[sceptic]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  Pass  Pass  1NT
 2♦    Dbl   2♥    Pass
 2NT   Dbl   Pass  Pass
 Pass  

2 diamond alerted as natural 5+ and 8hcp +

2 hearts alerted as natural


can u comment on

1/. the 2 diamond overcall
2/. the x of 2 diamond (what can or should it mean) i.e. stolen x or anything else
3/. the lead J spades and why you think it is good or bad
4/. the final x

[badderzboy]

My humble opinion...

1/. the 2 diamond overcall
Pushy but u pays your money

2/. the x of 2 diamond (what can or should it mean) i.e. stolen x or anything else

Hmm I play it as penalty with 2NT showing a limit raise not necessarily including a stop but ok. Not a bad hand for Leb I suspect with dbl penalty...

3/. the lead J spades and why you think it is good or bad
Don't like it we know West doesn't like Hearts so attack East's holding Lead 5♥ and partner can place every ♥! - we can signal for Diamonds v.soon we get 4 Hearts tricks virtually off the top b4 opps can set up some ♣s (ptrs holding gives us 2...!


4/. the final x
Damn right swat them pesky opps ...

[luis]

Jlall, on Aug 25 2005, 01:55 PM, said:

2D vul at imps is just suicide. Bad suit, bad hand, passed pard.

The X looks like it was penalty, and is a good bid if you have the agreement. Unfortunately I don't, I like neg Xs alot in this auction, but against someone who bids 2D with that hand I should rethink that I guess.

Spade jack is an ok lead. The opps bid the red suits. I have no idea what the right lead is with that hand.

The final X is normal...no chance pard has psyched in 4th seat. Where do the opps get tricks?

Ditto
I alo play neg Xs after 1N-2x and 2♦ was crazy.
The lead and the final double are normal.

[Al_U_Card]

Holding that piece of #%$% I would start thinking about what D I will lead when it becomes my turn to lead........

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Aug 25 2005, 08:55 AM, said:

2D vul at imps is just suicide. Bad suit, bad hand, passed pard.

this statement is an underbid 2♦ is not merely suicide, it is also fraticide!

There is NO upside to such a call. The opps get what is essentially a free double, since if they miscalculate, and partner has a great hand, and you make, they lose 180 as opposed to 90 if they pass. Not that I would suggest 2Major, if your long suit were in a major, but at least that kind of lunacy has the upside that the opps may be reluctant to double you into game.

Whether I have a penalty double available as North depends on who I am playing with and the field I am in. With most experts, double is takeout, but in a weak field I like penalty... and this sounds like a weak field.

If penalty is available, I make the double. If not I pass and hope that partner can reopen with double. If he passes it out, the chances are we have not missed game and I will pick up imps for setting 2♦ at 100 a pop.

No-one asked about 2♥ by east: it was as bad as the 2♦ bid. If you are running, do so with a redouble: get all 3 suits into play.

2N compounded the felony. Words cannot describe how I really feel about 2N....

Double of 2N? Absolutely.

Passing is probably safe on the actual hand: partner, with 17 real, will double, but your hand as North is good enough (especially those delicious ♦ cards) to know that they have only two chances of making (slim and none) and that 'slim' is highly unlikely. So double, while trying to keep the drool off the table.

As for the lead: I have no quarrel with the ♠J.

It is possible that even semi-intelligent ew players hold a 4-3 fit: with 4=5=1=3 or 4=6=1=2 or 4=6=0=3, east might choose 2♥, expecting west to bid 2♠ if running from 2♥. West should not have 4♠ after pulling to 2N. But, if there is a 5 card suit in south's hand it could well be ♠, and the ♠ spots are such that the suit is right even when the opps hold 7♠ between them.

[pclayton]

2♦ is really bizarre even for my strange tastes. But catching pard with a void is pretty unlucky. Give you QJT 6th of diamonds, i.e., a hand where most of us make the overcall, and you still get handed your head. Oh well.

I really hate 2♥. Whats wrong with a redouble? You might get to run out to 2♠ or 3♣, that "only" go for -800 .

[the hog]

"can u comment on

1/. the 2 diamond overcall
2/. the x of 2 diamond (what can or should it mean) i.e. stolen x or anything else
3/. the lead J spades and why you think it is good or bad
4/. the final x "

* The 2D bid is very poor - no upsides and many possible downsides. It is not "pushy" as Badderzboy claims, but rather just a very poor bid. He is right though, "you pays your money", and if you were playing rubber bridge you would pay a lot.

* The X of 2D depends on partnership agreement. In my partnership it is for takeout, however I know of many who still play this as penalties.

* The 2H bid is bizarre, as Phil points out, a XX is obvious. Incidentally, Sth should X 2H with AJ9. This makes a H lead by Nth easy.

* The J of S lead is ok

* The final X is obvious. I have Ds under control and where are they going?

[Elianna]

sceptic, on Aug 25 2005, 06:42 AM, said:

1/. the 2 diamond overcall
2/. the x of 2 diamond (what can or should it mean) i.e. stolen x or anything else
3/. the lead J spades and why you think it is good or bad
4/. the final x

1/. Make my ace of clubs the ace of diamonds, and I don't mind 2d at all. Of course, since I play 2d as a weak two, I would have opened that in the first place if those aces are switched. I know that it's not everybody's taste to open the hand (as it is) a weak two, but I'm much more sympathetic to a weak two bid than a 2d overcall.

2/. Adam and I play penalty doubles. I understand people preferring it to be negative. I don't have strong feelings which is better (I just know which I'm more likely to remember when I'm super tired). I do know that I love when people play doubles as "stolen bids" against me. I think that ranks way up there in the list of conventions I will refuse to play.

3/. Eh. Doesn't drive me crazy with liking, nor with hatred. I probably would have led a heart, but I don't think that it's particularly brilliant, either.

4/. I like it. I like doubling auctions when it sounds like they reached a stupid place, and since it looks like we have the majority of points (if partner was in third chair, I wouldn't be as confident about this), and as I'm more than happy to double whatever they run to, this double seems quite good.

[helene_t]

Elianna, on Aug 26 2005, 07:52 AM, said:

I do know that I love when people play doubles as "stolen bids" against me. I think that ranks way up there in the list of conventions I will refuse to play.

Why's that? At least it right-sides the contract. I thought transfer doubles was the new fashion after suit openings, why not play it after notrump openings as well?

[awm]

helene_t, on Aug 26 2005, 03:07 AM, said:

Elianna, on Aug 26 2005, 07:52 AM, said:

I do know that I love when people play doubles as "stolen bids" against me.  I think that ranks way up there in the list of conventions I will refuse to play.

Why's that? At least it right-sides the contract. I thought transfer doubles was the new fashion after suit openings, why not play it after notrump openings as well?

It's nice to be able to penalize when people bid like this 2♦ bidder. This is why penalty doubles over 1NT are good.

With takeout doubles, at least you can penalize when opener has the stack (you double for takeout and partner passes). Also, takeout doubles let you compete with the very frequent hands that are short in overcaller's suit and which otherwise have no easy bid.

Playing "stolen bid" doubles, you can't penalize when you have the stack unless opener finds a balance, AND you can't penalize when opener has the stack unless you have the relatively rare transfer hand, AND you have no way to compete on the common non-gamegoing hand short in overcaller's suit. This seems like the worst of all worlds, basically for only the gain of "right-siding" a contract.

I'm not convinced that "transfer doubles" are really the fashion after suit openings. The vast majority play double as negative or some other sort of takeout. I do see a lot of transfers after the opponents double (i.e. XX as a transfer) but that's a totally different story.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Why's that? At least it right-sides the contract. I thought transfer doubles was the new fashion after suit openings, why not play it after notrump openings as well?

Because you'll gain far more over time from either being able to compete intelligently in both majors at the 2 level (negative double), or from being able to penalize the opponents. Right-siding 2H is only going to be worth a fraction of a trick on average; right-siding is very overrated as a reason to use transfers.

If one wants to use transfers, use them at the 3 level with a Rubensohl type of arrangement.