[aguahombre]

hanp, on Sep 21 2010, 11:07 AM, said:

Why don't you do the search yourself? The search function is not that mysterious.

Thank you. I guess it is a mystery to me, since I only get a reply that the search menu is disabled. Was also having trouble thinking up key words.

[whereagles]

forum search engines are often as useful as microsoft help files

[cherdanno]

karlson, on Sep 18 2010, 07:03 AM, said:

hanp, on Sep 18 2010, 03:33 AM, said:

karlson, on Sep 18 2010, 06:23 AM, said:

So given that we could have had the same hand with the majors reversed for the double (could we?) what kind of hand bids 5♠?

The auction is certainly consistent with partner having 5-4-4-0 shape. And he doesn't need the world to double 3C with that shape.

So in the hypothetical I mentioned, we are either forced to slam or forced to play the 5-2?

I think 5♠ should be an almost impossible bid in this situation, and if it exists, should show basically a single-suiter.

Strain before level? I'd rather sometimes play a level too high than play a 4-3 fit at the 5-level.

[karlson]

Who said anything about a 4-3 fit? I think that the double should almost always have two places to play (yes, maybe you can have 3352 or something, but we can still get to diamonds often then) So we're mostly talking about getting to the 4-4 instead of the 5-4 sometimes. To me that's a pretty minor loss compared to the complete disaster of getting to an iffy 5-2 fit.

[cherdanno]

Nobody is playing a 5-2 fit - responder would have to correct to the 6-level with that.

[gwnn]

Sorry aguahombre couldn't find that thread (but I think that one was 3♣-x-4♣-x or something like that, to 4mx and the idea was that doubler should show his lowest 4+ card major, even from 5♠4♥)

[karlson]

cherdanno, on Sep 22 2010, 02:24 PM, said:

Nobody is playing a 5-2 fit - responder would have to correct to the 6-level with that.

Right -- sorry about ignoring your actual point.

I think though given the almost unanimous consensus on this hand that slam is likely to be no bargain even when partner has hit our suit (and people seem to think we have a 9 card fit in fact) getting to slam on these types of hands is not likely to be a good result.

[aguahombre]

gwnn, on Sep 22 2010, 04:26 PM, said:

Sorry aguahombre couldn't find that thread (but I think that one was 3♣-x-4♣-x or something like that, to 4mx and the idea was that doubler should show his lowest 4+ card major, even from 5♠4♥)

Yeh, Csaba, now I remember. Related, for sure.

[ArcLight]

hanp, on Sep 21 2010, 12:07 PM, said:

Why don't you do the search yourself? The search function is not that mysterious.

OK - this is the best (funniest ) quite of the week.
Nice one Hannie.