[Fluffy]

pass, 2♠ or 4♠, I can quickl see how any of them can turn into disaster, but have to pick one of them anyway, 4♠ to me.

[Winstonm]

Quote

Chamaco: Bidding 2S we are promising more defense.

I appreciate how ardently you argue your position. However, there are those of us who believe differently.

That's what makes a horse race, eh?

WinstonM

[han]

Mauro,

I also appreciate the efforts you make to convince us that double first is correct. I don't buy it, but you raise some interesting points. From my perspective you put too much emphasis on HCP's and not enough on playing strength.

[han]

I must say that I also don't believe Rolands argument that negative doubles don't work with 6+ majors. For instance, with AQJxxx xx xxx xx, I would make a negative double over 1H-(2D). I think that this is not good enough to bid 2S on, but the auction 1H-(2D)-Dbl-2H-2S would describe this hand perfectly (of course, it get's harder if the opponents bid again).

I would be interested to know if you agree with this Roland.

[Deanrover]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

Pass 1♦ 2♥ Dbl
Pass 3♦ Pass 3♠
Pass 4♠ Pass Pass
Dbl Pass Pass Pass

[the hog]

I guess the opposition were pretty weak. This is a pretty poor double. Swop partner's C ace for the KQ and the contract is cold.

[Deanrover]

+790 btw, courtesy of my brilliant declarer play

[han]

The worst bid is definitely 3D, which shows a minimal hand. North has a prime 19-count, a 3H bid would be in order imo.

[Fluffy]

Deanrover, on Apr 18 2005, 02:31 AM, said:

+790 btw, courtesy of my brilliant declarer play

I am afraid I am not that brilliant and woud collect -400 with my 4♠ bid :_(

[luis]

Fluffy, on Apr 18 2005, 02:35 PM, said:

Deanrover, on Apr 18 2005, 02:31 AM, said:

+790 btw, courtesy of my brilliant declarer play

I am afraid I am not that brilliant and woud collect -400 with my 4♠ bid :_(

I got to this thread late but I must say I really consider 4♠ a bid that I might make at the table.
Maybe WE are not that brilliant!

[Deanrover]

What do you guys think my sequence (x followed by 3♠) shows?

[han]

Double followed by 3S should show about 7-10 highs with a good 6-card spade suit.

[Fluffy]

agree with hannie, when there is no NFB you have to have a way to show 8-9 hands with long suit.

[Deanrover]

Fluffy, on Apr 18 2005, 11:59 PM, said:

agree with hannie, when there is no NFB you have to have a way to show 8-9 hands with long suit.

So was my hand consistent with my bidding?

I thought double was the most flexible action as it would allow partner to pass in what could be a horrible misfit for both partnerships, whilst it kept open the possibility of playing in clubs. Also, when in doubt, if double is one of the options, I double

[han]

I don't think that you showed a hand with as much playing strength as this one, and perhaps a better spade suit. You also never showed your clubs.

If you start with 2S then you might get both suits in.

[Chamaco]

Fluffy, on Apr 18 2005, 11:59 PM, said:

agree with hannie, when there is no NFB you have to have a way to show 8-9 hands with long suit.

That's what I tried to say in many of my posts previously in this thread.
I am glad someone else agrees with me.

*------------------------*

BTW, someone said by doubling and bidding spades we can lose the club suit.

The point is that BOTH doubling and bidding spades AND bidding 2S right away will work if opps shut up.
The concerns in choosing one or the other is if ops jump raise 3/4H.
In those cases we'll lose clubs anyways, so the problem of showing clubs should be forgotten IMO: in the relevant cases we won't be able to show clubs anyways, even if we start with 2S.

-------------------------------

BTW, if I have to quasi-force to game with 2S (yes yes I know it's only inv+, but 90% of the times we endup in game anyways), I much prefer bidding 4S as luis does.
The 4S bid does not promise as much defense as 2S does.

[PriorKnowledge]

Dbl. What is the problem? You can't make a forcing 2S bid, so you start with a negative dbl. Over 3D bid 3S. Over 2N bid 4S.

Again. What is the problem? That is the system you play.

Same as: (playing strong jump-shifts)
Holding xxxxxx xxx xxx x
and partner opens 1C. What do you bid? You pass, of course.

[beatrix45]

This is a really good problem hand. The original negative double was devised to cover hands where there was no good bid available, and a pass was not a good option either. That's exactly what we have here. My hand is plenty strong enough offensively for 2S, but it woefully lacks defense. So, a negative double looks attractive to me.

Plus, it looks like the bidding ought to develop fairly well after a negative double. If they have a heart fit, then partner will either have a few spades or will be all diamonds and clubs. With my playing strength, I am more than ready to bid up to the 3S level in any case, and if they reveal a heart fit then the 4S level should be OK. The only disaster hands would be something like 1-3-7-2 distribution for partner.

Plan A for me would be a negative double followed by a spade bid. That way, if partner wants to double a heart contract, I will happily sit for it.

On the actual hand, a double worked out as well as could be expected - not a bad auction, really, if you don't mind partner's underbidding. Imagine what would have happened after a 2S call.

[Winstonm]

I find it interesting that there are so many who play that the free 2S bid should show defensive values yet I am guessing that everyone would accept xx, KQJ9xx, KQ109, x as an opening first seat hand and end up with the same type of problem over 1H-2S-3C-4S-P-P-X-?