[Echognome]

Scoring: BAM

P - (1♦) - Dbl - (2♠);
Dbl - (P) - ?

---

1. What's partner's double?
2. What's your call now?

[PhantomSac]

I think Fred posted on here once that X should be responsive of a weak 2S bid, as opposed to penalty of a 1S bid. They are just far less likely to psyche a weak 2S bid, and if they aren't psyching you're far less likely to have a penalty X (whereas over a 1S non psyche you could easily have a X), and finally you need a responsive double more as playing a 4-3 fit at the 3 level is not good.

That being said, I don't know if that's a standard definition, I would take it as penalty undiscussed probably.

[Siegmund]

Responsive, but with the expectation that initial doubler will often leave it in with 4 quality spades (=fourth hand shouldn't be void in spades), is what I'd assume without discussion. Sort of a "fourth hand can't have a penalty double unless there are 14 or 15 spades in the deck" type of logic.

On the posted cards I don't think Axx spades is good enough, and I bid 3C.

[Cyberyeti]

I find it interesting that everybody assumes 2♠ is weak, over here it would be fit 90% of the time.

Also this is a very standard psyche, intending to play it undoubled or go back to 3♦ if doubled.

That said, on this hand I'd bid 2N (Lebensohl style) intending to pass 3♣ if partner bids it.

[Fluffy]

penalty!

[mcphee]

This dble is responsive, and who cares if the 2S bidder has tried to steal. To suggest to bid 2NT lebensohl style makes me thing those choosing that action should seriously re-read the convention.

[Cyberyeti]

mcphee, on Feb 23 2010, 08:11 AM, said:

This dble is responsive, and who cares if the 2S bidder has tried to steal. To suggest to bid 2NT lebensohl style makes me thing those choosing that action should seriously re-read the convention.

Lebensohl style seemed the best description, basically we play 2N in many competitive auctions as "bad version with clubs, or better version of all the other calls", so we can know if partner has 12 or 18 and he can effectively bid his suit naturally with either without making a fatuous cue or double first.

[bftboy]

Siegmund, on Feb 23 2010, 04:06 AM, said:

Responsive, but with the expectation that initial doubler will often leave it in with 4 quality spades (=fourth hand shouldn't be void in spades), is what I'd assume without discussion. Sort of a "fourth hand can't have a penalty double unless there are 14 or 15 spades in the deck" type of logic.

On the posted cards I don't think Axx spades is good enough, and I bid 3C.

this, except I'd change "will often" to just "may."

[Siegmund]

Quote

I find it interesting that everybody assumes 2♠ is weak, over here it would be fit 90% of the time.

Forgive our ACBL bias: over here, 2♠-without-an-alert is weak, 2♠-with-an-alert is fit, and OP didn't include any alerts or footnotes, so we assumed accordingly.

It would also be an overbid to think 90% of your opponents have even heard of fit-jumps unless this is a top-level event, I think. (Perhaps the next revision of the ACBL convention card, they will put a checkbox for "fit" on the "jump shift after double" line instead of the invitational or forcing blanks...)

[Echognome]

For what it's worth, there was no alert and looking at the hand record, I cannot tell which way he meant it as he was 6-4.

[Cyberyeti]

Siegmund, on Feb 23 2010, 03:15 PM, said:

Quote

I find it interesting that everybody assumes 2♠ is weak, over here it would be fit 90% of the time.

Forgive our ACBL bias: over here, 2♠-without-an-alert is weak, 2♠-with-an-alert is fit, and OP didn't include any alerts or footnotes, so we assumed accordingly.

It would also be an overbid to think 90% of your opponents have even heard of fit-jumps unless this is a top-level event, I think. (Perhaps the next revision of the ACBL convention card, they will put a checkbox for "fit" on the "jump shift after double" line instead of the invitational or forcing blanks...)

Curiously over here, I believe that without an alert it would be strong, both weak and fit are alertable I think. Will try to check up.

Even some pretty mediocre players play fit jumps, if I encountered it at any sort of tournament rather than at a local club I'd assume fit.

[jchiu]

My default agreement is something like this shows spades, so I am happy to pass. However, with prior discussion, I believe it would be useful on frequency to define this sequence - along with anything above 1N, until people start baby psyching such calls.

[Echognome]

Scoring: BAM

P - (1♦) - Dbl - (2♠);
Dbl - (P) - 3♣ - All Pass

---

After the double, East asked me the meaning and I said "I'm sorry we have not discussed this sequence," which we hadn't. I thought about it for awhile, but eventually came out with 3♣. Our teammates made a part-score in diamonds, so was a win.

[aguahombre]

yep...looks like your partner didn't care how you took the double.

[rogerclee]

Echognome, on Feb 23 2010, 10:19 PM, said:

After the double, East asked me the meaning and I said "I'm sorry we have not discussed this sequence," which we hadn't. I thought about it for awhile, but eventually came out with 3♣. Our teammates made a part-score in diamonds, so was a win.

West passed over 3C? lol

[Echognome]

rogerclee, on Feb 24 2010, 01:06 AM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 23 2010, 10:19 PM, said:

After the double, East asked me the meaning and I said "I'm sorry we have not discussed this sequence," which we hadn't.  I thought about it for awhile, but eventually came out with 3♣.  Our teammates made a part-score in diamonds, so was a win.

West passed over 3C? lol

Maybe West thought 2♠ was a fit jump? Who knows?

[aguahombre]

Echognome, on Feb 24 2010, 10:49 AM, said:

rogerclee, on Feb 24 2010, 01:06 AM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 23 2010, 10:19 PM, said:

After the double, East asked me the meaning and I said "I'm sorry we have not discussed this sequence," which we hadn't.  I thought about it for awhile, but eventually came out with 3♣.  Our teammates made a part-score in diamonds, so was a win.

West passed over 3C? lol

Maybe West thought 2♠ was a fit jump? Who knows?

Yep. That opens a whole can of worms for West. If it was a fit jump, then he has already done his all. If his pard didn't alert it, he is still stuck with assuming his partner knew what the bid was. Therefore, West has done right, and done the right thing, too.

It would be East who would have to bid 3D in passout/3C if it was a fit jump, or bid 3D at his second turn.