[sathyab]

Scoring: IMP

---

Say you pass as dealer. The bidding goes p-(1h)-2c-(3c).

You've played with this partner before a few times in on-line tourneys but "2/1, 3/5 vs suits, UDCA" is the extent of your agreements.

Do you take any action ?

[mike777]

pass
I do not expect partner to have 4 spades here.

[jdonn]

I would bid 3♦ hoping to bid 3♠ next, and figuring that gives us enough chances to hit a good landing spot.

Of course, if I had idiotically decided 3♦ shows a club fit too...

[pclayton]

Double should be responsive. I'm light on values, but I have a couple of extra cards in the unbids.

[ArtK78]

I bid 3♦. Partner is allowed to have a good hand and a second suit when he overcalls 2♣. This could still be our hand.

[jdonn]

pclayton, on Aug 10 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

Double should be responsive. I'm light on values, but I have a couple of extra cards in the unbids.

That is not standard at all. There may not be comlete agreement about whether double shows a club raise or a club honor, but unless you have an agreement to the contrary double is showing something about your clubs, not the unbid suits.

[ralph23]

Assuming the 3♣ cuebid by my RHO is a limit+ ♥ raise, and they're vul and we're not, a responsive double would be in order, at least the way we play them, EXCEPT we also play I must have a doubleton in partner's suit when I do that. Oh well.....

NB to raise ♣ in the strongest way I can, I would bid their suit, ♥.

This post has been edited by ralph23: 2007-August-10, 15:54

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Aug 10 2007, 01:47 PM, said:

pclayton, on Aug 10 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

Double should be responsive. I'm light on values, but I have a couple of extra cards in the unbids.

That is not standard at all. There may not be comlete agreement about whether double shows a club raise or a club honor, but unless you have an agreement to the contrary double is showing something about your clubs, not the unbid suits.

Its vague.

I put it into the category of a double of a Bergen raise: 1 major - pass - 3 clubs - double.

If we've had the discussion: "All doubles of artificial raises are takeout of the major" I would expect pard to get this one right, and the OP's auction.

If I've had the usual 15 minute cram before game time with a new pard, I wouldn't make the call and bid 3♦ (which fortunately, cannot be construed as a FNJ either )

[Halo]

3D

Too much pressure to be fancy about club support.

[Fluffy]

2-suiters play horribly opposite 1-suiters, pass quickly.

[sathyab]

pclayton, on Aug 10 2007, 04:53 PM, said:

I put it into the category of a double of a Bergen raise: 1 major - pass - 3 clubs - double.

If we've had the discussion: "All doubles of artificial raises are takeout of the major" I would expect pard to get this one right, and the OP's auction.

That's not standard either. A lot of people play that a double of a constructive Bergen raise is T/O of the major, but double of the Bergen limit raise is simply lead-directing in the suit that was used for the LR. The 3c here would seem like LR, but probably not an alertable bid, it wasn't alerted at the table anyway. So X of 3c would say you have Hx or Hxx in clubs probably.

Not that we had that agreement either. It's a pick-up partnership and you meet on-line a minute before game time. OKB 2/1 is supposed to take care of the rest. The answers are all in the book.

[goobers]

I'm no expert, but I've always understood double as jdonn described it, club showing.

[the hog]

We play X as responsive. A suit bid would be fit showing by a passed hand. With C just raise the suit.

[P_Marlowe]

No, I pass.

If you want to bid those hands
in the given sitution, play 2-suited
openings.

Besides, You may get another chance,
if you pass now, you may learn, that
they intended to settle for 3H.

Chances are remote, that you have game
your side, still possible, but not very likely,
if they bid game, you may have got information,
which warrants a 4S / 5D bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pclayton]

sathyab, on Aug 10 2007, 03:21 PM, said:

pclayton, on Aug 10 2007, 04:53 PM, said:

I put it into the category of a double of a Bergen raise: 1 major - pass - 3 clubs - double.

If we've had the discussion: "All doubles of artificial raises are takeout of the major" I would expect pard to get this one right, and the OP's auction.

That's not standard either. A lot of people play that a double of a constructive Bergen raise is T/O of the major, but double of the Bergen limit raise is simply lead-directing in the suit that was used for the LR. The 3c here would seem like LR, but probably not an alertable bid, it wasn't alerted at the table anyway. So X of 3c would say you have Hx or Hxx in clubs probably.

Not that we had that agreement either. It's a pick-up partnership and you meet on-line a minute before game time. OKB 2/1 is supposed to take care of the rest. The answers are all in the book.

I wouldn't think a double of a splinter would be takeout.

I still play a double of a limit raise like Bergen is takeout, although there's less utility.

[benlessard]

X = ♣

This is obvious

3♥ also should showing ♣ or at least a vgood hand.

my bid is 3♦ this could easily be our hand and i have everything i want --shape a 6cd suit, pts in my suit, no worthless values + shortness in opponent suit + parnter will know i dont have clubs support since I did not double the more i think about it i the more pass is a mistake.


My agreement is that 4th hand bid when both opp showed value are NF.

But even if 3♦ is forcing its still my bid

[cherdano]

Obviously X = clubs is standard, but I think in many similar situations X = takeout would be the more useful agreement.

E.g. 1D (1S) P (2D) X. Standard is probably diamonds, but with that you can bid 3♦ or 2♠, you almost always have safety at the 3-level, whereas if you have a strong 3-suiter, you would really love to show your hand with one cheap bid, you might have game or go down badly at the 3-level, depending on partner's hand.

[mikeh]

I'm not convinced that we want to be bidding here.

1stly, double is, for me, clubs, unable or unwilling to raise but encouraging partner to bid (with extreme shape) or lead.. and, perhaps more to the point, to deter any other lead. Kx(x) would be typical.

2ndly, we have good defence in context. Bidding seems right only if:

1) they can make 4♥ and we have a good, findable save

2) they can make and will stop at 3♥, and we have a good, findable save against a partscore.... not a high priority for me

3) we can make something

4) we can push them to an ummakable spot.

Points 1 and 3 are the most important.

But we have very good defence against 4♥. If partner holds the AK of his suit (and if they bid game, then he rates to have a decent suit, since he won't hold much else most of the time), I'd rather double than save.

And he rates to have some heart length: the more round suit length he has (and I'd expect about 9.2 round cards in his hand), the less likely it is that we have a viable save... if he lacks the ♣A, we almost certainly don't have a good save and if he has it, we have good defence... so long as he leads a black suit. If we bid 3♦, he isn't leading a black suit.

Besides, if we bid 3♦ and they reach 4♥, are we really bidding 4♠? If not, then 3♦ leads to a save only when he fits diamonds... and he probably doesn't.

So bidding significantly weakens our chances of beating 4♥ while rarely getting us to a good save (and if we have a makable contract, it is far more likely to be in spades than in ♦s)

[cherdano]

P.S.: I agree about passing, of course it could be our hand in 6♦ but the odds just seem too much in favor of defending. Even if I had X=responsive available, I am not sure I would use it.