[Winstonm]

Scoring: IMP

1D-2H*-?

*Weak Preemptive Jump Overcall

---

This may not be a great problem for advanced/expert, but it is the third from the team game trilogy. We won this match by 1-imp on this decision - negative double or pass or something else?

[mike777]

Winstonm, on May 6 2007, 02:33 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1D-2H*-?

*Weak Preemptive Jump Overcall

---

This may not be a great problem for advanced/expert, but it is the third from the team game trilogy. We won this match by 1-imp on this decision - negative double or pass or something else?

Pass

I can still have 6 or 7 working hcp for pass here I think.

[Halo]

Double.

No point pretending, it's what I would do - and apologise if necessary.

[P_Marlowe]

pass, ... I may dbl, but most likely
I will pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

yucky hand. I bid a lot, but i'm passing this one

[Winstonm]

I was swayed by the shape most of all, and the knowledge that at NV equal RHO didn't have to hold the world's fair for a suit so the K might not be total wastage.

I figured that a 5/4 club fit would be fine at the 3-level, a 2S contract would be O.K., and we might even survive 3D without a trump lead, and my K would be of value if partner found a NT call.

I talked myself into a double - lucky guess, I guess - but it turned out to be a double partscore swing of +220.

[Gerben42]

Double. I love playing Fantunes, then this hand would be a non-problem

[kenrexford]

I'd double, but I hate it. I'm protecting a partner who will not be able to reopen because he probably has heart length of some troubling amount. Hopefully he appropriately downgrades that holding.

That being said, this hand isa great hand for a personal style. For many years, I have played that 1♦ is unbalanced, meaning 4+ diamonds and, if only 4-5 diamonds, then also a stiff or a void somewhere.

This helps with my decision here.

If partner has six diamonds, I like my hand.
If partner has a stiff heart, I am shocked but like my hand.
If partner has a stiff spade, and even four hearts, then we have a nine-card club fit, or a double fit in the minors, or a nine-card diamond fit.
If partner has a stiff club, and four hearts, then we have a spade fit or a diamond fit.

Eliminate the unbalanced requirement, and partner may have the death hand of 3442.

A similar advantage happened this weekend. Holding ♠x ♥Qxx ♦Qxxxx ♣AJ10x. Partner opened 1♦. When the opponents competed to 3♥, I was safe bidding 4♦, because I knew that the opponents had a nine-fit in hearts. +130 was a good IMP pickup. Sure, I might have bid 4♦ anyway, but it was easy with the information I had.

[skjaeran]

kenrexford, on May 7 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

I'd double, but I hate it. I'm protecting a partner who will not be able to reopen because he probably has heart length of some troubling amount. Hopefully he appropriately downgrades that holding.

That being said, this hand isa great hand for a personal style. For many years, I have played that 1♦ is unbalanced, meaning 4+ diamonds and, if only 4-5 diamonds, then also a stiff or a void somewhere.

This helps with my decision here.

If partner has six diamonds, I like my hand.
If partner has a stiff heart, I am shocked but like my hand.
If partner has a stiff spade, and even four hearts, then we have a nine-card club fit, or a double fit in the minors, or a nine-card diamond fit.
If partner has a stiff club, and four hearts, then we have a spade fit or a diamond fit.

Eliminate the unbalanced requirement, and partner may have the death hand of 3442.

A similar advantage happened this weekend. Holding ♠x ♥Qxx ♦Qxxxx ♣AJ10x. Partner opened 1♦. When the opponents competed to 3♥, I was safe bidding 4♦, because I knew that the opponents had a nine-fit in hearts. +130 was a good IMP pickup. Sure, I might have bid 4♦ anyway, but it was easy with the information I had.

I also play a unbalanced 1♦ opening. Then this is a no-brainer negative double.

Playing standard methods, I'd still double. But now it really is a stretch.