[han]

Scoring: IMP

p - p - 1D - (2H)
??

---

What's your call?

[655321]

Double.

Yes, I owe partner a spade.

[dake50]

Do I need immediate action on this hand? I think partner reopens on any future-in-it hand. Then my delayed strong action shows this tainted S-holding, near 3C bid.

[jdonn]

I tend to pass rather than making offshape negative doubles but this is a sure exception for me. I love where the honors are and it's getting borderline too good to risk passing.

[Gerben42]

Not stuck. Dbl...

[whereagles]

dake50, on Mar 5 2008, 07:55 AM, said:

Do I need immediate action on this hand? I think partner reopens on any future-in-it hand.

I doubt that. Unless LHO raises hearts, it's good odds pard will have something like 3 hearts to an honor and pass this out.

You have to bid NOW. Hence either 3♣ or dbl. I prefer dbl.

[helene_t]

Dbl is clear. I think I would try 3♦ in a weak-NT context (or 3♣ if that is not GF) but that's probably off-topic.

Btw, is it really optimal to play negative doubles and forcing freebids here? The only way to end in 2♠ is if responder makes a negative double and opener happens to be minimal with 4 spades. Wouldn't it be better to play dbl as primarily a NFB in spades, and then bid 2♠ with (usually) 4 spades? (Not sure if 2♠ should be forcing or if the strong hands with 4 spades should double, just a vague idea).

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Mar 5 2008, 09:00 AM, said:

I tend to pass rather than making offshape negative doubles but this is a sure exception for me. I love where the honors are and it's getting borderline too good to risk passing.

What he said

[paulg]

The Bridge World puts this hand in its bidding competition (MSC) every few months to see how many panelists will distort the system and double (which guarantees 4 spades in BW Standard).

I'm sure they'd be fairly unanimous with doubling here.

(Interestingly the March issue has a similar hand but with two spades and three diamonds and there were still 2 doublers!).

Paul

[FrancesHinden]

helene_t, on Mar 5 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

Dbl is clear. I think I would try 3♦ in a weak-NT context (or 3♣ if that is not GF) but that's probably off-topic.

Btw, is it really optimal to play negative doubles and forcing freebids here? The only way to end in 2♠ is if responder makes a negative double and opener happens to be minimal with 4 spades. Wouldn't it be better to play dbl as primarily a NFB in spades, and then bid 2♠ with (usually) 4 spades? (Not sure if 2♠ should be forcing or if the strong hands with 4 spades should double, just a vague idea).

I know someone who likes to play that double = 3 or 5 spades, an immediate 2S = 4.

[joker_gib]

Dbl (nothing else available)

[kenrexford]

X.

[ewj]

My partner isn't afraid of 4-3 fits

[paulg]

ewj, on Mar 5 2008, 01:49 PM, said:

My partner isn't afraid of 4-3 fits

or is he just happy when they are that good?

[gnasher]

helene_t, on Mar 5 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

Wouldn't it be better to play dbl as primarily a NFB in spades, and then bid 2♠ with (usually) 4 spades? (Not sure if 2♠ should be forcing or if the strong hands with 4 spades should double, just a vague idea).

I like that idea. I don't think you could include strong hands with four spades in the double - it would make it too difficult to handle a raise by LHO.

[inquiry]

ewj, on Mar 5 2008, 08:49 AM, said:

My partner isn't afraid of 4-3 fits

Double is correct....but....

How does your partner like 3-3 fits...

[skjaeran]

Playing a unbalanced 1♦ opening, It would be close between double and 3♦.

Playing more standard I'd no doubt make a negative double here.