[dboxley]

---

[ArtK78]

Pass.

The classic meaning of a bid in front of partner who has redoubled (assuming the redouble is not conventional) is that the opening bid is based on a minimum hand with distribution and opener is not willing to cooperate in any attempt to penalize the opponents. This hand has full values for its opening bid, good defensive values and no remarkable distribution. Also, it has Kx in clubs, so if partner wants to double clubs it is probably a good idea to defend.

Let partner take the next move.

[TimG]

Suppose the opponents run to 2D, are we going to be happy about defending this? I don't think so.

But, to pull to 2S (or 2H) now tells partner that you have a minimum hand, I don't think this 6412 qualifies as minimum. So, I pass now and pull later if the opponents find 2D. Most people play that the pass and pull shows a better hand than bidding directly.

[ahydra]

ArtK78, on 2012-September-20, 08:35, said:

Pass.

The classic meaning of a bid in front of partner who has redoubled (assuming the redouble is not conventional) is that the opening bid is based on a minimum hand with distribution and opener is not willing to cooperate in any attempt to penalize the opponents. This hand has full values for its opening bid, good defensive values and no remarkable distribution. Also, it has Kx in clubs, so if partner wants to double clubs it is probably a good idea to defend.

Let partner take the next move.

I sort-of understand this, but it feels rather unintuitive. If partner had bid instead of rdbl, then pass would show a weak hand, now it shows penalty interest... And if you had different suits, are you actually going to pass over 1D-(X)-XX-(1H) when holding four spades just in case partner's interested in pen-X'ing 1H? I wonder how many times that has come up!

Why not play double as "optional" or whatever the word is for "don't mind whether we play or try for penalties", and otherwise bid naturally? This would allow you to describe your hand better, and feels more intuitive. Playing this, the OP hand is an obvious 2H at the given vul (wonder if it should X if opps were vul, with 3 defensive tricks).

ahydra

[jogs]

2♠. I like XX guarantees tolerance for my suit. Therefore XX has at least two spades. Little point in bidding 2♥ since doubler usually has four and I rather play in a 6-2 fit than a 4-4 fit.

[lalldonn]

Seems obvious to pass. If partner doubles 2♣ that has to be good. If the opponents bid 2♦ I will bid then. I don't really see a downside.

[billw55]

lalldonn, on 2012-September-20, 09:46, said:

Seems obvious to pass. If partner doubles 2♣ that has to be good. If the opponents bid 2♦ I will bid then. I don't really see a downside.

I thought that at this vulnerability, the downside is scoring +500 (maybe only 300) with 3NT or 4M making. Dunno, maybe I worry too much.

[lalldonn]

billw55, on 2012-September-20, 10:11, said:

I thought that at this vulnerability, the downside is scoring +500 (maybe only 300) with 3NT or 4M making. Dunno, maybe I worry too much.

Look how awesome our defense is for clubs if partner doubles. Kx opposite his four card holding, singleton opposite his likely 5+ length (or else what are the opponents doing in clubs?), and two aces opposite his shorter suits. I think 800 is likely and even 1100 can happen, even at this vul.

Also, don't just assume we are making game even if we were going to bid it. On the hands where partner is doubling clubs and the opponents aren't running to diamonds then partner is all minors opposite our majors. It's very easy to imagine game going down, especially if we don't have a spade fit.

I mean, yes I suppose you caught me since there is always a downside. What I meant is I'm happy with any likely way the auction will develop.

[aguahombre]

billw55, on 2012-September-20, 10:11, said:

I thought that at this vulnerability, the downside is scoring +500 (maybe only 300) with 3NT or 4M making. Dunno, maybe I worry too much.

I assume your only concern about Josh's post is the part about defending 2CX. You might be right, or not, but let's start with the PASS of the redouble. That has to be right, and that is the poll. Once we have established that our opening bid was not a piece of cheese, we are on a good track. Yeh, will sit for 2CX if it happens ---but if partner does double 2C where are all the diamonds?

[CSGibson]

By the way, suppose partner is 2-4-4-3 with some random 12 count. What options does partner have over 2♣ passed back to him? Bidding after a XX and a forcing pass is something I am not very good at (and as a result I don't XX very frequently unless it is absolutely clear/no other palatable options), just curious whether this is a hand where we will often grit our teeth & double, or remove to a 2/4 card suit, hoping partner doesn't read it as more...

[inquiry]

IF you play Garozzo 2/3 Doubles, this hand just rises to the level of the double by opener. This shows 2 or 3 clubs and "extras", The quick tricks and potential ruffing value in diamonds counts as the extras perhaps. A pass shows 1 or 4+ clubs, and cuebid a void.

[TimG]

CSGibson, on 2012-September-20, 10:45, said:

By the way, suppose partner is 2-4-4-3 with some random 12 count. What options does partner have over 2♣ passed back to him? Bidding after a XX and a forcing pass is something I am not very good at (and as a result I don't XX very frequently unless it is absolutely clear/no other palatable options), just curious whether this is a hand where we will often grit our teeth & double, or remove to a 2/4 card suit, hoping partner doesn't read it as more...

With the 2=4=4=3 12 count opposite a sound opener who could not double 2C, I'll try 3C. Maybe the concern with a 2=4=4=3 12 count is what to do after 1S-DBL-RDBL-3C; P-P-? especially if you don't have a club stopper.

(With a 2=4=4=3 10 count, I wouldn't redouble, rather I'd bid 1N. And, with my regular partner, I can bid 2N natural over the DBL with an invitational hand, though I understand that is far from common expert practice.)

[Yu18772]

CSGibson, on 2012-September-20, 10:45, said:

By the way, suppose partner is 2-4-4-3 with some random 12 count. What options does partner have over 2♣ passed back to him? Bidding after a XX and a forcing pass is something I am not very good at (and as a result I don't XX very frequently unless it is absolutely clear/no other palatable options), just curious whether this is a hand where we will often grit our teeth & double, or remove to a 2/4 card suit, hoping partner doesn't read it as more...

Well the random count was good enough to xx in any case I play that 2♠ is 2 cards usually (xx for me most likely denies fit, and if i redoubled with 3+ i would now bid 3♠).



Yu

[JLOGIC]

I don't understand anything but pass, I would be thrilled if partner ripped 2C.

[Phil]

No need to panic and bid out our shape.

We are in a forcing auction, and I am thrilled at whatever partner bids at this point.

[Fluffy]

jogs, on 2012-September-20, 09:14, said:

2♠. I like XX guarantees tolerance for my suit. Therefore XX has at least two spades. Little point in bidding 2♥ since doubler usually has four and I rather play in a 6-2 fit than a 4-4 fit.

I think your methods are unplayable, and that assuming there is no heart fit is very poor. I can't recall ever disagreeing that much with a post.

[sathyab]

What if the minor suits in your hand were reversed, i.e ♠AJ8xxx ♥AJTx ♦Kx ♣x ? This still looks like a good defensive hand. Would people bid 2M with this hand ? If you do pass, and partner hits 2♣, it might play really well for our side if partner's ♣ length is two more than ♠ length, but not all that well when he has only one more ♣ than ♠.

[ArtK78]

sathyab, on 2012-September-21, 11:54, said:

What if the minor suits in your hand were reversed, i.e ♠AJ8xxx ♥AJTx ♦Kx ♣x ? This still looks like a good defensive hand. Would people bid 2M with this hand ? If you do pass, and partner hits 2♣, it might play really well for our side if partner's ♣ length is two more than ♠ length, but not all that well when he has only one more ♣ than ♠.

No, I would not bid 2 of a major on this hand. If partner doubles 2♣ I will pull to 2♥. It may be wrong to run from 2♣x, as partner may have a club stack, but it is not a clear leave in like it would be with x Kx in the minors.

We can now bid out our hands naturally and, hopefully, without any further interference from the opponents.