[TimG]

As dealer (IMPs, NV/NV), you hold ♠AK93 ♥K8752 ♦9 ♣K97 and see this auction:

1♥-P-1N-P
2♣-P-2♦-2♠
P-P-3♣

1NT was forcing. Do you agree with opener's pass over 2♠? Would double be penalty or takeout? If responder had balanced with a double instead of bidding 3♣, would that be penalty or takeout?

Having gotten to this point, what is your guess for responder's shape?

[kenrexford]

Spoiler

Well, this is just goofy. I'm torn on what this should mean.

On the one hand, I think 3♣ could be what could be called an "auto game last train." In other words, Responder should be rebidding his diamonds but claiming a maximum for a 3♦ rebid, whatever that is contextually.

On the other, I think this could be more akin to some sort of strange snapdragon-like bid. Something like six diamonds and two hearts.

I suppose that this could be the natural club-diamond 3-6 type hand,

Spoiler

but that seems too obvious. No, really I think that seems like a 2NT call here.

Or, maybe I was out in the sun too long today.

[Edited for forum type.]

[mike777]

My guess is a maximum 6-4 hand in d and clubs. 1nt can be quite wide ranging including mild invite without spade stopper but less than a strong invite hand.

For several partnerships, not sure how standard this is, 2nt over 2s would not be natural but good/bad...that means 3c is true max hand with diamonds and clubs.

2=1=6=4 maximum, here 1nt is quite a wide range and 2c is an extremely wide range.

[the hog]

I would have doubled 2S for penalties. I think anyone who bids this way - coming in with a delayed 2S has no idea what they are doing. You don't see this too often, only amongst weak players.

[han]

I agree with Ron that the opponents likely have no clue. However, that does not mean that we can beat 2S and that we should be doubling them.

3C is clearly natural, showing probably 6 diamonds and 4 clubs. Rexford should refrain from making such posts in the B/I forum imo.

[kenrexford]

han, on Jun 22 2008, 06:11 AM, said:

I agree with Ron that the opponents likely have no clue. However, that does not mean that we can beat 2S and that we should be doubling them.

3C is clearly natural, showing probably 6 diamonds and 4 clubs. Rexford should refrain from making such posts in the B/I forum imo.

Damn! Missed that again!

[fromageGB]

Agree. 2♠ is probably going off as we have no fit and probably at least half the points, but double in IMPS is a bit risky.
Double would be penalty.
If responder balanced with double that is neither takeout nor penalty, but "values".
Responder is weak with x(x) x(x) 6 4.

[jtfanclub]

fromageGB, on Jun 24 2008, 09:04 AM, said:

Agree. 2♠ is probably going off as we have no fit and probably at least half the points, but double in IMPS is a bit risky.
Double would be penalty.
If responder balanced with double that is neither takeout nor penalty, but "values".
Responder is weak with x(x) x(x) 6 4.

But if partner is 6-4 in the minors, he's got an almost-even chance to have a singleton spade, giving them a fit in spades.

[han]

Jlall, on Jun 22 2008, 02:41 PM, said:

Why can't partner just have 5D and 4C? ie xxx x AKJTx xxxx. Anyways, I pass, and would not have smacked them off in 2S.

Yes I would also bid 2D followed by 3C with this hand, agree. I think 6-4 is more likely and with 5-4 I would more often pass 2C, but with these suits 2D is clear.

[effervesce]

I'd have doubled 2♠- a big chance for a large gain, while a relatively small chance of 2♠X making. If you don't double them and they make occasionally, you're not doubling enough. Anyway, I'm guessing responder is 6 diamonds 4 clubs.

[jtfanclub]

effervesce, on Jun 24 2008, 09:07 PM, said:

If you don't double them and they make occasionally, you're not doubling enough. Anyway, I'm guessing responder is 6 diamonds 4 clubs.

Ewwwwwwwwwwww.....

Gain 2 IMPs at most if you set them one trick. Lose 8 if they make.

This is not a great hand for 'if they don't make doubled occassionally, you aren't doubling enough'. This is a good hand for 'if they don't go down more than 1 doubled occassionally, you aren't doubling enough'.

Edited to add: if it were the LOLs at my club, it wouldn't shock me at all for the 2♠ bid to be a 5 card suit and a 14 count. Know your opponents and all that, but I'd say fully half the time we have an auction like this, the opponents had game. When LOLs back into a bid like this one, it usually means that experts would have been in the auction a long time ago.

[effervesce]

jtfanclub, on Jun 24 2008, 09:41 PM, said:

effervesce, on Jun 24 2008, 09:07 PM, said:

If you don't double them and they make occasionally, you're not doubling enough. Anyway, I'm guessing responder is 6 diamonds 4 clubs.

Ewwwwwwwwwwww.....

Gain 2 IMPs at most if you set them one trick. Lose 8 if they make.

This is not a great hand for 'if they don't make doubled occassionally, you aren't doubling enough'. This is a good hand for 'if they don't go down more than 1 doubled occassionally, you aren't doubling enough'.

Edited to add: if it were the LOLs at my club, it wouldn't shock me at all for the 2♠ bid to be a 5 card suit and a 14 count. Know your opponents and all that, but I'd say fully half the time we have an auction like this, the opponents had game. When LOLs back into a bid like this one, it usually means that experts would have been in the auction a long time ago.

That's assuming they're just one off. They could be two or three off.

What do you think the chances of them making are? Assuming that if they go off they only go 1 off, and if they make they make exactly, by your figures X breaks even if they're making 20% of the time.

I don't believe partner would bid 3♣ with a minimum crappy hand. If partner has zero defensive tricks and had bid on shape, he can pull anyway, given he knows your hand pretty well (he knows you're almost certain to be 4513 from the bidding).

[jtfanclub]

effervesce, on Jun 25 2008, 12:09 AM, said:

I don't believe partner would bid 3♣ with a minimum crappy hand. If partner has zero defensive tricks and had bid on shape, he can pull anyway, given he knows your hand pretty well (he knows you're almost certain to be 4513 from the bidding).

While what you say is true, unfortunately, where you have to X is after

1♥ 1NT
2♣ 2♦

and they bid 2♠. At that point, your partner could have a 1-2-7-3 0 count for all you know. I think there's an argument for 'now that partner has bid 3♣, I'd like to go back in time and double'. Unfortunately, that's not an option.

There might be cases where I'd pull the X as responder, but I'd have to be ridiculously weak. Partner should guess I'm within a card of 1-2-6-4 from the auction, and he shouldn't count on me for more than one defensive trick.

[TimG]

jtfanclub, on Jun 25 2008, 10:12 AM, said:

While what you say is true, unfortunately, where you have to X is after

1♥ 1NT
2♣ 2♦

and they bid 2♠. At that point, your partner could have a 1-2-7-3 0 count for all you know.

I don't think it is typical to respond with 1273 zero counts.

[han]

Partner would pull with a 1273 0-count anyway so it isn't relevant.