[benlessard]

Quote

Maybe our standards are different for negative doubles here?

Im 100% with Phil on this one.

x
xx
KT9xx
AT9xx

Pollers in Bridge World make a neg X with this hand or a very similar hand to this.

[sathyab]

TimG, on Aug 27 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

Phil, on Aug 27 2009, 09:48 AM, said:

There are hands that would make a negative double of 2♥, but would not make a 2/1 in sayc, i.e., :

x, xxx, Axxx, KJxxx

Can't we wait for partner's reopening action with this hand?

If your hand was slightly weaker, say xx Qx, QJxx, Axxxx and you passed, partner may not reopen as he may easily have length in hearts. He might easily have a 5=3=4=1 or 5=3=1=4 shape. As you have two spades, partner can always bid 2♠ if doesn't care for either minor and has no ♥ stopper.

[mtvesuvius]

andy_h, on Aug 26 2009, 11:26 PM, said:

gnasher, on Aug 27 2009, 09:20 AM, said:

Cascade, on Aug 26 2009, 11:04 PM, said:

1♠ (2♥) Dbl (PASS)
3♠ (PASS) 4♠ (PASS)
PASS (PASS)

Me too

Me three.

Make it four.

[TimG]

sathyab, on Aug 28 2009, 10:56 AM, said:

TimG, on Aug 27 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

Phil, on Aug 27 2009, 09:48 AM, said:

There are hands that would make a negative double of 2♥, but would not make a 2/1 in sayc, i.e., :

x, xxx, Axxx, KJxxx

Can't we wait for partner's reopening action with this hand?

If your hand was slightly weaker, say xx Qx, QJxx, Axxxx and you passed, partner may not reopen as he may easily have length in hearts. He might easily have a 5=3=4=1 or 5=3=1=4 shape. As you have two spades, partner can always bid 2♠ if doesn't care for either minor and has no ♥ stopper.

None of what you say really applies to the hand Phil gave as an example. There are not two spades so that opener has a safe exit in 3S and there are three hearts instead of two so that opener is less likely to hold length in hearts. If you held Phil's example hand and knew that opener was 53(41), wouldn't you be content to defend 2H (undoubled)?

[Phil]

TimG, on Aug 27 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

Phil, on Aug 27 2009, 09:48 AM, said:

There are hands that would make a negative double of 2♥, but would not make a 2/1 in sayc, i.e., :

x, xxx, Axxx, KJxxx

Can't we wait for partner's reopening action with this hand?

Give me a heart honor and I would.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi

1S - (2H) - 2NT (1) - (Pass)
4C (2) - (Pass) - 5C (3) - (Pass)
Pass - (Pass)



(1) Transfer to clubs, at least a good 5 card suit, at least 8HCP,
3 card spade support still possile
(2) Natural and forcing, the alterntive is 4H (my first reaction),
but the hand is pretty strong, and 4C gives partner the most
room for a cue
(3) no cue or no interest

Playing standard

1S - (2H) - X (1) - (Pass)
4S (2) -(Pass) - Pass (3) - (Pass)

(1) Neg. X, at least 8HCP, most likely both minors, but nt 100% clear
(2) I guess 4C is better, and 4C should be forcing, ... and 3S would
be NF, although I am hard pressed to find hands, where the auction
would die in 3S
(3) one has already shown 8 of the 12HCP, and the Queen of heart is
not worth a lot, so pass is clear

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

nigel_k, on Aug 26 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

We lost a Swiss teams last night after leading going into the last round, mainly because of three slam (or not) hands. The third one is below:

Scoring: IMP

---

Bid these hands. North overcalls 2♥. Unfortunately you are not playing Kickback though perhaps you will consider doing so after this hand.

hmm as a nonexpert I would expect to get to 4s or 5c and never a slam. Was this yet another cuebidding disaster?

[OleBerg]

1♠ - (2♥) - X
4♣ - 4NT

Playing 1430 you are home free, playing 0314 you are FCK'ed.

In my own obscure system:

1♠ - (2♥) - X
4♣ - 4NT*

*Promising exactly two aces and a diamond-control.



In my world

1♠ - (2♥) - X
4♣ - 4♠

Is to play, with two or three spades. Thus bidding 4♣ is no problem.

[nigel_k]

What happened at the table is that East bid 3♣ instead of double and West drove to slam. As I mentioned at the start there was no suitable ace ask available and West took the view that East would have to have quite a precise collection of cards for slam to be bad.

I am about 60/40 in favour of double instead of 3♣ and the 3♠-4♠ continuation works too but I still have a feeling it's just a bit lucky for clubs to get lost on a hand that also happens to be missing two aces.

[gnasher]

Even if East bids 3♣ (a significant overbid IMO), I don't see any reason to bid slam. Didn't it now continue 4♣-5♣, with East clearly denying a red-suit ace?

[Cascade]

nigel_k, on Aug 31 2009, 10:51 AM, said:

but I still have a feeling it's just a bit lucky for clubs to get lost on a hand that also happens to be missing two aces.

I don't think it is that lucky.

Both hands are deficient in controls. An average 15 count has about 5 controls - this one has 4 - and an average 12 count has nearly 4 controls - this one has 3.

In terms of slam it is therefore reasonable for both players to be a little bit pessimistic. With sharper cards we could take more optimistic views.

[Fluffy]

I didn't miss clubs, even asked for keycards and ended up in 5♣.