[ewj]

Scoring: IMP

---

Playing against a pretty good pair, and LHO opens a weak only multi (weak two in either major).
You play an initial double of this as Dixon style 13-15 bal or 19+...

Partner passes and RHO bids 2♥ pass or correct....partner protects with a double...is this even a close decision?

[han]

I'd pass, I don't think it is a close decision.

[pclayton]

han, on Sep 8 2008, 11:03 AM, said:

I'd pass, I don't think it is a close decision.

I'm surprised at this, although if you upgrade my heart spots a little, I'd pass too.

If the auction started 2♥ - x - p I wouldn't pass and defending a multi gives us even less reason to think they are playing a 6-0 fit, where we could hope pard has a heart intermediate. We are looking at a stiff diamond, so RHO could have passed 2♦ with many hand types looking at a void heart. Put me down for an overbid of 3♣ (assuming Lebensohl applies). Frankly, this might be the kind of hand where they can make 2♥ and we can make 3N.

____________

Side note: It seems everyone is playing Dixon, or a Dixon variant over multi, but I'm starting to wonder if it really makes that much sense to pass and wait with a three suiter. There's a couple of problems I see:

1. In the OP, pard's double can be anywhere from a protective 4045 9 count, up to a 17-18 short in hearts. That's a pretty wide range, and also makes passing dangerous.

2. Holding both majors, LHO gets a free shot of 3♥ looking at 3+-3+ and anywhere from a zero count up to a 14-15. I kibbed a hand the other day where the player had a 4045 16 count and had to wade out to the four level. This just doesn't feel like good bridge to me.

I'm sure there are plenty of good reasons to play Dixon, but I'm having my doubts, and hands like this don't give me any confidence.

[MFA]

I'm not passing this one, but it is a close decision.
I'm used to a style, where the doubling of 2♦ with a 3-suiter starts at around 16/17. D+D is takeout with (16)17+. P+D is takeout with 10-16.

[andy_h]

I'd leb it planning to pass 3C

[ewj]

I must say I'm surprised that 3 people out of 4 say they wouldn't pass.

I didn't pass at the table, although 2H was going for quite a lot.

I was told that it was automatic to pass and that I was ridiculus not to, which I admit I did think was a bit unfair. I thought I might lead a diamond, picking up partner's holding and then the opps would make lots of diamond tricks, while I'd only make 2 trump tricks. I thought they could easily have an 8 card fit, although probably a 7 card fit but quite likely to have the balance of power.

For the record partner had xxx A AJxx AQxxx and the weak two was on

xx
JT9xxx
Kxx
Kx

so I'm pretty unlucky that this is going for so much, club king in the slot, stiff heart king in the dummy and so forth...we an make 6C on the hand, although we played in 3C after I lebensohled.

[pclayton]

It also sounds like 3N is pretty good.

[Apollo81]

IMO not a clear decision either way due to the IMP scoring and lousy heart spots.

[catch22]

I didn't pass at the time - but now think it is right to pass.

Would the passers still pass with

---

Is this closer or does it make no difference

[OleBerg]

MFA, on Sep 8 2008, 11:37 PM, said:

I'm not passing this one, but it is a close decision.
I'm used to a style, where the doubling of 2♦ with a 3-suiter starts at around 16/17. D+D is takeout with (16)17+. P+D is takeout with 10-16.

In this thread:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=27256

you voiced the concern that, when void in hearts, the minimum requirements for a double would be lower. I agreed in that thread, and here the danger is even bigger.

I pull to 3♣ and I dont find it close.

With no good spot to play in, I'd revert to strongest play:

Pass and prey.

[OleBerg]

ewj, on Sep 9 2008, 04:58 PM, said:

For the record partner had xxx A AJxx AQxxx.

On which I find an initial double mandatory, even if the convention says "13-15 balanced". It should really be: "13-15 with no good bid."

[pclayton]

catch22, on Sep 13 2008, 01:52 AM, said:

I didn't pass at the time - but now think it is right to pass.

Would the passers still pass with

---

Is this closer or does it make no difference

This I'd pass. There's no safe harbor and our ODR has been reduced. I have no idea if we are setting 2♥, but 2♠ looks unappetizing.

[nige1]

ewj, on Sep 8 2008, 01:38 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

Playing against a pretty good pair, and LHO opens a weak only multi (weak two in either major).
You play an initial double of this as Dixon style 13-15 bal or 19+...
Partner passes and RHO bids 2♥ pass or correct....partner protects with a double...is this even a close decision?

---

IMO _P = 10, 2N = 4
Partner has a takeout double of ♥ or 19+. In the latter case, ♥ may be your suit but you will find it hard to reach game or slam in that denomination, if you don't pass now. If opponents bid and make 6♣ in the other room, congratulate them.

The EBU wanted a defence to Multi before they would license the convention and at the last minute, they asked Chris Dixon to concoct a defence; so it is not surprising if improvement is possible.