[gnasher]

With AKJxxx x Qxx KQx I would have another go as South. That's not just another queen: it's another trick, both in offence and in defence.

Regarding North's actions, when defending against preempts you should usually assume that partner has about a seven-count. Given that, North doesn't have a lot to spare, and what he has is in the wrong places. The problem is not just the lack of any spade fit, but also that the ace of hearts isn't pulling its weight in offence. xx xxx Kxxx AJ8x would be a much better hand.

[jdonn]

sathyab, on Jul 13 2009, 04:42 AM, said:

Yes, North might like an additional Queen for a responsive double, but doesn't it make partner's life a lot easier if you have to, on occasion overstate  your hand by a Quack in competition if the alternative was to understate it by an Ace ?

I think this is the wrong way to look at things. If a double with this shape shows (say) 10 or more, and you have 8, then passing doesn't understate your hand by an ace merely because you would do the same thing with an ace less. Passing states your hand correctly.

I understand your point that sometimes it's better to stretch since it may be your only chance to get in. But with nothing in spades, the ace in hearts (even with the ace it's better for offense outside the opponents' suit, as this hand easily demonstrates by moving it to either minor), and a random jack, this is not the hand for it. Jx xxx AKxx xxxx is more understandable with the same high cards.