[zheddh]

Holding a 6-4 hand in diamonds, hearts and a less than GF hand, what is the way to bid playing Walsh style responses to 1C open?

I held the following hand yesterday and responded 1H to partners open of 1C. The auction went

1♣ - (p) - 1♥ - (2♠)
X - (3♠) - ?

In case your answer is to show hearts first, what now? X is support double.

Scoring: IMP

---

EDIT: or is this a GF hand?

[655321]

This looks like a GF to me, of course it got worse during the auction. Support double also seems odd, if double is takeout I would bid 5♦.

[jillybean]

I think the hand is good enough to start 1♦ then jump in ♥'s

[mikeh]

jillybean2, on Jul 23 2009, 12:33 AM, said:

I think the hand is good enough to start 1♦ then jump in ♥'s

No.... with a gf hand, one responds in diamonds and then reverses into hearts (not jump). A jump in hearts later would be a splinter (if partner bid a suit)

[aguahombre]

agree that the support double is odd. If it is one it should be a good one. At IMPS i hope for xx AQX AXX AXXXX, and try 4H.

[zheddh]

Why is the support double odd? I thought it was routine to play support doubles till 2S?

Some experts play it till 4H, i believe.

[aguahombre]

I guess what I am saying is that it is nice to be able to show 3 card support, but the hand also must be able to handle the level. Therefore, here I think it has to show a better opening bid than the usual garbage.

[Codo]

What the X promises is open to discussion. You may make it with any 3 card support and you may make it just with good hands.

For the questions: This is a clear GF for me, so with the given hand I had bid 1 Diamond.

Now, maybe influenced by our opening style I judged this hand as invitational.

I would like to bid 4 diamond to show THIS hand, but the Forum regulars will kill me, because this is the only possible bid for a strong 4 Heart bid.


So I cannot bring myself to pass and will bid 4 Heart for better or worse.

And later; I would discuss what a double would be and what 3 NT. They cannot both show good spades, so I shoudl reserve one of them to show a hand I cannot show with another bid.

[jdonn]

zheddh, on Jul 23 2009, 12:57 AM, said:

Why is the support double odd? I thought it was routine to play support doubles till 2S?

Some experts play it till 4H, i believe.

lol?

You are getting either your doubles or your terminology mixed up.

[Fluffy]

support doubles are normally played till they let you play your contract at the 2 level. Doubling 2♠ brings you to the -800 level on a 4-3 fit too often.

I had this same auction a couple of years ago with dad, he bid 4♦ I rectfied to 4♥ and we scored -500. 4♦ would had been -50/-100. I went to bed without dinner that day.

[zheddh]

jdonn, on Jul 23 2009, 02:34 AM, said:

zheddh, on Jul 23 2009, 12:57 AM, said:

Why is the support double odd? I thought it was routine to play support doubles till 2S?

Some experts play it till 4H, i believe.

lol?

You are getting either your doubles or your terminology mixed up.

http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files...oth-rodwell.pdf

[zheddh]

Fluffy, on Jul 23 2009, 03:18 AM, said:

support doubles are normally played till they let you play your contract at the 2 level. Doubling 2♠ brings you to the -800 level on a 4-3 fit too often.

It should show extra values or playing strength, if it forces partner to the 3 level. But it could be playable. And if R-M play it, i don't think one can term this treatment as ridiculous as jdonn suggested.

[Phil]

I would GF with this hand. Before the spade bids, I had no idea if my QJ were working values or not (and they still might hold a little value). Mike is correct that a simple reverse to our major after 1♦ creates a GF.

Support double are usually played through "two of our suit". The purpose is you can still get out at the two level if responder holds a weak hand. Its possible to play them through "three of our suit", but they require extra values. I've never seen the value in forcing to play the hand at the three level with a possible 4-3 fit however.

On the actual hand I'm a little jammed. I know the answer and I'm not surprised that 4♥ was a poor contract. Whether or not 4♦ is forcing is a matter of discussion, but it should be because you can pass with a weak hand, which this hand is starting to resemble.

I doubt you'd be that much better placed after 1♦ however. Preempts work.

[Echognome]

Hard to know how the auction would go after a 1♦ response. I think I would double 3♠ to show values.