[zenbiddist]

IMPs

---

What do you bid and why? Double would be take-out.
If you think this is completely clear, adjust the hand to make it a tricky problem, then tell me what you'd do. Thanks

Cheers

[nige1]

 zenbiddist, on 2017-July-10, 23:49, said:

IMPs
What do you bid and why? Double would be take-out.
If you think this is completely clear, adjust the hand to make it a tricky problem, then tell me what you'd do. Thanks

---

This is a hard problem.. After partner's 1N opener, perhaps, you should agree transfer's in competition. Hence here, you could bid 3♠ and then 4♥. Without such an agreement, this decision is even harder. I rank

• 3N = NAT. A bit of a punt, without a ♦ stop.
• Pass = NAT, When fixed, stay fixed... unless partner protects.
• 4♣ = NAT but the onward path is unclear.
• Double = T/O, Sows the wind but might reap a ♠ whirlwind.

[Zelandakh]

 nige1, on 2017-July-11, 00:19, said:

Double = T/O, Sows the wind but might reap a ♠ whirlwind.[/list]

Why We have 4♦ to cover hands with both majors so partner should not be jumping to 4♠ here just because they have 4 of them. Double is the normal call with one 4-card major.

You can optimise slightly here by switching the majors (3♥ = 5+♠; 3♠ = 5+♥) but that is not necessary for a B/I pair.

[rmnka447]

This is a situation for a partnership agreement on what a 3 level double means.

At the 2 level, there are plenty of tools available to sort out what to do. At the 3 level space is constrained for finding a fit and deciding if 3 NT is possible.

3 NT here has to be to play with a stopper. 3 ♥, 3 ♠ should be natural 5 card suits GF. So, double here is needed for a myriad hands where no clear cut bid exists, but you need to tell the 1 NT opener that you have values. Else, especially at IMPs, your opponents will learn that preempting at the 3 level when possible can knock you out of biddable games.

How about something like ♠ xx ♥ Kxx ♦ xx ♣ AKQ10xx? You have six pretty sure tricks for partner at NT and a good probability of 7. But the 3 ♦ preempt puts it to you right away. 4 ♣ bypasses 3 NT, but you can't play 3 NT without a ♦ stopper. An 11 trick 5 ♣ contract may not be ironclad while 3 NT may be if partner has the stopper. So this is another candidate for a values double.

[The_Badger]

Beyond what the best bid is here - a values double seems the only option, as others have said - is the other problem of having such a wide range of distributional hands suitable for a 1NT opening: with five card majors, six card minors, and even singleton honours these days.

But given that 1NT openers with 5 card majors are certainly more prevalent these days, this situation is probably a little easier to handle than in times gone by. Opener will already knows that you will have values for game, without a ♦ stop (or you would have bid 3NT yourself) and no 5 card major yourself (or you would have bid that too).

In effect, the value double is also a takeout double is also an optional double. Pre-empts are not there to make your life easy, and you just have to accept that sometimes you will get it wrong but it doesn't mean the other table will get it right. They will probably be under the same pressure to find the correct bid.

[mcphee]

Double and bid 3N over 3S. I do not agree that if you were to bid 3N you show a D stop. Remove a H and make it a S and you bid 3N. Just because RHO made your hand "awkward" does not mean 3N is not a playable contract.

[MrAce]

DBL followed by 3 NT.

And remember, almost NOBODY bids 3♦ with a solid suit over 1 NT . They usually tend to wait and cash their diamonds vs a NT contract.

[dokoko]

 zenbiddist, on 2017-July-10, 23:49, said:

IMPs

---

What do you bid and why? Double would be take-out.
If you think this is completely clear, adjust the hand to make it a tricky problem, then tell me what you'd do. Thanks

Cheers

Easy dbl, primarily shows values.

To make this tricky, change the hand to ♠KT854 ♥K864 ♦J82 ♣9. There I would have a problem, because dbl would get us to game. But I think I would double and raise 3M to 4.

[Mbodell]

X for me. You can pull 4♠ to 5♣, raise 3♥ to 4♥, over 3♠ I guess you try an in tempo 3nt unless you know something special about RHO in which case maybe 4!C in that case too, but 3nt down 2 unlucky seems a spot of destiny. Maybe opponents will be kind enough to X 3nt if it is going down.

[nige1]

OK, I'm persuaded. Double followed by 3N or 4♣ or 5♣ does seem better.

[GrahamJson]

Nobody will agree with this, but I much prefer double to be for penalties after a 1NT opening, not that I would double in this situation, although it could be the winning move.

I think there is a good argument to be made for an offbeat 3H bid. Partner should rebid 3NT with a good diamond stop, even with heart support, as he would want to avoid the lead coming through him and the risk of ruffs. Of course he could raise with three card support, but that could well turn out to be a good contract, with diamond ruffs being taken in his hand.

[Kaitlyn S]

 GrahamJson, on 2017-July-12, 08:44, said:

Nobody will agree with this, but I much prefer double to be for penalties after a 1NT opening, not that I would double in this situation, although it could be the winning move.

I agree with you. I see the crap people overcall 1NT with. In fact, I would take a shot with this hand.

Playing double as takeout or values is an invitation for opponents to jam up your auction on 13 cards.

[Zelandakh]

 dokoko, on 2017-July-12, 00:09, said:

To make this tricky, change the hand to ♠KT854 ♥K864 ♦J82 ♣9. There I would have a problem, because dbl would get us to game. But I think I would double and raise 3M to 4.

5431 hands are indeed a problem but not for the specific reason you give. If you double and pass 3NT, partner has a minimum 3244 hand and you are down 1 with 4♠ making. If instead you bid 4♠ over partner's 3NT, Opener is 2344 and 9 tricks are the limit. Similarly if you bid 3♠ and pass partner's 3NT, they hold 24(34) and you wanted to be in 4♥, whilst if you continue 4♥ over 3NT or bid 4♦ directly over 3♦, that minimum 2344 hand turns up again. There is unfortunately just not enough space to get this one right 100% of the time, a difficulty that is massively exacerbated if one starts to bring penalty doubles into the equation.

[GrahamJson]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-12, 09:21, said:

I agree with you. I see the crap people overcall 1NT with. In fact, I would take a shot with this hand.

Playing double as takeout or values is an invitation for opponents to jam up your auction on 13 cards.

I prefer to play penalty doubles whenever partner has implied length, or at least some holding, in the suit, for example by bidding NT or making a TO or negative double of another suit. One particular case is an auction that begins something like (1H)-DBL-(1S)-DBL. I have seen many times players operating by bidding 1S on two or three small, thereby talking their oppo out of a game because any double would be negative.

[MrAce]

Deleted

[ggwhiz]

I like to make a middle of the road choice on hands this tough, accept a 40% or so score or minus petty cash type imps and move on. No such bid exists on this one.

1. If rho is fairly sane and your partner is as aggressive as mine it is odds on that partner will reopen with a double which I'll float.

2. Double followed by 3nt over spades is likely with (most of) the field but only if they face the same 3♦ call. If rho is a loose cannon and they aren't facing that, you could be doomed.

I have a sneaking suspicion that 5♣ over a double followed by spades from partner could be the winner as partners most likely shape on that auction is 4-3-2-4.

[miamijd]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-12, 09:21, said:

I agree with you. I see the crap people overcall 1NT with. In fact, I would take a shot with this hand.

Playing double as takeout or values is an invitation for opponents to jam up your auction on 13 cards.

Kaitlyn:

Over a two-level overcall other than 2C, there are a lot of ways to play X: values, penalty, negative (please don't suggest stolen bids - what an awful treatment). I think probably "cards" Xs are most common, but many top pairs still play this as penalty-oriented, because there are satisfactory ways to show just about everything except the balanced invite, and that can "fudged" by upgrading it.

But over a three-level overcall, no top pair I've ever seen plays penalty Xs. The bidding is just too jammed to show very many hands at that point. The values-showing X is not only essential, it's an overworked bid. But in many cases, that's about the only tool you have. If you play 3-level Xs as penalty, you are either going to be guessing a lot (as Timo suggested) or else waiting for Godot to arrive with the right hand to make a penalty X.

Cheers,
Mike

[bilalz]

 miamijd, on 2017-July-12, 12:43, said:

Kaitlyn:

Over a two-level overcall other than 2C, there are a lot of ways to play X: values, penalty, negative (please don't suggest stolen bids - what an awful treatment). I think probably "cards" Xs are most common, but many top pairs still play this as penalty-oriented, because there are satisfactory ways to show just about everything except the balanced invite, and that can "fudged" by upgrading it.

But over a three-level overcall, no top pair I've ever seen plays penalty Xs. The bidding is just too jammed to show very many hands at that point. The values-showing X is not only essential, it's an overworked bid. But in many cases, that's about the only tool you have. If you play 3-level Xs as penalty, you are either going to be guessing a lot (as Timo suggested) or else waiting for Godot to arrive with the right hand to make a penalty X.

Cheers,
Mike

We play stolen bids: double at the second level taken as a transfer to the next suit and use sort of puppet stayman with 3c to find a 4-4 major fit (with required values ofc, and we do not open nt with 5 card majors so that helps). I'm not saying the system is perfect and works for all hands, but what does? Over time in an established partnership, there are not many deals that we can't cater to. Maybe you or the others who sometimes write up pieces on tricky subjects (Badger, Kaitlyn, etc.) can lay out a good system and we can discuss the pros and cons.

Cheers

[Kaitlyn S]

A big downside of stolen bids is that you can't make a penalty double anymore. (For some that play the double takeout, it means you can't make a takeout double anymore, and some of those get converted!)

[miamijd]

 bilalz, on 2017-July-12, 15:36, said:

We play stolen bids: double at the second level taken as a transfer to the next suit and use sort of puppet stayman with 3c to find a 4-4 major fit (with required values ofc, and we do not open nt with 5 card majors so that helps). I'm not saying the system is perfect and works for all hands, but what does? Over time in an established partnership, there are not many deals that we can't cater to. Maybe you or the others who sometimes write up pieces on tricky subjects (Badger, Kaitlyn, etc.) can lay out a good system and we can discuss the pros and cons.

Cheers

The big problem with "stolen bid" doubles in this situation (really, in any situation) is that they don't accomplish a whole lot and they rob X of a better meaning. In the 1NT interference context, if a stolen bid X is available, that means three levels of bidding the suit are available: 2-level (drop); Leb/3suit (invite); and 3suit (GF). As an example:

1NT (2d) ??

Xing as a transfer to 2H right-hands a heart contract, but that's about it. You can show all the hands without it just as well:

2H: drop
2NT (leb) followed by 3H: 5/6H invite (invite, since 2H is available)
3H: GF with 5H
4D: Texas (gf with 6H)

The stolen bid X doesn't really help you solve a problem that you can't solve almost as well in some other way.

on the other hand, there are a couple of very good uses for Xs here. The traditional use is a penalty double. If you play stolen bid Xs, you have to give that up. No, you don't get a pure penalty X a lot in this situation, but it does happen. One more modern use is a "card-showing" double (which partner will sometimes pass, so you need to have at least two pieces). The card-showing double solves the problem of what to do with the balanced 8-9 counts (which come up a lot in this situation). Another possible use is a pure negative double. I don't care for that so much over 2-level bids, because with Leb, you have plenty of ways to show various types of unbalanced hands.

You do play Lebensohl, don't you? If not, you should (or Rubenshol, or some similar method).

Cheers,
Mike