[Little Kid]

Scoring: IMP

Pass-(Pass)-1♦-(Double)
?

---

1♥ or 2♦?

[655321]

1♥ WTP

[bill1157]

1NT would be preferable to 2♦ but 2♥ is the only good bid. The problem would be more interesting if you had 1 more diamond and weaker hearts...

Bill

[pooltuna]

bill1157, on Jan 5 2010, 07:30 PM, said:

1NT would be preferable to 2♦ but 2♥ is the only good bid. The problem would be more interesting if you had 1 more diamond and weaker hearts...

Bill

I going to take a blind guess here that you think the TOXer is your partner.

[aguahombre]

considering what people think a takeout double is, these days, we choose to pretty much ignore 1mX and bid what we would have bid without the double.

Responding after 1MajX is a different story, since we gain so many tools.

1H is an easy response. 2D would show a weak response, this one is quite nice.

[Little Kid]

Until yesterday I would have automatically bid 1♥ but then someone gave me some good arguments for 2♦ and now I'm not sure anymore.

Although it is true you may belong in ♥s (possibly even at the game level), bidding 1♥ does nothing in terms of preempting the opponents. Your LHO will make his best bid and the opponents will know exactly how high to go and in what strain. Your side will have exchanged no information about your only known fit and may miss a cold 3♦ when it may easily be the best contract. If you intend to bid 1♥ and support ♦s later, you are unlikely to still be able to bid 2♦ when it gets back to you. You could maybe chance a 3♦ then too but at much higher risk.

If you bid 2♦, you take away valuable bids from the opponents such as 2♣ and 1♠. It does not look like they will let you play in 2♦ very often and might stretch a 2M or 3♣ bid when it is too high. Maybe they even end up in 2♥s if we get lucky. By bidding 2♦ you tell partner about the fit before it is too late (eg. they bid 2♠ over your 1♥ response). With some extra ♦ length he will be able to compete safely to 3♦. In terms of best partscore, maybe 2♦ works better because it eats up some bidding space and reveals your fit.

Any thoughts?

[Codo]

Yes, 2 ♦ shows the fit and the strength quite well. Yes 2 ♦ preempts, 1 Heart does not.

But opps tend to bid more agressively over a known fit then in a misfit situation. So they will stretch a little to bid 2 Spade over 2 Diamond which negates the preemptive value.

And you are not banned from bidding 3 diamond or often 2 diamond later.
And you may miss a game which could easily be in heart or NT and which you may not find after 2 Diamond.

So: many reasons for 1 Heart, the normal bid.

[bid_em_up]

Little Kid, on Jan 6 2010, 06:37 AM, said:

Until yesterday I would have automatically bid 1♥ but then someone gave me some good arguments for 2♦ and now I'm not sure anymore.

Let me guess. This advice came from a person who is one of your regular opponents, right?

[Little Kid]

Nope, what makes you think so? Is it that bad?

[jdonn]

You even made the hearts better than the diamonds haha.

[bill1157]

pooltuna, on Jan 5 2010, 09:57 PM, said:

bill1157, on Jan 5 2010, 07:30 PM, said:

1NT would be preferable to 2♦ but 2♥ is the only good bid.  The problem would be more interesting if you had 1 more diamond and weaker hearts...

Bill

I going to take a blind guess here that you think the TOXer is your partner.

TOXer? What is that?

Bill

[bid_em_up]

bill1157, on Jan 6 2010, 11:09 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Jan 5 2010, 09:57 PM, said:

I going to take a blind guess here that you think the TOXer is your partner.

TOXer? What is that?

Bill

Take Out X'r (the person making the double).

[nigel_k]

I think raising is underrated on these kind of hands. But here you have a decent heart suit with the intermediates and you are better than minimum which means:

i) You can bid 3♦ over 2♠ or 3♣ next without stretching (much)
ii) Partner will pass instead of bidding 2♥ on quite a few of the hands where you have a 4-4 heart fit and enough to make game or outbid opps.
iii) A 4-3 heart fit may play well

So I'd bid 1♥ but it's not a wtp. I would be happy to bid 2♦ with xxx T9xx Qxxx Ax. Even xxx QT9x Jxxx Ax would be borderline.

[Apollo81]

Little Kid, on Jan 6 2010, 06:37 AM, said:

Any thoughts?

1♥ may also reveal a double fit on the hand, enabling you to bid 3 over 3 when you ordinarily wouldn't.

[kenrexford]

I would bid 2♦, and I feel strongly that it is the right call. So much so that it is not even close for me.

[P_Marlowe]

Little Kid, on Jan 6 2010, 06:37 AM, said:

Until yesterday I would have automatically bid 1♥ but then someone gave me some good arguments for 2♦ and now I'm not sure anymore.

Although it is true you may belong in ♥s (possibly even at the game level), bidding 1♥ does nothing in terms of preempting the opponents. Your LHO will make his best bid and the opponents will know exactly how high to go and in what strain. Your side will have exchanged no information about your only known fit and may miss a cold 3♦ when it may easily be the best contract. If you intend to bid 1♥ and support ♦s later, you are unlikely to still be able to bid 2♦ when it gets back to you. You could maybe chance a 3♦ then too but at much higher risk.

If you bid 2♦, you take away valuable bids from the opponents such as 2♣ and 1♠. It does not look like they will let you play in 2♦ very often and might stretch a 2M or 3♣ bid when it is too high. Maybe they even end up in 2♥s if we get lucky. By bidding 2♦ you tell partner about the fit before it is too late (eg. they bid 2♠ over your 1♥ response). With some extra ♦ length he will be able to compete safely to 3♦. In terms of best partscore, maybe 2♦ works better because it eats up some bidding space and reveals your fit.

Any thoughts?

Hi,

I dont intend to hide the diamond fit, but I also dont intend to give up
on a constructive auction either, thats why I am bidding 1H.
If the auction comes back to me with 2S or 3C, I will show the support,
the hand is good enough to make a competitive / nonforcing 3D bid over
2S / 3C.

There is only one reason not to bid 1H - if you dont want to bid 3D over
2S / 3C on your own, than you have to decide between 1H and 2D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Playing standard, it is not even 100% sure, that you have a 8 card
diamond fit, it is highly likely, but it is not 100% sure, so why should I
commit my self to play a possible 7 card fit, if I have a better alternative?

[kenrexford]

Here's my take, explained.

Contrary to the claim that the only reason to not bid 1♥ is that you are afraid of bidding 3♦ later, the reason to not bid 1♥ is more fundamental.

If partner lacks four hearts, we are obviously better placed after a 2♦ raise, it seems. First of all, partner himself gains info that is happy info, which makes his task easier. With this hand, I want partner's knowledge enhanced.

Moreover, the opponents have more difficulty. Their likely fits are clubs and/or spades. By bidding 2♦, I have really strained their ability to find a club fit, but I have also strained their ability to find a spade fit.

So, what if we do have a heart fit? Well, that increases the odds of the opponents having a spade fit, and my call made that ever-so-slightly easier to find. It also increases the odds of discovering a club fit, with the same bad result.

If partner has values sufficient for 4♥ to be in play, he likely will be able to introduce hearts himself, and partner should do that whenever his partner is not a slave to four-card majors in this type of sequence.

Make my side major boss spades, and the analysis is different. Buit, a heart secondary should, IMO, be temporarily ignored in a situation like this.

[Free]

I'd bid 1♥, although I can understand 2♦. In case this is a part score battle, imo we'll usually have to play at 3-level, so you might as well bet on 2 horses and let partner decide. In case we have game we'll probably get there one way or another.

I don't think 2♦ has enough preemptive effect to keep opps out of 2♠, but it might keep them from 3♣. I wonder if the 2♦ bidders would still support if the Major were reversed, because that's a whole different situation.

[mike777]

1h, no problem yet.

I dont think it is close.