[ArtK78]

Scoring: MP

1♣ - (1♥) - Dbl* - (2♥)
Dbl - (3♥) - P - (P)
Dbl - (P) - ?

---

*shows exactly 4 spades.

(1) What kind of hand do you expect partner to hold?
(2) What action do you take?

[TimG]

I know this will be met with nearly unanimous disagreement, but I'd rather raise clubs over the 1♥ overcall than make the more "flexible" negative double.

As for what to do in this case: I don't really know. Perhaps partner will know and can place the contract after I bid 4♥?

[dake50]

Partner says "our hand, our hand". I guess we have 5C or defend 3H-X decision. Only DA is defensive here, so I vote 5C direct or 4H-splinter if that is our agreement. If partner thinks his 4H-6C is misfit, I dispel that.

[P_Marlowe]

#2 Pass
#1 no idea, and I dont really care, but he wont have 4 spades,
he wont have 6 or more clubs, so fairly likely a bal. hand,
with +18HCP, but does it matter?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[y66]

I'll play p for 1345, too good to open 1D and rebid 2C and doesn't want to play in 3N even if I have a heart stop. Maybe

A Kxx KTxx AKxxx
K xxx KJTx AKQxx

Think he's playing me for 4144 or 42(43).

Like TimG's 4H idea.

[jdonn]

I think 5♣ is clear, and that partner will tend to be stronger than the example hands so far given. I think the prototype is 18-19 balanced with no (or a weak) heart stopper.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Sep 21 2008, 09:24 AM, said:

I know this will be met with nearly unanimous disagreement, but I'd rather raise clubs over the 1♥ overcall than make the more "flexible" negative double.

I don't mind that sometimes people will raise the minor on this instead of doubling and that their minds can never be changed, but they always make their choice in opposition to the "flexible" other choice. I don't negative double because it's flexible, I do it because it shows four spades and certain other bids (for me?) such as raising partner's minor deny four spades!

[TimG]

jdonn, on Sep 21 2008, 11:06 AM, said:

TimG, on Sep 21 2008, 09:24 AM, said:

I know this will be met with nearly unanimous disagreement, but I'd rather raise clubs over the 1♥ overcall than make the more "flexible" negative double.

I don't mind that sometimes people will raise the minor on this instead of doubling and that their minds can never be changed, but they always make their choice in opposition to the "flexible" other choice. I don't negative double because it's flexible, I do it because it shows four spades and certain other bids (for me?) such as raising partner's minor deny four spades!

Sorry if I sounded dogmatic -- I do recognize that there will sometimes be a cost to not showing ♠J853 and could probably be convinced I am wrong (I recognize that it is not your obligation to convince me and that I have not given any more argument for my approach than you have for yours). I also freely admitted that my opinion was unlikely to be met with any agreement, though I do think it is worthy of consideration.

I put flexible in quotes because, as you seem to agree, the negative double isn't really flexible, rather it is very rigid: double with exactly four spades, take other action without exactly four spades more or less regardless of the rest of the hand.

[gnasher]

1. One of:
- a strong xx45, but not strong enough to game-force with 3♦ over 2♥
- a balanced 18-19 without a heart stop
- a game-forcing one-suiter, too strong for 3♣ over 2♥, still hoping to play 3NT

2. I would have bid 4♣ on the previous round. Now I bid 5♣.

Regarding raising clubs on the first round, I don't mind concealing a major when I have poor defence and good support. On this hand I have neither.

[sathyab]

gnasher, on Sep 21 2008, 01:30 PM, said:

2. I would have bid 4♣ on the previous round.  Now I bid 5♣.

Why would you have bid 4♣ on the previous round ? Couldn't partner's X of 2♥ be a simple support X ? If it was support X he didn't promise extra high cards or shape. Hopefully his X of 3♥ does show extras although I'm not sure about the shape any more except that he has genuine clubs.

[gnasher]

sathyab, on Sep 21 2008, 08:13 PM, said:

Couldn't partner's X of 2♥ be a simple support X ?

It seems strange to play support doubles opposite what is known to be exactly a four-card suit. Is that a popular method?

[gnasher]

In his 1992 book Contested Auctions (p 310) Mike Lawrence described opener's double of 2♥ as "a Return Negative Double, asking [responder] to bid something in light of the fact that [opener] didn't know what to bid himself." His alternative meaning is penalties.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Sep 21 2008, 03:22 PM, said:

sathyab, on Sep 21 2008, 08:13 PM, said:

Couldn't partner's X of 2♥ be a simple support X ?

It seems strange to play support doubles opposite what is known to be exactly a four-card suit. Is that a popular method?

I agree with you, and I think 4♣ the prior round is a good bid. It didn't occur to me when given the problem a round later, but at the table I would bid it too.

[Codo]

gnasher, on Sep 22 2008, 03:30 AM, said:

1. One of:
- a strong xx45, but not strong enough to game-force with 3♦ over 2♥
- a balanced 18-19 without a heart stop
- a game-forcing one-suiter, too strong for 3♣ over 2♥, still hoping to play 3NT

2. I would have bid 4♣ on the previous round. Now I bid 5♣.

Regarding raising clubs on the first round, I don't mind concealing a major when I have poor defence and good support. On this hand I have neither.

If he has:

1. A strong XX45, which hand shall he have where we could not stand his 3 Diamond bid but where he is strong enough to X 2 and 3 Hearts?
This is espacially true, if you play negative doubles, so a double shows a hand with 4 Spades, shortness in Hearts and a possibility to handle any rebid.

2. A bal. 18-19: Maybe he can rebid 3 Spade instead of a second double to show this hand? Maybe this is no universal wisdom, but what else should it be?

3. Why didn`t he bid 3 Heart to ask for a stopper with a gameforcing onesuiter?

I play him for 18-19 w/o a stopper and 3 Spades. Now I bid 5 Clubs.

[TimG]

ArtK78, on Sep 21 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl* - 2♥
P  -  P  -  ?

---

* exactly four spades

Suppose instead this is the auction. What is your action?

[gnasher]

TimG, on Sep 22 2008, 02:31 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Sep 21 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl* - 2♥
P  -  P  -   ?

---

* exactly four spades

Suppose instead this is the auction. What is your action?

3♣. That will turn out to be an overbid if partner happens to be 3=4=3=3, but otherwise I won't be ashamed of my hand. Maybe one should use 2NT to distinguish good and bad 3♣ bids here.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Sep 22 2008, 08:31 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Sep 21 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl* - 2♥
P  -  P  -   ?

---

* exactly four spades

Suppose instead this is the auction. What is your action?

3♣ wtp?

[TimG]

ArtK78, on Sep 21 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl* - 3♥
P  -  P  -  ?

---

* exactly four spades

And, this one?

[gnasher]

TimG, on Sep 22 2008, 05:40 PM, said:

1♣ - 1♥ - Dbl* - 3♥
P  -  P  -  ?

And, this one?

Pass. I'd rather have this auction than

1♣  1♥  2♣  3♥
P   P   ?