[han]

Does it matter if partner responds in a minor or a major, at the 1-level or the 2-level (e.g. (1S)-Dbl-(pass)-2H-(pass)-3H )?


By adding some silly answers, I hoped to avoid votes for the "other"...

[Fluffy]

Its 16(15)-18. Dunno if you consider this almost forcing or jsut some interest in game.

[han]

I would consider that "some interest in game". Not almost forcing, as I would more often pass than bid opposite 16-18 I think.

[pigpenz]

it shows extra values cause partner can always be forced to be a 3 card suit on the dreaded 3-3-2-5 hand. In this particular auction partner most likely doesnt have a 3 card ♠ suit unless he is 3-2-2-6 with a zero count and bidding 1♠ would still be the correct bid.

In fact just had this hand yesterday playing in an individual

1♣ pass pass double
pass 1♥ 1♥ 2♥
2♥ pass pass 3♣



now I contended to partner it has to show extra values cause he could have been forced to bid a 3 card suit. the 3♣ was now a game try....pard had KQXX♥'s and another K. Played 3♥'s making 5

[han]

I think that this situation is slightly different, because of the 1S bid. Here 2H still shows a very sound double, but it does not show 16-18 HCP.

[luke warm]

assuming i have this right

(1S) x (p) 2H (p) 3H should definitely show 16-18 else there's no good way for responder to judge the nature of the t/o

[beatrix45]

It is really very simple. Visualize three or four common type hands just short of a 2♠ bid. If all of these hands produce a game, bid 2♠.

[awm]

I prefer to play that a raise to the two level (2♠ in the auction given) is mostly obstructive. It shows four-card support and something a little better than a minimum double. I wouldn't go as far as (15)16-18 as some suggest though. For example:

AKxx
Kxx
KJxx
xx

would be a fine 2♠ bid from my viewpoint. Opponents don't sell to 1♠ and it's more effective to raise now than to wait for the balance. If partner has a maximum 1♠ bid, a game TRY is perfectly fine with me. However I don't expect partner to blast a game even with the best possible non-jump response.

I should note that a THREE level raise (i.e. 1♠-X-P-2♥; P-3♥) is a somewhat different beast (since there's no room for game tries and we're a level higher) and I would agree that this should show something like 16-18.

Yes, it is possible that partner might've bid a three card suit... but I don't think that bending over backwards to cater to this (fairly remote) possibility is good bridge.

[Chamaco]

pigpenz, on May 8 2005, 04:35 PM, said:

In fact just had this hand yesterday playing in an individual

1♣     pass     pass      double
pass        1♥    1♠   2♥
2♠     pass     pass       3♣

CHAMACO'S NOTE: I EDITED THE "BLACK HEARTS" SYMBOLS AND REPLACED WITH THE SPADES SYMBOLS, ASSUMING A TYPO

If after the takeout double, opener's side shuts up, then doubler's raise shows serious game interest opposite a maximum response.

However, the example you show here has a FUNDAMENTAL difference, which changes everything.
In your example, opps rebid, and in such cases (opps get busy), we must get busy too, and bid lighter, not for game, but to contest partscore.

In that light, the doubler should be able to communicate a good fit to pard, even if he has not interest in game.
There has been a thread about such sequences a few months ago (Link to the thread), and quite a few players suggested that, if opener's side bids on, doubler's rebid DOES show a better than minimum opening, BUT, it does not guarantee a hand interested in game.

[beatrix45]

awm, on May 8 2005, 10:51 PM, said:

I prefer to play that a raise to the two level (2♠ in the auction given) is mostly obstructive. It shows four-card support and something a little better than a minimum double. I wouldn't go as far as (15)16-18 as some suggest though. For example:

AKxx
Kxx
KJxx
xx

would be a fine 2♠ bid from my viewpoint.

I agree, almost. Partner will bid game with 8 or 9 HCP outside of ♣, or compensating distribution. So, we want a solid majority of such hands to have a 50% or better chance of making. On this hand, any finesse against opening bidder is around 75%, and given the lack of competition, odds on a 3-2 ♠ break should be around 75% as well.

Given this, I find just a few more failing cases than I would like, but on this basis a 2♠ bid is certainly reasonable, imo. The other requirement is that 2♠ be safe opposite four small and out. Here, I also have a slight problem, esp. if we are vul. Partner will not be able to hit her hand until late in the play, if then. Playing suit combos like Kxx and KJxx will be a nightmare. Easy to go down two or three, a disaster if vul.

Putting the two cases together argues against a 2♠ bid, imo. You WILL miss a good game contract once in a while.

If you add just one more working HCP to this example, most of these problems are considerably diminished.

AKJx .................... AKxx.......................AKxx
Kxx....................... Axx.........................Kxx
KJxx......................KJxx.............or........KQxx
xx........................ xx...........................xx

In short, this aspect of bidding has been carefully worked out over the years. Don't mess with it.

[Chamaco]

beatrix45, on May 9 2005, 09:27 AM, said:

Putting the two cases together argues against a 2♠ bid, imo.  You WILL miss a good game contract once in a while.

Probably the trick to avoid thse occasional unbid games is to be more aggressive as advancer when responding to a t/o double.

That's what I learned in a past thread, and Ben's (Inquiry)suggestions, taken from some Kantar's tips were quite enlightening, suggesting more pushy jumpbids by advancer when he has a bunch of working points or distribution.

This relieves opener from the obligation to raise with barely a decent pening and a 4 bagger.
Of course there is a "shutout" effect in the immediate opener's raise, but I lean towrds the use of such competitive raises only when opps get busy.

[joker_gib]

Jlall, on May 9 2005, 05:10 AM, said:

agree with adam. At the 2 level the raise says i have 4 trumps. at the 3 level its extras.

Agree with Adam and Justin !

Alain

[luke warm]

i still haven't seen anything better than klinger's t/o doubles type A, B, and C...

type A=12-15 (rule of 15) passes any response (assuming partner bids at cheapest level, doesn't cue, etc)...

type B=16-18, any type not suitable for 1nt overcall in that range, names new suit (no jump), raises advancer, etc...

type C=19+
........1) double + cheapest nt = 19-21
........2) double + jump in nt = 22-23
........3) double + jump raise or jump in new suit = 4 losers
........4) double + cue in opps' suit = 19+ and not sure of direction

rule of 15 for type A = hcp + 2 points for each card below 3 in opps' suit.. for example, rho opens 1♠:

--- 1 --- ........ --- 2 --- ..... -- 3 --
♠K63 .......... 5 ............ void
♥KQ43 ........ AQ32 ...... QT52
♦875 ........... KJ7 ........ AT753
♣AQ3 .......... J8643 ..... K762

on hand 1, pass (unless you'd o/c 1nt with it, which i wouldn't)... hand 2, double (11 hcp + 4 for the stiff spade)... hand 3, double (9 hcp + 6 for spade void)

as an aside, he also recommends 'rule of 15' for michaels and u2nt.. add total number of cards contained in 2 suits to number of honors in them... the J or 10 counts as honor only if another honor is held in same suit... for example:

♠8
♥62
♦KQT95
♣QJ984

10 cards in the minors + 5 honors in the 2 suits = 15.. so bid 2nt over 1H or 1S

[pigpenz]

used to be that we used pts as a guideline.....response showed 0-7 hcp so to raise was most like 16-18.....jump raise 19-20...etc......granted most of the time raising with 4 card support to just compete will work but that is what partners are for.

[Fluffy]

beatrix45, on May 9 2005, 09:27 AM, said:

I agree, almost. Partner will bid game with 8 or 9 HCP outside of ♣, or compensating distribution. So, we want a solid majority of such hands to have a 50% or better chance of making. On this hand, any finesse against opening bidder is around 75%, and given the lack of competition, odds

I am not fully sure I undrstood what you meant, but I ave one thing clear, my partners won't bid 1♠ with 8 nor 9 HCP.

[beatrix45]

Chamaco, on May 9 2005, 02:35 AM, said:

beatrix45, on May 9 2005, 09:27 AM, said:

Putting the two cases together argues against a 2♠ bid, imo.  You WILL miss a good game contract once in a while.

Probably the trick to avoid thse occasional unbid games is to be more aggressive as advancer when responding to a t/o double.

By Jove, I think you have it! Jumping the bidding with 9 working HCP or compensating distributional values has only one minor drawback - it extends the range of that bid by one 'point'. Not so bad since partner has the choice of raising to three or four in order to discriminate.

What this solves is the awkwardness of t/o doubler's raising with a hand that plays badly opposite four small and nothing outside or four small and a queen outside. Granted that average opponents will seldom judge well enough or defend well enough to make you pay, but I don't believe in building unsoundness into my bidding just to bash the unseeded pairs. Am I wrong in this? What would the ghost of Barry Crane say?

[Chamaco]

beatrix45, on May 10 2005, 03:36 AM, said:

Am I wrong in this? What would the ghost of Barry Crane say?

I dunno, here is what Kantar says (but he is alive, does it count the same ? ):

http://www.kantarbri...om/tips_bid.htm

(see Tips #26 and higher, "Takeout double tips")