, 11:38 AM, said:

The doublers first think they have a better chance of getting to the right spot if LHO doesn't raise hearts aggressively as partner will know we have a very strong hand. If we overcall 1S partner won't realise that something like, ooh, xx QJ10x QJxx Qxx gives us good play for 4S and we might play in 1S.

I am also a 1♠ bidder. However, with this example that you gave, I bid 1NT if it goes (1♥) - 1♠ - (Pass) - ?

In part I bid 1NT because I'm in the heavy overcall camp and try to keep the auction alive more than if 1♠ were more limited. Heck, 1NT might play better than 1♠ and partner can always return to 2♠.

However, if you gave me a stiff spade, I might pass. It gets very close.
</digression>

[cherdano]

I fall in the 1♠ camp more often than the majority with single-suiters -- which is why I can double here, partner will expect a flexible hand for double-then-4S.

In fact, I would expect Mike's "strong 6133" as a typical hand for X-then-4S, whereas 1S-then-X will often be 51(43) or similar. I would expect partner to pass with pretty much all 2344 or 23(53) hands.

Arend

[mike777]

Interesting post and discussion. I would bid x and then spades as I do not want to bid one spade and then x later with a void. In general just trying to never or almost never make a takeout x with a void.

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Jan 8 2007, 05:03 PM, said:

Mike you feel way more comfortable than I would Xing after 1H-1S-4H-p-p. I think partner will sit more often than is right opposite this (there is a big difference with this and 6133). Of course, Xing then bidding 4S could result in a minus with a plus available against 4H, but I think that is less likely than going -790 instead of -200 or +200 instead of +620, both of which are very poor results.

If partner made a responsive X after 1H X 2H or 1H X 3H I'm sure I'd drive to slam so I think I'd be able to find clubs if it was right.

I doubt that I am way more comfortable: this hand is so close that changing a 9 to a 10 might be enough to change my bid...so I'm not even close to comfortable with either approach: I just feel slightly less uncomfortable after 1♠.... and bear in mind that if partner makes a responsive double after my 1♠, I can show slam ambitions in ♣s (well, I can sometimes, and other times I may just have to bid it) whereas if I double and partner responsive doubles, I'm likely screwed in terms of finding ♣s, let alone slam...ok, maybe can just blast there as well

[jmc]

In face to face bridge I am rarely playing in a field that is all good competition. I often will look left and right and decide how likely that pesky 3H or 4H call is from these people. I might lean slightly towards 1S against better opponents and lean towards double against palookas.

jmc

[inquiry]

mike777, on Jan 8 2007, 05:21 PM, said:

I would bid x and then spades as I do not want to bid one spade and then x later with a void. In general just trying to never or almost never make a takeout x with a void.

Interesting, you make a takeout double with a void because you in general don't make takeout doubles with a void.