[MickyB]

Scoring: IMP

Genuine expert table, RHO opens 1♣, you double, partner bids 1♥. What's your plan?

---

[P_Marlowe]

2S, not forcing, but the bid shows a hand,
which just needs an Ace to make game.

The alternative would be 2NT, but this would
loose the spade suit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[han]

2C. A jump to 2S shows a single-suited hand imo, not a balanced hand. I will bid 2S next.

[awm]

I like 1♠. Not forcing, but showing too good a hand to overcall. If partner passes it out, it's fairly likely we didn't have a game. For me 2♠ would be forcing and tend to be more spade-oriented (generally if a non-jump shows a big hand already, a jump is forcing).

[pclayton]

I like the 2♣ / 2♠ continuation. 1♠ could be made on King less.

[pbleighton]

"2C. A jump to 2S shows a single-suited hand imo, not a balanced hand. I will bid 2S next."

Agree.

Peter

[jdonn]

I like 1♠ but 2♣ is ok too. Most people double and cuebid waaaay too frequently, it should be about the equivalent of a 23 count, although this is close enough that it's ok too. But I am not bothered that 1♠ has a pretty wide range since after all we are just on the 1 level, and I really don't think we have game if partner passes.

I like the convention (does it have a name?) that if I double and cuebid, the cheapest bid by partner is artificial and shows a complete bust, every other bid is natural and what it sounds like with at least something like 3+, and forcing to game.

[Apollo81]

1♠ wtp

[barmar]

Were you playing in the OKbridge mini-IMP tourney last night? I remember that hand.

I chose double followed by 2♠, although in retrospect 2♣ followed by 2♠ seems better. But I'd never just bid 1♠ -- that shows extra, but not this much.

[HeartA]

2C. 1S as the second choice. 2S shows at least 6+ spades and tends to deny H support.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Mar 11 2007, 06:35 PM, said:

I like 1♠ but 2♣ is ok too. Most people double and cuebid waaaay too frequently, it should be about the equivalent of a 23 count, although this is close enough that it's ok too. But I am not bothered that 1♠ has a pretty wide range since after all we are just on the 1 level, and I really don't think we have game if partner passes.

I like the convention (does it have a name?) that if I double and cuebid, the cheapest bid by partner is artificial and shows a complete bust, every other bid is natural and what it sounds like with at least something like 3+, and forcing to game.

Herbert Negative is the only name I've heard similar type bids called, and they are sensible in an auction like this.

Normally, pard has to rebid his suit with a bust, but it would be nice for pard to be able to show 5 hearts and a little something with 2♥ over 2♣.

[P_Marlowe]

Hannie, on Mar 11 2007, 04:52 PM, said:

2C. A jump to 2S shows a single-suited hand imo, not a balanced hand. I will bid 2S next.

Hi,

I would tend to agree, but the down side to 2C
followed by 2S is, that this seq. is game forcing,
at least for me.
Partner can pass 2S, and I will survive this, and
if he bids on, he will only raise with 2 cards, else
he will bid a new suit, giving me the chance to show
the 3 card support for hearts.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

what about bidding 1♠ on first round?, maybe it is too laet now. 1♠ is enough for me.

[han]

If you think that 2C is too strong then you bid 1S. My point was that 2S shows a different kind of hand.

[inquiry]

1♠ after the double is more than enough for me. I would never consider a jump to 2♠ with this hand.

I will admit that the 1♠ bid is a matter-of-style related to what kind of hands you will overcall 1♠ on versus double and rebid spades. Those who prefer to double with all 16 hcp hands to "show" extra values can not bid a simple 1♠ here. So if your style is to limit your overcalls to 15 or 16 hcp, then you have to do something other than bid 1♠. In that case, the something other should be 2♣ not 2♠... 2♠ shows a one suiter. Here you can aim towards NT or hearts as well as spades. Don't confuse the issue with a 2♠ leap.

[whereagles]

1♠ should be enough. Pard will bid over this whenever he has 3-4 hcps, so don't worry.

[skjaeran]

1♠ is adequate. I've got 5.5 losers. Cue-bidding 2♣ is too much, and a jump to 2♠ shows a longer suit and more playing strenght. I'm not afraid of missing a game if partner is passing this.

I'm showing something like 19+ hcp and a 5-bagger or 16/17+ and a 6-bagger by doubling followed by a non-jump rebid.

[Walddk]

1♠ is plenty. I have a 5 loser hand and no intermediates. I don't think we will have missed a game if partner can't bid again. The hand needs to be a little stronger for me to bid 2♣ first.

A jump to 2♠ wouldn't even cross my mind.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

since nobody mentioned it, the alternative to the bids
already mentioned is 2NT, that was the bid, I thought
about, before I decided to suggest 2S ...

With kind regards
Marlowe

[MickyB]

Scoring: XIMP

1♣-X-P-1♥
P-2♠-P-3♠
P-4♠-AP

---

I'd have bid 1♠:2♠, 4♠. Occasionally a 1♠ rebid might miss 4♥, I guess, but not often.

Seems to me that the actual South did rather a lot of bidding on his hand. I believe 2♠ traditionally shows an Acol Two, but I'd have thought that could get away with rebidding 1♠ nowadays.

2♣ then 2♠ sounds GF, and I don't think I have that.

This post has been edited by MickyB: 2007-March-12, 15:42