[gnasher]

You can cope with singleton 9 in a 1165 as well: diamond ruff; ♥10 to Q, A and 9; spade.

If RHO started with ♥H9, he can ruff if he likes, but that's all they get. We can win the club switch, cash the spades as RHO follows, and claim.

If RHO discards on the second spade, throw two clubs on top spades, cash ♣A, ruff a spade and play a heart to the eight, in this trump position:
        86
             H74
        J53
or, if LHO had ♥H9 and has been holding off
        86
    H        74
        J53

If LHO follows to the second spade, and is therefore 2155: play two more top spades, ♣A, and another spade. If RHO ruffs, overruff, ruff a diamond and play another spade winner; if he ruffs again we can again overruff, ruff a diamond, and play a spade winner. If he doesn't ruff the fourth spade, proceed as against 1165.

[gnasher]

I don't think that double of 6♦ would be penalties in the sense of "I really want to defend".

We've shown game-going values, so this is a normal forcing pass situation. Pass would be encouraging and double is discouraging. I don't think it's sensible to make that all about diamond control: wouldn't you want to make a forcing pass with Jxx AKQxxx xx Ax, and wouldn't you want to make a discouraging double with xx KQxxx Axx Kxx?

[pooltuna]

Codo, on Dec 18 2009, 02:48 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Dec 18 2009, 11:12 AM, said:

jdonn, on Dec 17 2009, 06:09 PM, said:

655321, on Dec 17 2009, 06:04 PM, said:

I would pass, but I don't hate 6♥.

pooltuna, on Dec 17 2009, 05:35 PM, said:

presumably the X of 6♦ denied first or second round control of ♦

Why on earth would you presume that?

Haha, imagine opener's frown looking at KQJT of diamonds and being unable to double.

I must have missed the part in the OP's post where he said the opps were stupid

So they are stupid to bid this way missing KQJT but not missing AKx? Aha.

You may defend your opinion as long as you wish but I think you are not mainstream. Actually I guess you are not just not mainstream, but in a minority of one- maybe two if your partner plays the same funny stuff.

Just so I am clear, are you saying it is nonstandard to use X and a forcing pass to deny/show a diamond control when the opps have interrupted a strong auction with slam overtones by preempting to the 5 or 6 level where we are in doubt as to whether we belong in slam because we lack a diamond contol? Or are you saying that I am overreaching that agreement on this hand? I assume the latter is what you mean and yes gnasher's suggestion has much merit for a standard FP situation. Altho I think the standard FP is not encouraging but rather semi-encouraging and shows doubt about the correct action to take.

Wouldn't I want to X if I for instance held

---

[ArtK78]

Double says you want to defend, pass says that bidding more is OK. Or, as another poster put it, double is discouraging, pass is encouraging.

Even with controls in diamonds, one might double if one believed that slam was not likely. One is permitted to exercise judgment in these situations.

[kenrexford]

kayin801, on Dec 17 2009, 06:49 PM, said:

Mashing of 6♥ and P is what I hear. No votes for 6♠ at all? Anyway, at the table it went like this (hands rotated)

<!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> South </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> N/S </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKQ642 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> 1086 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td>  </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AJ94 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> J3 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AJ532 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AK4 </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> 1073 </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td> 1♥-2NT-3♠-6♦
X-P-6♥-AP

Lead: ♠7 </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end -->

You've already made two unlikely slams today, think you can go 3 for 3?

Bonus: What's your line in 6♠ in the North if East leads the ♦J? (though that might be easier)

Yes. One vote for 6♠, by Opener. Responder doesn't normally introduce spades like this without a reason.

Play. I'd ditch a heart and thank the opponents for another entry. Then, small club toward dummy. If LHO splits, I win, pull trumps, heart to Ace, ditch the other heart loser on the other diamond, and claim. So, LHO doesn't split. I hopefully win the 9, pull trumps, heart to Ace, ditch the other heart, and lead another small club toward dummy, claiming as well. (I pulled two rounds of trump first, ending on dummy, just in case.)

[gnasher]

I agree that opener should convert 6♥ to 6♠.

In 6♠ on a diamond lead, it seems unlikely that West has ♣KQxxx - East would probably have led his small singleton. With a club void, I imagine he'd lead his lowest diamond, hoping to find his partner with the ace. I think the indications are that East has a singleton club honour.

I'd ruff the diamond lead, draw trumps, and cash ♣A. If I'm wrong about the club layout, I can still play for ♥KQx onside.

[ggwhiz]

With only the Q of d and no ten, (from the jack lead) I think the 2nt bidder must have both club honours or they fail the drug test.

I'm with the kenrexford line.

Converting to 6 spades looks positionally sound too should they either own a successful club lead against hearts (Ace and a ruff) or East has a club void.

In this case, you got a diamond lead instead of the stiff club which could be the difference.

Also, I play the double here pretty loosely, just about any minimum not interested in slam.

Hey, we're debating successful lines opposite the world's worst fitting dog and it will still hunt. I'm convinced now that the 6h bid is a no=brainer.