[cyc0002002]

Scoring: MP

---

- - 2♠ ?

1. do you agree with dbl

2. if you agree
- - 2♠ x
3♠ x - ?

do you agree with pass?

[hrothgar]

The first double seems trivial

I'd leave the second double in
(It will suck if partner has long diamonds and weak Spades)

[helene_t]

Agree with dbl. Not too worried about my void, if p passes or bids 3NT it's probably ok.

Don't agree with pass, partner's dbl is not for penalties. I probably bid 4♠.

[Fluffy]

4♠ and then raise whatever partner bids

[pooltuna]

helene_t, on Aug 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

Agree with dbl. Not too worried about my void, if p passes or bids 3NT it's probably ok.

Don't agree with pass, partner's dbl is not for penalties. I probably bid 4♠.

this looks like a reasonable action & the alternative looks to be bidding 4♦

[andy_h]

Agree with first dbl, now I bid 4♠.

[cherdanno]

pooltuna, on Aug 10 2009, 08:42 AM, said:

helene_t, on Aug 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

Agree with dbl. Not too worried about my void, if p passes or bids 3NT it's probably ok.

Don't agree with pass, partner's dbl is not for penalties. I probably bid 4♠.

this likes a reasonable action the alternative looks to be, bidding 4♦

Do you play 4♦ as forcing?

[pooltuna]

cherdanno, on Aug 10 2009, 11:26 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Aug 10 2009, 08:42 AM, said:

helene_t, on Aug 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

Agree with dbl. Not too worried about my void, if p passes or bids 3NT it's probably ok.

Don't agree with pass, partner's dbl is not for penalties. I probably bid 4♠.

this likes a reasonable action the alternative looks to be, bidding 4♦

Do you play 4♦ as forcing?

No but then I don't whack weak 2 bids with trash either (i.e. a minimum opening hand with shortage in the opener's suit)

[Apollo81]

The first double is the best description of your hand. Double says you have a good hand with support for all unbid suits, and when partner chooses one you can raise to show your extra strength. There's really no other way to bid this hand. The only other call that makes any sense at all is 3♦, which is wrong because partner will pass with a weakish hand with short diamonds and long hearts, and you'd miss game.

Partner's double is responsive, which shows a flexible minor-oriented hand with too many high cards to pass. If partner had hearts, he would have bid them, and if partner had a strong spade holding, he would have either passed (with a weak hand) or bid 3NT (with a good hand). If partner had a very long minor, he would have bid it. A typical hand for partner here is Qxx xx Qxxx AKxx or Kxx Qx Jxxx KJxx. We should certainly be in game, and should be in slam if partner has extras with key cards such as the first example. I would bid 4♠, intending to follow up by bidding 5♦, which partner should raise to 6 on a hand like the first one.

[cherdanno]

pooltuna, on Aug 10 2009, 12:05 PM, said:

cherdanno, on Aug 10 2009, 11:26 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Aug 10 2009, 08:42 AM, said:

helene_t, on Aug 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

Agree with dbl. Not too worried about my void, if p passes or bids 3NT it's probably ok.

Don't agree with pass, partner's dbl is not for penalties. I probably bid 4♠.

this likes a reasonable action the alternative looks to be, bidding 4♦

Do you play 4♦ as forcing?

No but then I don't whack weak 2 bids with trash either (i.e. a minimum opening hand with shortage in the opener's suit)

Sorry, but a non-forcing 4♦ is the worst bid I have seen seriously suggested in this forum for a while. It is also inconsistent - your choice is really between a slam try with 4♠ and a non-forcing 4♦ bid?

x AKxx Axxx QTxx is an obvious double of 2♠ (if you claim you don't double on this, I am not sure I believe you, but in any case it would be very bad). Given that we are likely to have diamond fit, our actual hand is about 2.5 tricks better. 6♦ is a better bid than 4♦. The heck, maybe 7♦ is a better bid than 4♦.

[Phil]

Arend trying to assume the position as the new JDonn.

Anyway I agree. 4♦ is a serious underbid. We don't 'run' from penalty doubles (assuming its penalties) with good hands.

4♠ is obvious.

[ArtK78]

I don't disagree that the double of 3♠ should be a responsive double; I will state, however, that such an agreement is not universal.

If the double is a penalty double, then I will pass. My spade void is an indication that my partner REALLY has a penalty double, not an indication that we should be playing the hand at the 5 level.

Sometimes your opponents make a mistake. Partner could have KQJTx xxx xx xxx. Keep in mind that the 2♠ bid was made by a player in third-seat. I have seen some really "aggressive" weak 2 bids by third-seat at matchpoints, even vulnerable.

If you have a firm agreement with your partner that the double of 3♠ is responsive, then 4♠ is a very reasonable call. But try to remember that partner is a passed hand, so slam may not be there.

(I am assuming that the "- -" in the auction indicate passes, as there is no reason for them to be there if the 2♠ bid was in first seat)

[aguahombre]

cherdanno, in a world filled with terms such as:

We Play...
agree
disagree.
Suggest
Maybe
LOL

FWIW
IMHO
etc.

Your use of "worst", "very bad", etc. certainly stand out. Sometimes the very bad become reasonable in context of the poster's agreements or style.

[Phil]

aguahombre, on Aug 10 2009, 12:46 PM, said:

Your use of "worst", "very bad", etc. certainly stand out. Sometimes the very bad become reasonable in context of the poster's agreements or style.

I just finished Outliers by Gladwell and one of the chapters I found interesting was how some airlines are more prone to accidents, based on cultural norms specifying how subordinates deal with superiors. The 'polite' and 'respectful' approach would frequently get people killed.

Granted, the forums pale to a jumbo jet about to crash into a mountain, but frankly, I appreciate directness.

[aguahombre]

Yep, crashing directly into the mountain would probably be less emotionally taxing.

[cherdanno]

aguahombre, on Aug 10 2009, 12:46 PM, said:

cherdanno, in a world filled with terms such as:

We Play...
agree
disagree.
Suggest
Maybe
LOL

FWIW
IMHO
etc.

Your use of "worst", "very bad", etc. certainly stand out. Sometimes the very bad become reasonable in context of the poster's agreements or style.

Well, usually I pick some of your suggestions. This time I didn't think they would adequately describe how I feel about 4♦. (And no, picking between a slam-try and a non-forcing 4♦ is not reasonable in any style.)