[han]

Everybody likes to support with support in competition, but how far do you carry this at unfavorable vulnerability?

Examples:

You hold xxx xx Qxxx xxxx, partner opens 1S, RHO doubles. Do you bid 2S? (assume that you are not playing a gadget that would allow you to show a weak raise).

You hold xxxx xx Qxxx xxx, partner opens 1S, RHO doubles. Would you pass, bid 2S or 3S?

[fred]

With the first hand I would pass at any form of scoring and at any vulnerability. In my view this is not even close.

With the second hand I would consider 3S at favorable, but I suspect I would pass even then. I would definitely pass at all other vulnerabilities. There are players who I have a lot of respect for who are more aggressive in this position than I am.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Gerben42]

With the first hand I would pass, although with my regular partner I would bid 2♠ showing a bad raise at any vulnerability.

With the second hand 3♠ not vulnerable. Partner will expect nothing, and I've got a queen more than that.
Vulnerable I would pass.

Notice that you need to discuss this with partner!

[Fluffy]

pass, and pass, and with another Q pass, and maybe then 3♠ on second.

[Winstonm]

I am to a degree old fashioned.

The first hand to me is a clear cut pass. If it went 1S-P-P-2H-P-P-? I would pass again. One thing I believe strongly in: if the hand wasn't good enough to bid the first time it surely isn't good enough to bid the second time.

As far as the second hand, I still pass although with more reluctance. For me, to get up to the 3-level on minimal cards requires more compensatory shape - 4414, 4135, 4126. I've found that this 3-level blocking bid on weak hands often propels the opponents into games they may not have bid or poor sacrifices on our part. If pard decides to double them after my weak jump, that's on him; but if he takes the bait and sacrifices and I don't have the right shape, that one extra loser in my hand might mean the match or the board.

Still, there are world-class players who disagree with me. I'm just more comfortable with my approach.

WinstonM

[luke warm]

ben can correct this if it's wrong, but i'm pretty sure he and misho would bid 2S on the first hand (not me, i'd pass - i'm not that brave)... on the 2nd, i'd bid 3S nv... maybe heheh

[fred]

Here is a principle try to apply when deciding whether or not a bad hand qualifies for a preemptive raise. I have to admit that I occasionally ignore this rule at favorable vulnerability:

A bad hand qualifies for a preemptive raise if it will not be a complete disappointment when you put down the dummy.

In other words, your hand should have at least one (and in many cases exactly one) good feature. For example:

- Good trumps
- Good distribution
- A side Ace or King

One nice thing about this rule is that your partner will never be completely disappointed when you put down the dummy (by definition!) and having a happy partner tends to be conducive to having a partner who plays well

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[pbleighton]

Pass hand 1 at any vulnerability. If you raise to 2S with this, how will you find your games when pd has a strong hand?

Bid 3S on hand 2 at any vulnerability, though I am sympathetic to the passers at unfavorable.

Peter

[luke warm]

pbleighton, on Apr 28 2005, 06:34 PM, said:

If you raise to 2S with this, how will you find your games when pd has a strong hand?

they have ways, but don't forget they bid 2S on nothing... matter of fact, the way they used to play this, the opener would pass 2S with as many as 18 points, depending... i don't remember it all but it seems like 2S meant 0-6 with 3 cards

better hands go thru 1nt or 2c, if i recall

[pbleighton]

"they have ways, but don't forget they bid 2S on nothing... matter of fact, the way they used to play this, the opener would pass 2S with as many as 18 points, depending... i don't remember it all but it seems like 2S meant 0-6 with 3 cards"

That's fine for them, because for them 2S has that meaning.

My comment was based on 1M-2M having the standard meaning. If it does, I don't think you should stretch much because of a double or overcall.

Peter

[inquiry]

luke warm, on Apr 28 2005, 07:19 PM, said:

ben can correct this if it's wrong, but i'm pretty sure he and misho would bid 2S on the first hand (not me, i'd pass - i'm not that brave)... on the 2nd, i'd bid 3S nv... maybe heheh

We can bid 1S-2S without competition with as few as 0 HCP, the fact that we can doesn't mean that we do on all such hands. Here they have already made a takeout double, so the very weakest hands are removed from the mix. On this hand, we would never dream of bidding 2S at unfavorable. At favorable we are more likely to bid 2♠ on this.. .our effective range is suppose to be in the 3 to 7 hcp (bad 7 hcp). But we do not go through 2♣ after the double. Over the double, we play 2♠ as weak raise, 2♥ here as sound raise to 2♠.

The second hand, while we would jump to 3♠, at favorable vul, the most I would consider is I would consider is 2♠, the weak raise to 2 level. I am going to bid 3♠ despite my fourth trump and the "LAW". Even 2♠ is probably too high. There is a second danger of bidding 2♠ at unfavorable at imps... partner might strech to try for vulnerable game try. If he does, your hand would be a huge disapppointment. So here, I would pass at imps, but probably bid 2♠ at MP.

[han]

Thanks for the nice replies.

I like the "1 useful feature" principle, although I would be tempted to make a preemptive raise with the second hand at favorable vulnerability. I remember a similar question in "the bridge world" a couple of years ago where Cohen and Berkowitz both asked why the queen of diamonds was added!

If I was allowed to play only 1 jump raise, I would prefer it as mixed raise at unfavorable. Do people agree with this?

[P_Marlowe]

1) Pass
2) 3S at green versus red, else 2S
Our partnership owns the spade suit, I will tell this
partner, the 4th card is compensation enough for
anything my partner may expect

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TheoKole]

I like to follow the Law of Total Tricks in competition bidding.

If I don't have an aggreement with my partner of "slow promises, fast denies" then I would pass and then come back in at the 2 or 3 level depending on if we have 8 or 9 trumps between us and if the opponents bidding stops at a low level.
This would obviously be weak, and partner should pass unless he has the distribution to continue.

Cheers

[ochinko]

At favourable vulns I'd bid 2Sp on the first and 3Sp on the second with my regular partner or anyone else that follows the LoTT and plays 1NT as a forcing to 2Sp, 2NT to 3Sp, etc. It is clear that raising my partner's suit after a double is preemptive and doesn't promise even a single HCP. If I have 7+ points, but don't have 3 spades, I'd redouble. I can't miss the opportunity to inform my partner about my shape and points, while preempting the opponents at the same time. Any new suit after the double would be sign off with a spade misfit.

***Edit*** I forgot to answer the question which was about unfavourable vulns. Pass on the first, 2Sp on the second. I don't see why one would pass the first but bid 3Sp on the second.

Petko

[Walddk]

ochinko, on Apr 29 2005, 03:01 AM, said:

If I have 7+ points, but don't have 3 spades, I'd redouble.

I hope you (self-alert) and your partner alert that redouble. Most people need a bit more for a redouble. 10+ is common.

By the way, your 1-level openings must be 14+ then I suppose. As most people play it, redouble gives the following message to partner: "We have got the balance of the high cards, and I usually don't have support for your suit. Let's go get 'em!"

Roland

[Double !]

A wise sage once said to me (OK, more than once) two things:
1) I bid when I have a reason to bid. &
2) Avoid making bids that partner can criticize
to which I might add, "the purpose of this game is to take tricks, not count points"

where is the trick-taking potential of hand #1? OK, maybe a heart ruff. This whole issue about balancing "support with support" with the idea that a bid might also suggest some potential defense or offensive support via a high card or two still seems to be wide open.

I see trick taking potential on hand 2 in terms of a 4th trump, and a potential ruffing value. NV, 3 spades is reasonable, I guess...never vul. hate - 200, 500, 800, but that's another story. As for a single raise with this hand? matter of partnership agreement/ is the hand good enough to make game opposite an opener who has just under a 2C or 2N hand?----could be.

[fred]

Jlall, on Apr 29 2005, 10:41 PM, said:

I don't know, I'm sure a pass is theoretically right on board 2 if NV, but for some reason it works way more often than it should. Maybe I play too much in weak fields as fred would pass even w/r and plays mainly against strong competition.

That doesn't mean I am right

I tend to play with difficult partners so my "do not put down a dummy that is a complete disappointment" philosophy is especially important for me.

Also, since my partners know I feel this way, it is a good idea to stick with this principle - otherwise they will expect a little something when I make a preemptive jump raise and misevaluate if I decide to bid with nothing.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com