Raise?
#21
Posted 2010-May-29, 02:27
#22
Posted 2010-May-29, 04:04
It might be a slight overbid, but as it is highly descriptive, I simply have to bid it.
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#23
Posted 2010-May-29, 04:26
#24
Posted 2010-May-29, 05:16
#25
Posted 2010-May-29, 05:21
I would not even double 2D with this hand, what is the point as they are not going to play there. Assume you pass 2D and they take H preference,now you might consider another double.
#26
Posted 2010-May-29, 05:44
MFA, on May 29 2010, 11:26 AM, said:
I agree with that evaluation. I'm still not sure whether 2♠ shows a 3-card suit or a poor hand with 4-6 (or even 4-5) in the blacks. With xxxx xx x J10xxxx, maybe advancer would bid 2♣ in response to the takeout double because a club partscore is likely to play betetr than a spade partscore?
#27
Posted 2010-May-29, 06:07
#28
Posted 2010-May-29, 06:55
Little Kid, on May 28 2010, 08:20 PM, said:
LHO deals and passes, as does partner. RHO opens 1♥ and the auction proceeds. Do you move now?
I assume there must be a 2 card disparity in length between ♣ & ♠. Consequently I wanted to bid 4♠ but 3 should show this hand and leave partner some leeway.
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#29
Posted 2010-May-29, 08:11
hanp, on May 29 2010, 01:07 PM, said:
I know, but I'd moved on to what it should show in abstract, rather than what I think he's got on this hand. It's probably unworkable to use it to show a good 3-5 when partner has a 4153 16-count, but as a bad 4-6 when partner has a balanced 22-count.
#30
Posted 2010-May-29, 09:45
gnasher, on May 29 2010, 09:11 AM, said:
hanp, on May 29 2010, 01:07 PM, said:
I know, but I'd moved on to what it should show in abstract, rather than what I think he's got on this hand. It's probably unworkable to use it to show a good 3-5 when partner has a 4153 16-count, but as a bad 4-6 when partner has a balanced 22-count.
Yes my final conclusion was that I thought it should show a 4-6 yarb, but since I don't think partner has that on this hand I think he has 3-5 with some values. I would never bid 2C on a 4-5 yarb.
#31
Posted 2010-May-29, 09:49
So I am guessing everyone who passes over 2♠ now would have bid 2♠ initially instead of 2♣? What about the ones that still raise, do you bid 2♠ over this first double?
#32
Posted 2010-May-29, 09:50
* agree that doubling 2D is extras without primary club support, not penalty
* in that context, we have a minimum
* our hand is getting worse on the auction, since the DK is a favorite to face shortness, and one of the black suits isn't splitting
#33
Posted 2010-May-29, 10:32
Little Kid, on May 29 2010, 05:49 PM, said:
So I am guessing everyone who passes over 2♠ now would have bid 2♠ initially instead of 2♣? What about the ones that still raise, do you bid 2♠ over this first double?
2♣ belongs in another forum. It ranges below 3♠.
2♠ seems pretty straight forward, unless I have some agreement about 2♥, that could cater to this hand. (But I would assume 2♥ promised another bid?)
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#34
Posted 2010-May-29, 10:48
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#35
Posted 2010-May-29, 11:52
The_Hog, on May 28 2010, 11:28 PM, said:
The 2♥ bid is not a raise, it's a preference.
#36
Posted 2010-May-29, 12:08
Many, many beginners would --and do--just bid a suit cheaply in response to a t/o, regardless of their strength. Some of them would even bid 1♠. Of course these people's partners always bid as if it was a normal 6-infinity response to an opening bid --and they land on their feet. When the minimal advance really has a yarb, somehow the doubler knows this
However, these responses with 9+ don't belong in that forum, either. They don't belong on the planet; and people who bid this way won't be reading fora. They haven't even read a beginning book on bidding.
#37
Posted 2010-May-29, 17:06
#38
Posted 2010-May-29, 17:43
A not-so-experienced player would probably have a 64 or 54. Opposite a more advanced player, justin's interpretation of 3 spades has more merit.
I'm not surprised pard came up with that somewhat unexpected 54 of 9 hcp. An expert would probably have bid 2♠ instead of 2♣.

Help

(Pass)-Pass- (1♥) - X
(Pass) - 2♣ - (2♦) - X
(2♥) - 2♠ - (Pass) - ?