[OleBerg]

Apollo81, on Apr 4 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Not by a passed hand.

Does everyone agree that it does promise a rebid by an UPH?

No. For reasons alredy brought forth by others.

Best Regards

Ole Berg

[gnasher]

Some people play the cue bid as forcing to agreement - that is, until a suit is raised or someone bids notrumps.

This allows a cue bid on an invitational hand with only one major, such as Kxxx xx AKJx xxx or xx Kxxx K10xxx Ax. The main benefits are that a jump to two of a major is better defined, and you can avoid having to play a poor 4-3 fit.

Playing this style, the cue bid has to promise another bid, even by a passed hand. If it didn't, a doubler with a good hand would have to cue bid in return, leaving you without enough space to investigate both fits and stops.

This approach is, or used to be, standard in the UK, possibly because takeout doubles tend to be more traditional.

[dake50]

Don't I have other forces available? jump cue eg. Can I use this to get best choice on 5-7 4-4M? No continue? How about 5-5M 4-5? Would 2N force by either partner? Expect to show suits next? Isn't 3M clearer if cheap cue is allowed?

[whereagles]

yes and no

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Apr 5 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

This approach seems fundamentally flawed since your hand is not good enough to drive to the 3 level,

For "invitational" read "worth the three level opposite a takeout double". If you don't think my examples are worth that, just adjust them accordingly (or stop making crappy takeout doubles).

Quote

and if you DON'T find a fit you will just get way too high.

Having this agreement probably presupposes that the takeout double will be have either two four-card suits outside clubs or extra values. So, if you don't find a fit, you will find a game. I did mention an association between this method and the only country in the world where they still play proper takeout doubles.

[cherdano]

gnasher, on Apr 5 2008, 09:19 AM, said:

Jlall, on Apr 5 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

This approach seems fundamentally flawed since your hand is not good enough to drive to the 3 level,

For "invitational" read "worth the three level opposite a takeout double". If you don't think my examples are worth that, just adjust them accordingly (or stop making crappy takeout doubles).

But there are almost no passed hands that
1. don't have a 5-card suit and
2. can force to the 3-level opposite a takeout double.

I admit your 2452 example would qualify, here you would play 3♥ if you have a 4-4 heart fit (bad, might be too high), but you would play 3♦ rather than 2♥ if partner has just 3 hearts, i.e. play a likely 5-4 fit rather than a 4-3 fit.

[gnasher]

cherdano, on Apr 5 2008, 05:43 PM, said:

But there are almost no passed hands that
1. don't have a 5-card suit and
2. can force to the 3-level opposite a takeout double.

I admit your 2452 example would qualify, here you would play 3♥ if you have a 4-4 heart fit (bad, might be too high), but you would play 3♦ rather than 2♥ if partner has just 3 hearts, i.e. play a likely 5-4 fit rather than a 4-3 fit.

Perhaps you expect less from a takeout double than the practitioners of this method.

With my 2452 example - xx Kxxx K10xxx Ax, once we'd found a heart fit I'd be more worried about missing game. AQxx AQxx Jxx xx is close to a minimum, and not an especially well-fitting one either, but game is pretty good.

[cherdano]

True I would definitely double with a queen less than your example.

[gnasher]

cherdano, on Apr 6 2008, 12:23 AM, said:

True I would definitely double with a queen less than your example.

I might do too, so being at the three level isn't completely safe. For what it's worth, some of the time that 3♥ goes down, they'll make 3♣.