[pclayton]

Pass may not be a bad idea, but not for the reasons anyone is stating. RHO didn't pull to 2D so he has tolerance for spades. We have 3, LHO has 4 and maybe 5. What's that leave pard with? 2 - 3 is my guess.

Having said that, what pard should have is at least 17. The shape that seems most likely is 3325. I have 7. A club tap against 1S looks pretty juicy against their 4-3 fit. We don't have a great fit, but we have at least 60% of the deck.

I forgot to check the vul here, but at green I'm passing and at adverse I'm probably shooting 3N counting on enough tricks. At equal I don't know what I'd do.

[pclayton]

Oops thought I was 3433 not 2434. Put me down for 2N nv and 3N vul.

[Winstonm]

As I mentioned earlier, partner should have 15 or more with 4324 or 4315 shape. The problem with the pass is my diamond holding is not sufficient to deter a low level spade contract, and the trouble with bidding NT is my diamond holding is not that good. RHOs pass is probably based on equal tolerance, so 3433 shape is quite likely. At the 1-level there seems to be LAW protection for them, so I am inclined to bid a simple 2C. I don't visualize a game our way unless partner can move again and my diamond King is not so valuable that I wish to express any serious interest in 3N - no, this 2C bid followed by 2N if they compete further should really describe this hand quite well I would think.

Winston

[omeroj]

It is very nice:)I see 10 votes for pass:))))
The is imp, not MP:)
We could make 3 nt and too if we don't make it, opp could make 1♠x
The bridge is infinite

Omero

[FrancesHinden]

This is another hand where if you have an agreement with partner, you should stick to it.

If you really believe double is penalties, you have to leave it in. Any argument about "it can't be right to defend at the 1-level" is not valid because partner is well aware that they are at the 1-level. We have no unexpected distribution, and we have the upper end of the high cards we have promised. If partner thinks it is right to defend at the 1-level then there is absolutely nothing in our hand to suggest we over-rule him.

If on the other hand you think double is just "high cards" then of course you bid, either 2NT or 3NT.

p.s. I've only seen (effectively) this auction twice. Once we took 1100, the other time they were vul and we took 200 against a partial at MPs. The last time it came up at the 2-level I bid 3NT and went off, rather than taking our nice safe 300, which would have been 500 had 400 been available in 3NT.

[Walddk]

Off topic, true, but I would like to take the opportunity to thank Frances Hinden for being one of regular visitors to the Forums. Her posts are always very articulate, and her points well substantiated.

As you may have seen in another thread, Frances will also be on our panel of experts (BBO Polls) from now on, and only recently did she join as one of our vugraph commentators. Very skillful is this area too.

Great asset in all respects!

Roland

[helene_t]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 15 2005, 11:56 AM, said:

If you really believe double is penalties, you have to leave it in.

But partner does not know anything about my hand. How can he double for penalty then? Those who say this double is penalty, do you expect partner to have a 6-card spades? In that case, I would call the double psyche-exposing rather than penalty.

As soon as either partner has described his hand, say with a preemptive opening, the other partner is captain and you can agree that certain doubles are 100% penalty. But as long as neither partner is captain, doubles must be descriptive. You can agree that this double shows four spades and denies four hearts. Fine. Maybe this could be termed "penalty" (a question of semantics). But you don't have to pass it, of course. Say you think that seven trumps are needed to defend doubled at the one-level. Then you pass with three and take out with two. (Of course, there is more to bidding than counting trumps, but you get my point).

[luke warm]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 15 2005, 04:56 AM, said:

If you really believe double is penalties, you have to leave it in.

i don't buy that at all... that's the same as saying, if you really believe a double is take out, you must take it out

judgment is allowed... that's why postmortems were invented

[FrancesHinden]

luke warm, on Jul 15 2005, 08:15 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jul 15 2005, 04:56 AM, said:

If you really believe double is penalties, you have to leave it in.

i don't buy that at all... that's the same as saying, if you really believe a double is take out, you must take it out

judgment is allowed... that's why postmortems were invented

OK, sorry,....

If you believe double is penalties, you have to leave it in _given the hand you hold_

I would bid with a singleton or void spade, or with a long suit.
In the same way as I would pass a take-out double with long trumps.

But I also admit I wouldn't leave it in _unless_ I was playing with one of my two regular partners because I wouldn't be sufficiently confident we were on the same page.

[luke warm]

i tend to agree with that... i believe the double was for penalty, and the only reason i'd bid 3nt is because i think that's a hundred points better... but you're probably right, with this hand it's better to pass *if* you think it's penalty

[the hog]

Agree with Ben. 3NT is a good bid, but can live with 2NT

[Free]

Pass seems quite obvious to me