[jillybean]

Dealer: East Vul: EW Scoring: IMP

♠ AK5 ♥ KQ8 ♦ T9832 ♣ 74

West North East South

 -     -     Pass  1♦
 2♣    Dbl   Pass  ?

[dicklont]

2♥.
I'd rather have four but I see no alternative.
I would bid 2♦ as a weak respons without majors, but only when we have an agreement about it.

[jillybean]

dicklont, on Dec 29 2008, 12:06 AM, said:

2♥.
I'd rather have four but I see no alternative.
I would bid 2♦ as a weak respons without majors, but only when we have an agreement about it.

What else can 2♦ be other than weak?

[dicklont]

jillybean2, on Dec 29 2008, 02:10 AM, said:

What else can 2♦ be other than weak?

A decent 5-card or longer. No extra HCP's of course.

[rogerclee]

This sort of hand is a common problem, most people just bid 2♥. As a side note, this is why players are always talking about the advantages of bidding 2♣ over 1♦ (and 2♦ over 1♣).

[paulg]

I believe you are forced into 2♦ here but I'm not unhappy about that with a 5-card suit. I think you'd also be forced into 2♦ if you held 3=3=4=3 with no club stop - I'd be less happy but think it's clear too.

You don't want to bid notrump with a small doubleton.

Partner has not guaranteed both majors with the double and this is the reason the picking a major is dangerous. All partner needs to double is a hand that can cope with you bidding a 4-card major, so can easily be 4-3 majors with a fair hand and no club stop. Given the lack of bidding, something like 4=3=3=3 is quite possible.

If partner has 5-4 majors, then you'd rather play in the 5-3 fit rather than the 4-3 and bidding 2♦ is the only way to assure this.

[Gerben42]

2♦, not really happy but at least I have 5 of them...

[andy_h]

Don't mind either 2D or 2H. 2D isn't that attractive with that suit and 2H isn't that attractive since you only have 3 of them. On the bright side, diamonds is a 5card suit and the club shortage (we'll be ruffing with our short trump(s)) will be counteracting with our 3 card heart suit. Maybe my answer depends on who I'm playing with and if they can expect a 3card Major or not, but I think I'll tend to stick with 2D.

[dicklont]

I'm convinced by Cardsharp.
Since partner can have 4/3 in the majors I must bid 2♦ here and see what happens.

[P_Marlowe]

2D.

Ugly, but what else.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[JavaBean]

2♦, I guess. I'm not delighted, but I don't think it's the "whitest lie" either; in fact I don't think it's a lie at all. Rebidding my suit here shouldn't guarantee six, but more like deny anything else useful to do. Partner will not have made a negative double if he can't stand for me to rebid my suit cheaply.

I don't hate 2♥ either - the 4-3 may play quite well, with reasonable hearts, and a mild ruffing value. Of course, partner may think the same thing with three hearts and short diamonds!

[neilkaz]

From reading thru Bergen's Neg X book tonite, I think he'd bid 2♥ here with a good 3 carder and such a poor 5 card ♦

[foo]

jillybean2, on Dec 29 2008, 01:51 AM, said:

East,EW,IMP,
AK5_KQ8_T9832_74

Pa-1♦-(2♣)-Dbl;
Pa-??

Partnership Agreement time.

Hands like this are why some pairs play that C's-(D's)-X or D's-(C's)-X promises 44 in the Majors or a hand that can handle any subsequent auction.

Your best bet with this hand is 2H.

[the hog]

2H. Don't like 2D at all.