Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

MP Decision

94 views
Skip to first unread message

jadelo

unread,
May 12, 2012, 1:22:12 AM5/12/12
to
You hold

xxx AJTx AKJxx A


1D - 2C - x - P

?

Please also discuss possible followups.


Jeff

Henry Lockwood

unread,
May 12, 2012, 3:11:19 AM5/12/12
to
Partner's double, assuming it shows majors, makes my hand even better
than before. 2H is non-forcing, and it looks like I want to force at
least to game. I'm bidding 3C here; if partner bids 3D I bid 3H;
after 3H I cue 4C; after 3S I cue 4C as well.

HenryL

Chris xxxxx

unread,
May 12, 2012, 7:46:10 AM5/12/12
to
3C is clear, but the discussion of follow-ups seems inconsistent.
Either the second cue bid is a slam try or a probe for he right game.
In the former case, 4C over 3H is fine, but you should bid 4D (or 4H)
over 3S. In the former case, 4C over 3S is fine, but you should bid
4H over 3H.

Christopher Monsour

Charles Brenner

unread,
May 12, 2012, 11:36:03 AM5/12/12
to
I just bid 4H. The followups after 3C are unclear, and either angle
for a fit that might not exist or leave us in ambiguity about our fit.
For example, with
x, AJx, AKJxxx, A, wouldn't I bid 3C, then if my champ of a partner
comes through with 3D, 3H from me?

Therefore if with the given hand I bid the same way, partner with Qxxx
of hearts will not insist on hearts and I'll gain nothing compared to
simply declaring my hand clearly with a direct bid of 4H.

Charles

rhm

unread,
May 12, 2012, 4:15:37 PM5/12/12
to
How clear is it that partner has both majors?
This is a known problem sequence.
In standard a new suit by partner would have been forcing, so partner
will regularly have a problem with one major and not enough to force,
but too much to keep quiet. Partner may have only 3 cards in hearts.
Almost anyone I know would double with limited values and 4-3 or 5-3
in the majors.
I would bid 3H
It keeps the continuation simple.
Partner without four hearts can still introduce a 5 card spade suit

If 3H is an underbid it is only a slight one.

Rainer Herrmann

Charles Brenner

unread,
May 12, 2012, 5:09:12 PM5/12/12
to
I agree with the point of view and also toyed with a 3H underbid
because of enhanced flexibility, but in the end I felt it too much of
an underbid.

Charles

jadelo

unread,
May 12, 2012, 6:25:59 PM5/12/12
to
On May 11, 10:22 pm, jadelo <slesse...@comcast.net> wrote:
What was partner supposed to do after a 3C cue bid
holding

kqxx q9x 9xx Qxx

Chris xxxxx

unread,
May 12, 2012, 9:35:44 PM5/12/12
to
Bid 3S.

Christopher Monsour

Thomas Dehn

unread,
May 14, 2012, 7:31:03 PM5/14/12
to
On 05/12/2012 07:22 AM, jadelo wrote:
> You hold
>
> xxx AJTx AKJxx A
>
>
> 1D - 2C - x - P
>
> ?

3H. I am playing this as forcing.


Thomas

Chris xxxxx

unread,
May 14, 2012, 8:22:58 PM5/14/12
to
A neat solution would be to let opener's 3-of-a-suit rebids on this
auction all be transfers, all promising extras. (3S would show a
strong balanced hand with four diamonds and xxx or xxxx of clubs.)
This hand would then be an easy 3D bid, knowing you will get another
chance to call even if partner tries to sign off in 3H.

The problem with this approach is that it would make opener's rebids
after 1D-(2C)-X different from after other negative double sequences.
But this is the only negative double of a simple overcall where
responder does not promise a known suit, so it's a special case. (I
suppose you could try to do something similar with 1C-(2D)-X, but you
might give up the natural 2NT, and thus you'd need to be willing to
rebid 2H or 2S on three-card suits--something like 2NT = clubs,
extras; 3C = clubs, minimum, 3D = hearts, 3H = spades, 3S = balanced
with 4-5 clubs and no diamond stop.)

Christopher Monsour

Eric Leong

unread,
May 16, 2012, 9:16:07 AM5/16/12
to
On May 11, 10:22 pm, jadelo <slesse...@comcast.net> wrote:
One must proceed carefully as partner could well have a four card
spade suit and shorter hearts. A number of pairs play a double in this
situation as almost promising four spades if on a minimum double.
Also, I am interested in game but I am not quite so sure I want to
commit to game so I would try an encouraging but not forcing 3H bid to
show a better than average hand and good hearts.

Eric Leong

Co Wiersma

unread,
May 16, 2012, 7:48:40 PM5/16/12
to
Op 12-5-2012 17:36, Charles Brenner schreef:
What if partner has a hand like
AKxx Kx xxx xxxx

Co Wiersma

Charles Brenner

unread,
May 16, 2012, 10:16:42 PM5/16/12
to
I'd be astonished. Maybe even gobsmacked.

Charles

OldPalooka

unread,
May 17, 2012, 2:26:57 PM5/17/12
to
So what is terribly wrong with 5D? Sure you need some racing luck, but if Hambone was at the wheel my money would be on him.

Charles Brenner

unread,
May 18, 2012, 9:04:15 PM5/18/12
to
Maybe what I said was clear, but maybe it is worth clarifying. My
assumption is that the negative double of 2C shows majors as rhm
described. Of course there is a temptation to negative double anytime
that one has a hand with values and no obvious bid (such as Co's AKxx,
Kx hand), but one has to consider whether a method is playable and I
expected everyone to be in accord that stretching the negative double
so far in this sequence isn't. Perhaps I was just wrong to assume that
everyone feels that way.

I would even be surprised if a partner doubled with AKxx Kx xxxx xxx
in this particular sequence explaining that the diamond (instead of
heart) length provided "two suited playability", though I would be
open-minded about arguments justifying the bid even despite
partnership expectations.

By the way I certainly like my 4H choice in view of the actual deal.

Charles
0 new messages