[Antrax]

---

I was east. 2♥ and 3♥ were weak. What would you make of West's 4♦ call?

[gwnn]

3163 15+ count, give or take a few cards. forcing - East took a positive action. it would not be forcing, for example, if the opening were 3H and North had passed.

[Antrax]

Thanks, that's what I thought (a "big double" type of hand with a good diamond suit). P meant it as a slam try with a fit in spades (which I thought 4♥ would've been)

[ArtK78]

gwnn, on 2011-March-24, 05:01, said:

3163 15+ count, give or take a few cards. forcing - East took a positive action. it would not be forcing, for example, if the opening were 3H and North had passed.

If it were me making the 4♦ bid, it would be a lot better than a 15 count (yes, you did put a + next to the 15). With up to about 17 HCP and a good diamond suit, I would overcall 3♦ rather than double. A direct action over a preempt should be based on a sound hand, so the worst hand that I can have for a direct overcall is a sound hand with good diamonds. To double first and then bid diamonds requires a very good hand.

Given partner's free 3♠ call, 4♦ is forcing. It does not promise anything in spades, but it does not deny a spade fit.

[helene_t]

Agree with gwnn. This doesn't promise a hand too strong for a 3♦ overcall, although it doesn't deny it either. A 3154 (with chunky diamonds, otherwise 4♥) is possible. You planned to pass a 2♠ response by p but once he made a free bid, you force to game.

[ggwhiz]

My "Free" bid of 3♠ doesn't promise much.

With something like 5 or 6 spades and a minor suit singleton, not much at all except a desire not to defend 3♥.

Therefore although 4♦ shows a very good natural bid it's only about 80% forcing for me.

And..... I could easily be on the wrong page in a casual partnership.

[ArtK78]

With all due respect, I just do not understand the idea of bidding 4♦ over 3♠ after making a takeout double on 3-1-5-4 or 3-1-6-3 shape unless it is a move towards slam.

Why not just bid 4♠ or pass, depending on whether you want to bid game or not? Why bid 4♦ on those cards?

Partner expects that you have values for your takeout double. Yet, partner did not bid game. Slam seems dubious at best. Is the purpose of the 4♦ call to seek an alternate strain?

To me, the only explanation for the 4♦ bid after making a takeout double of 2♥ is a very strong one-suited hand with or without a secondary spade fit. 4♦ must be 100% forcing on this auction.

You took your position to treat the hand as a three-suited hand when you made your takeout double. You have to stick with it now. If you wanted to treat the hand as a one-suited diamond hand, you should have overcalled 3♦ rather than double UNLESS the 4♦ bid shows diamonds and a big hand too good to merely overcall 3♦.

[gwnn]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-24, 12:48, said:

Why not just bid 4♠ or pass, depending on whether you want to bid game or not? Why bid 4♦ on those cards?

Partner expects that you have values for your takeout double. Yet, partner did not bid game. Slam seems dubious at best. Is the purpose of the 4♦ call to seek an alternate strain?

Yes. 3♠ doesn't promise 5 for most people.

[ArtK78]

gwnn, on 2011-March-24, 12:57, said:

Yes. 3♠ doesn't promise 5 for most people.

Sure, 3♠ doesn't promise 5. What makes you think that diamonds will be a better fit, especially if you are 3-1-5-4?

Once you make the takeout double, you have already committed your side to playing in spades if partner has 4 unless you plan to bid another suit. Bidding 4♦ now is certainly going to muddy the waters if, as you say, you can have a minimum or medium takeout double with 3 spades for that bid. How are you going to convince partner that you don't have a monster one-suiter?

Assume that I accept your premise that double followed by 4♦ on this auction does not show a monster one-suited diamond hand. How would you have shown such a hand?

[quiddity]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-24, 13:38, said:

Assume that I accept your premise that double followed by 4♦ on this auction does not show a monster one-suited diamond hand. How would you have shown such a hand?

jumping in diamonds? 3♥ "stopper ask" followed by a diamond bid?

[gwnn]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-24, 13:38, said:

Sure, 3♠ doesn't promise 5. What makes you think that diamonds will be a better fit, especially if you are 3-1-5-4?

Once you make the takeout double, you have already committed your side to playing in spades if partner has 4 unless you plan to bid another suit. Bidding 4♦ now is certainly going to muddy the waters if, as you say, you can have a minimum or medium takeout double with 3 spades for that bid. How are you going to convince partner that you don't have a monster one-suiter?

Assume that I accept your premise that double followed by 4♦ on this auction does not show a monster one-suited diamond hand. How would you have shown such a hand?

4♦ is forcing. There is ample room to sort it out. I'm not sure what makes you think that I think I can have a minimum takeout double with 3 spades with 4♦. I am forcing to game and offering diamonds as a strain.

I don't think we have a fundamental disagreement here. Maybe we disagree on how many spades does doubler tend to have. I don't think I would have 1 spade in this auction more than .5% of the time. Maybe for you this percentage is 5%. Otherwise I think we agree in the case of most hands.

I wouldn't bid 4♦ on some 3154 14 count or anything. I'm undecided on the whole 3154 issue honestly. I'd be most likely 3163 or 3064 or 3073 and if very strong then possibly 2173.

I definitely dislike doubling on 2 spades and I hate hate hate doubling on 1. There's 3♦, 3♥, 3NT, 5♦ or 6♦ for singleton spades hands.

[mike777]

Antrax, on 2011-March-24, 03:54, said:

---

I was east. 2♥ and 3♥ were weak. What would you make of West's 4♦ call?

fwiw I think pard has diamonds and I cant ever pass after my 3s call.

I hope 4d is not a cue in support of spades, kind of a torture bid if so.

in any event I will raise d or rebid spades or bid 4h to torture pard.

[Antrax]

At the table I rebid spades. I had 7 HCP with Jxxx spades, a good five-card club suit, and 2-2 in the red suits. My line of thinking was "surely this can't be control since we haven't agreed spades, and also I'm a passed hand so what slam is partner envisioning? So despite being weird, it has to be natural. Thus, partner is strong enough to force to game. If he has no spades, he'll rebid clubs (great!) or diamonds (tolerable, since he'll have a 6 card suit) and we'll be okay". He passed 4♠ and tabled AK3♦ and an overall 19 HCP hand with a small heart singleton, 5 excellent spades (AKQTx) and four clubs. I asked him after the hand and his plan was to make a forcing bid and see if I bid something like 4♥, in which case he'd blast off to 6♠. Not sure what he would've done had I bid 5♦, but then again he didn't expect me to take the 4♦ call as natural, but rather as some sort of general cuebid or something.

[the hog]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-24, 08:13, said:

If it were me making the 4♦ bid, it would be a lot better than a 15 count (yes, you did put a + next to the 15). With up to about 17 HCP and a good diamond suit, I would overcall 3♦ rather than double. A direct action over a preempt should be based on a sound hand, so the worst hand that I can have for a direct overcall is a sound hand with good diamonds. To double first and then bid diamonds requires a very good hand.

Given partner's free 3♠ call, 4♦ is forcing. It does not promise anything in spades, but it does not deny a spade fit.

Agree with Art. This is clearly a hand too good for an immediate 3d bid. The bid is forcing, of course.

[ArtK78]

quiddity, on 2011-March-24, 16:50, said:

jumping in diamonds? 3♥ "stopper ask" followed by a diamond bid?

Most players play that the jump to 4♦ shows diamonds and spades (5-5 or better) and is forcing.

As for 3♥ followed by 4♦, that should show a one-suited game forcing hand. That would be an overbid if you held something like a 19 count with AQJxxx of diamonds.

[ArtK78]

Antrax, on 2011-March-25, 01:13, said:

At the table I rebid spades. I had 7 HCP with Jxxx spades, a good five-card club suit, and 2-2 in the red suits. My line of thinking was "surely this can't be control since we haven't agreed spades, and also I'm a passed hand so what slam is partner envisioning? So despite being weird, it has to be natural. Thus, partner is strong enough to force to game. If he has no spades, he'll rebid clubs (great!) or diamonds (tolerable, since he'll have a 6 card suit) and we'll be okay". He passed 4♠ and tabled AK3♦ and an overall 19 HCP hand with a small heart singleton, 5 excellent spades (AKQTx) and four clubs. I asked him after the hand and his plan was to make a forcing bid and see if I bid something like 4♥, in which case he'd blast off to 6♠. Not sure what he would've done had I bid 5♦, but then again he didn't expect me to take the 4♦ call as natural, but rather as some sort of general cuebid or something.

You got lucky. If partner had the strong one-suited hand he might pass 4♠ expecting you to have MUCH better spades, something like KQxxxx. Partner should have bid 4♥ if he was going to cue bid. He risked having you raise to 5♦ if your minor suits were reversed.

Quite frankly, it is far from clear that his hand is worth a cue bid. Since 3♠ is encouraging but not forcing, he could have just bid 4♠. You said that partner had a 19 count with AKQTx of spades and AKx of diamonds and a singleton heart (presumably a small singleton). So his clubs were Kxxx or QJxx. Not a bad hand, but 4♠ is enough on those cards.