[cherdano]

This is a spinoff from some comments Frances dropped in other threads...
Let's say we are in a scrambling situation, or a situation where a partner has shown an unspecified two-suiter. The opponents doubled, showing desire to defend, so we better find our best fit.

Obviously there is a lot of room for using pass, redouble and direct bids to show various preferences. What agreements do you have in regular partnerships for these situations?

Examples:
(1H) 2H (X)
Here pass could show willingness to play clubs, and redouble diamonds, if that is partner's suit.

(1S) P (2S) X
(P) 2N=scrambling (X)
Well, lots of possible shape, and lots of possible sequences...

(4S) 4N (X)
(4H) 4N (X)
(1S) 2C (2S) P (P) 2N (X)

Any well-tested meta-agreements out there?

[awm]

One agreement I do have is that when there is some possibility we might want to play in the suit partner bid, pass suggests to play there and redouble suggests that partner pick. This comes up for example:

1NT - 2♣ (majors) - X (cards)

Pass = "I have clubs"
Redouble = "Please bid your better major"
2♦ = "I have diamonds"
2M = preference

1NT - 2♦ (one major) - X (cards)

Pass = "I have diamonds"
Redouble = "Please bid your better major"
2M = my suit

This rule doesn't really apply in most of the auctions you gave though, since the last bid is notrump and we don't normally want to play 4NTX and such when the 4NT bid was minors.

[Cascade]

awm, on Dec 4 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

One agreement I do have is that when there is some possibility we might want to play in the suit partner bid, pass suggests to play there and redouble suggests that partner pick. 1NT - 2♦ (one major) - X (cards)

Pass = "I have diamonds"
Redouble = "Please bid your better major"
2M = my suit

I have played this way for many years over a multi-2♦ opening.

[han]

I was recently convinced that it is better to play redouble = bid 2H please I have my own major and both 2H and 2S as p/c.

[jdonn]

han, on Dec 3 2008, 06:56 PM, said:

I was recently convinced that it is better to play redouble = bid 2H please I have my own major and both 2H and 2S as p/c.

Never heard of it. That sounds like a good idea.

[MFA]

han, on Dec 3 2008, 06:56 PM, said:

I was recently convinced that it is better to play redouble = bid 2H please I have my own major and both 2H and 2S as p/c.

I play this too and I think it's better.

[Cascade]

jdonn, on Dec 4 2008, 01:01 PM, said:

han, on Dec 3 2008, 06:56 PM, said:

I was recently convinced that it is better to play redouble = bid 2H please I have my own major and both 2H and 2S as p/c.

Never heard of it. That sounds like a good idea.

It might depend who is likely to have the better hand.

1NT 2♦ - the overcall is likely to be better

2♦ multi - the partner may well be better

[MFA]

cherdano, on Dec 3 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

(1S) P (2S) X
(P) 2N=scrambling (X)
Well, lots of possible shape, and lots of possible sequences...

(4S) 4N (X)
(4H) 4N (X)
(1S) 2C (2S) P (P) 2N (X)

Any well-tested meta-agreements out there?

When we are in a scrambling sequence, and we can't play right there where we are doubled, then we play:

pass: no strong preference
bid: I want to play there

Not much of an agreement, I admit

We had this sequence this weekend:
(4♥)-X-(pass)-4NT
(X)-?

We agreed that XX would be strong/slam try from both hands, but take-out. So neither pass nor XX would be an attempt to play right there in 4NTX(X).
This applies to (4M)-4NT-(X) too in my partnership.

[whereagles]

Since you asked, here are my agreements:

(1H) 2H (X)

Rdbl = bid your minor
Pass = no agreement
3m = my suit


(1S) P (2S) X
(P) 2N=scrambling (X)

2NT would not be scrambling for me, but Lebenshol


(4S) 4N (X)
(4H) 4N (X)

Rdbl = bid your lowest 5-card suit
Pass = I'm ok with that contract
5x = my suit


(1S) 2C (2S) P
(P) 2N (X)

2NT would be natural for me (showing some 16-17 hcp overcall)