[gwnn]

Kx
xx
Qxx
KQxxxx

2♥-x-3♥-??

imps nobody v

opps are somewhat crazy for their preempts, your partner is somewhat sound for his double

(but neither factor is strong)

[Jlall]

5C

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Dec 23 2009, 07:29 PM, said:

5C

But wait!! The doubler upgraded his hand because of all the Ts & 9s and holds

---

and per BBF instructions stretches to act since he is short in the preemptor's suit

[rogerclee]

4C for me, maybe I downgrade for doubleton heart too much on these auctions, but if my opponents are "somewhat crazy" this definitely seems like a good reason to me.

[jjbrr]

in after clee.

4♣ for me.

[Phil]

Personally I think 4♣ is a nothing bid and 5♣ is hit or miss. While I like pressuring the opponents, the defense to 5♣ will be very straightforward.

I really want to get to 3N with my doubleton heart, so I'll go for the 'flexible' responsive double.

[mikeh]

5♣

it's game and I can't stand the thought of bidding over 4♦ by partner if I double, nor is this the hand on which to suggest defending...while double is takeout, it can be passed...if we are beating it, we will usually do well in clubs....ditto if we make 3N.

[nige1]

gwnn, on Dec 23 2009, 07:08 PM, said:

Imps nobody v. opps are somewhat crazy for their preempts, your partner is somewhat sound for his double (but neither factor is strong)♠ Kx ♥ xx ♦ Qxx ♣ KQxxxx
2♥-x-3♥-??

IMO _X = 10, 5♣ = 8, 4♣ = 7, _P = 6.
Agree with Phil that you should strive to keep 3N accessible. Over 4♦, you can try 5♣.

[rduran1216]

4C immediately

You dont wanna be in 3NT when your opponents have a 9 card fit, unless you have 9 of the top 3NT is finished.

5C is a severe overbid with a worthless doubleton heart and an Aceless hand. You surely have 1/2 heart losers and a probably loser somewhere else. If your partner really has 17, he can bid 5C over 4C

[Siegmund]

At the table I can't see any alternative to 4♣. I am not happy about knowing we're losing two heart tricks followed by a very likely missing diamond honor. Looks like I need the CA plus either SAQJx+DA or SA+DAK to have any play for five - and 15 in prime cards including 3 aces is a darn sight more than my partner's average doubles. Partner IS allowed to bid again if he has a big hand so we are still getting to 5 if he has 18 or something.

[P_Marlowe]

4C.

Unless this is spades and clubs, in which case 5C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gnasher]

4♣. Double would be OK if I wanted to play in game opposite a minimum, but I don't. Axxx xx Axxx Axx will look like a good hand to partner, but even 4♣ may go down opposite that.

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Dec 24 2009, 05:02 AM, said:

4♣. Double would be OK if I wanted to play in game opposite a minimum, but I don't. Axxx xx Axxx Axx will look like a good hand to partner, but even 4♣ may go down opposite that.

Wouldn't you expect to defend 3H X if he has that? Not that that is necessarily a good thing, that's one reason I don't like double with a hand like this; I don't like the thought of partner passing.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Dec 24 2009, 05:06 AM, said:

gnasher, on Dec 24 2009, 05:02 AM, said:

4♣.  Double would be OK if I wanted to play in game opposite a minimum, but I don't.  Axxx xx Axxx Axx will look like a good hand to partner, but even 4♣ may go down opposite that.

Wouldn't you expect to defend 3H X if he has that? Not that that is necessarily a good thing, that's one reason I don't like double with a hand like this; I don't like the thought of partner passing.

You would be defending 3♥X since I found an unhappy balancing double of 3♥. I would never double in direct seat with Axxx xx Axxx Axx.

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Dec 24 2009, 11:06 AM, said:

Wouldn't you expect to defend 3H X if he has that? Not that that is necessarily a good thing, that's one reason I don't like double with a hand like this; I don't like the thought of partner passing.

Yes, probably. That example was meant to show why I don't think we should drive to game, but you're right that it also highlights another downside of double.

Furthermore, if partner is passing the double on that, he's also passing it on Axxx Ax Jxxx Axxx, so we still miss 3NT. Does that mean that double is never going to do us any good?

[Winstonm]

4C I think is enough. I didn't have to bid at all, so I have some values. If we are competing for a plus score, I have done my part by bidding and if they bid we can pass and take our plus. If partner has a hand big enough for game, he can act again. I think the 3-heart bid actually did me a favor as I can show this hand now with a simple 4C.

[wank]

is it permitted to play part scores on this forum? 4c is a free bid at the 4 level ffs. it shows a good hand. if partner has enough to make 5c, he can bid.

[Fluffy]

I'd bid 5♣ with any other heart lenght, but the doubleton, given that they are not vulnerable, is so bad. 4♣ will suffice.

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Dec 24 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Jlall, on Dec 24 2009, 11:06 AM, said:

Wouldn't you expect to defend 3H X if he has that? Not that that is necessarily a good thing, that's one reason I don't like double with a hand like this; I don't like the thought of partner passing.

Yes, probably. That example was meant to show why I don't think we should drive to game, but you're right that it also highlights another downside of double.

Furthermore, if partner is passing the double on that, he's also passing it on Axxx Ax Jxxx Axxx, so we still miss 3NT. Does that mean that double is never going to do us any good?

Yes, that is why I would not double.

If I doubled and bid 4C over 3S, I would also expect partner to play me for the minors, and convert to 4D playing me for the minors. So if you want to play 4C, I don't think X is a great way to start.

[nige1]

gnasher, on Dec 24 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

Furthermore, if partner is passing the double on that, he's also passing it on Axxx Ax Jxxx Axxx, so we still miss 3NT.  Does that mean that double is never going to do us any good?

IMO Double will work more often than other calls and Gnasher's example
♠ Axx(x) ♥ Ax ♦ Jxx(x) ♣ Axx(x) illustrates why. Opposite your
♠ Kx ♥ xx ♦ Qxx ♣ KQxxxx

• 3N is excellent and partner may bid it, especially if your responsive double denies four ♠s.
  
• 3♥X may be defeated by two tricks.
  
• Higher contracts by either side are against the odds.