[gnasher]

Not at all. What I said wasn't at all clear.

[Zelandakh]

I thought the hand was an invite because of the soft values but I can understand treating it as a GF, especially if playing a more power-orientated style of double. If treating it as a GF then I would cue as well of course.

The possible point of contention here is whether you can cue with an invitational hand and only 1 major. I prefer not to and arrange follow-ups to a jump to accomodate this approach. This trades clarity on the first cue for ambiguity on the second cue. The main alternative creates problems in your cue bid auctions as Mike and Andy's discussion highlights. The third approach, using both a jump and double jump for invitational hands, has its own problems - you cannot stop in 2S when it is right and you lose the natural 3S bid.

None of these methods is without problems somewhere and I suspect if some top theorists sat down and devoted some time to this area they could find significant improvements. The current methods work "well enough" which is always the worst possible situation for bidding advancements.

[MrAce]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-22, 05:16, said:

I thought the hand was an invite because of the soft values but I can understand treating it as a GF, especially if playing a more power-orientated style of double. If treating it as a GF then I would cue as well of course.

Indeed it looks more of an invitational hand if what we end up will be a 5-3 fit 4♠ contract. But it looks more of a GF hand to me if i am shooting for 3NT.

Sometimes our knowledge at bridge make us play or bid auto. Imo holding 5 card ♠ and our knowledge about the general principles of when to play 3NT ( usually when we dont have a major fit) leading us quickly to focus on 4♠. I hope most of you agree that 3 NT is very attractive and playable contract even if you are one of the players who would never play 3NT with a 5-3 major fit.

For example this hand, if u change spade suit and ♦ suit, having no 4 or 5 card major, most people i am sure would already blast 3NT. 12 hcp + 5 card suit+ double stopper + position advantage+ it is imps. At worst we can go down in a borderline game. But when their 5 card suit is not diamonds but spades, they downgrade this hand to invitation and totally ignore a very attractive contract (3NT)

You also mentioned that pd's DBL might be light. Thats true but I expect him to hold at least 12 hcp. Yes he can DBL with much lighter hands, but then he has to have a perfect shape for that such as 4441, in this case i will play 4♠ at imps. It is extremely uncientific to try to figure that an extra Jack in our hand would make it ok but now we shd try to play partscore if we can. And there are also times when actually game has no play, the lead or defense may give life to it, we all know this. And in this auction the guy on lead looks like gonna sweat a bit before he leads.

[pirate22]

gnasher, on 2011-November-21, 18:31, said:

I didn't mean that we have to show that we have five of them - I can understand treating this as a 4224 shape. I was replying to a post that suggested concealing the fact that we have any kind of spade suit.

[pirate22]

i assume the hand shown is the hand to respond to pard opening 1cl
and next opp x's if one uses 2spades,[weak end of story unless the opener
has 18/19 points 1club opener}--having said that to bid 2cl is a travesty.
To arrive at an optimum contract whatever--I would xx {redouble},im interested in pards reaction and subsequent bid-or if next opp bids,and my paqrtner would be interested as well
dont forget we have the balance of points,if pard has opened sub normal point wise,
his subsequent bidding will clear it up.

[manudude03]

pirate22, on 2011-November-26, 18:46, said:

i assume the hand shown is the hand to respond to pard opening 1cl
and next opp x's if one uses 2spades,[weak end of story unless the opener
has 18/19 points 1club opener}--having said that to bid 2cl is a travesty.
To arrive at an optimum contract whatever--I would xx {redouble},im interested in pards reaction and subsequent bid-or if next opp bids,and my paqrtner would be interested as well
dont forget we have the balance of points,if pard has opened sub normal point wise,
his subsequent bidding will clear it up.

No, the posted hand is answering the takeout double by partner.

[aguahombre]

gnasher, on 2011-November-21, 18:31, said:

I didn't mean that we have to show that we have five of them - I can understand treating this as a 4224 shape. I was replying to a post that suggested concealing the fact that we have any kind of spade suit.

That was my post, and a bit silly at that; but it was only a tiny bit further out there from MrAce's initial thoughts (with which I mostly agree). The OP hand feels like a NoTrump hand which should be played from this side of the table, or if we have a nine-fit in spades it still should be played over here; and showing spades without bidding them doesn't quite get the job done.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2011-November-26, 19:05, said:

and showing spades without bidding them doesn't quite get the job done.

What do you mean by this ? If i understood correctly u like to play 4♠ with 5-4 major, and 3NT if no 9 card ♠ as i do too.

I can learn pd's 4♠ always when i start with 2♣. It works just like stayman here. Over 2♦ or 2♥ response i jump to 3NT and pd can always bid 4♠ with 4. If i didnt want him to bid 4♠ i would have never wasted time with cue and bid direct 3NT over his DBL.

[aguahombre]

All I meant, Timo, was that it doesn't get your hand to be declarer if the 5-4 spade fit is found, and I think with that club situation and the other stuff the hand should be declarer.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2011-November-26, 20:59, said:

All I meant, Timo, was that it doesn't get your hand to be declarer if the 5-4 spade fit is found, and I think with that club situation and the other stuff the hand should be declarer.

I see, good point.

Perhaps a creative pd can help us but i wouldnt bet on it.