[dcohio]

Scoring: MP

(P)-1♦-(P)-1♥
(1♠)-1NT-2(♠)-?

---

[gwnn]

3♦. underbid (in the sense that I could have 5 less HCP for the same action) but rates to be best.

mandatory old thread linking about the free 1NT rebid:
http://forums.bridge...topic=34918&hl=

[peachy]

None of the vote options. Partner showed a better than NT opening and I have 10 pretty HCP. Neither 3D nor 2NT is forcing, right?

[gwnn]

in the thread i linked to everyone seemed to agree this is 13-14 with a good spade stop, but most people admitted that it's probably workable to play it as 18-19.

[dcohio]

Partner is showing a minimum with spades stopped (twice usually). 2nt here would show 18-19

[neilkaz]

dcohio, on Feb 28 2010, 07:18 PM, said:

Partner is showing a minimum with spades stopped (twice usually). 2nt here would show 18-19

In that case I think a 3♦ bid stands out. I don't think I want to X them even when they are vul at MP here at the 2 level.

[PhantomSac]

Wow not Xing here is terrible imo. they are red, it's MP, we have lots of them HCP thingies, partner has those spade thingies, LHO is a passed hand so he doesn't have the nuts and is unlikely to have 6 spades...yay! We beat 2S X soooooo often.

Edit: Wow some of you say partner shows a double stopper in spades... and you still aren't doubling them?!?!?! WOW. If you think he's shown a double spade stopper then obv double. He didn't even make a support X so our QJ of hearts is good defense. If you think he has shown a max and could have one spade stopper since it's MP white then obv X.

I see why people overbid so much when vul in competitive auctions at MP...people don't even double. In reality if people doubled as often as they should then people would be much more cautious in competitive auctions vul at MP than vul at imps... and if that day were to ever come then maybe this wouldn't be a double (ok it still would, but you get my point!).

[dcohio]

Justin is 100% on this one. I took the second best option of 3♦ intending it to play.

Partner thought I was inviting, and pulled to 3NT with KQ73, 972, K854, A5. 3NT-1

I later told partner that if I wanted to invite 3NT, I'd invite w/2NT. And why would a minimum accept an invitation anyway.

3♦ makes easily, 2Sx is likely off 2.

[PhantomSac]

I would almost rather pass 2S than bid 3D if those were my only choices, since we probably beat them 2 enough of the time Oo

[neilkaz]

dcohio, on Feb 28 2010, 10:40 PM, said:

Justin is 100% on this one. I took the second best option of 3♦ intending it to play.

Partner thought I was inviting, and pulled to 3NT with KQ73, 972, K854, A5. 3NT-1

I later told partner that if I wanted to invite 3NT, I'd invite w/2NT. And why would a minimum accept an invitation anyway.

3♦ makes easily, 2Sx is likely off 2.

Yeah...you and Justin convinced me. 2♠ is likely going down, and that will score great at MP, esp -2. I am much more used to IMPs where if you X 2♠ and they make it is a disaster.

On the given auction I have to wonder why PD felt his 12 count and no source of extra tricks was worth accepting the invite.

Justin, would you double this at IMPs also?

[dcohio]

To me these type of auctions separate us lowbies from the great players... knowing when to take the next bid or when to double

[bftboy]

good lesson hand. the more I think about it, the more I agree that x should show almost exactly this hand type and these values. P can judge whether to leave it in, altho certainly will at these colors at MPs. 3♦ which I voted for is wimpy.

[PhantomSac]

neilkaz, on Feb 28 2010, 11:46 PM, said:

Justin, would you double this at IMPs also?

Yeah probably though 3D seems acceptable though, the difference is you're probably gonna need to get 500 to show a substantial gain since 3D is a sure plus, but partner will pass your double less often at imps so I can't really see them making it very often when he does.

[nigel_k]

I don't know what is standard here, but I would have assumed either:

1. The double is for takeout, in which case it should have been much more popular than it seems to be.

2. The double is for penalties, in which case I don't understand Justin's comment 'partner will pass your double less often at imps' because he'll always pass it.

Or is it something in between?

[P_Marlowe]

3D.

The bid woould be better, if you played something like good-bad
2NT in this seq., since you are max for the call, but given that no
alternative looks reasonably better 3D it is.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[lmilne]

nigel_k, on Mar 1 2010, 07:16 PM, said:

I don't know what is standard here, but I would have assumed either:

1. The double is for takeout, in which case it should have been much more popular than it seems to be.

2. The double is for penalties, in which case I don't understand Justin's comment 'partner will pass your double less often at imps' because he'll always pass it.

Or is it something in between?

I don't see why this double wouldn't be takeout but happy for partner to pass (as he's advertised values in their suit). No real reason to make a double penalties at a low level when opps have shown a fit and we haven't, right?

[Bbradley62]

If partner's 1NT shows a 13-14HCP balanced hand with spades double-stopped and not 4 hearts, isn't his hand sufficiently well-defined that you should be completely in charge of this auction? If so, double cannot be takeout.

[jdonn]

I really have to admit double wouldn't have even occured to me, I would have bid 3♦ as a reflex action. But with opponents vul at mps I like it.