[cnszsun]

Scoring: IMP

ps-ps-1♠-?

---

What do you bid now?
If you choose double, your pick-up partner bid a surprising 4♥. He is a passed hand, 4♥ seems to be an impossible bid, but anyway he did it, would you correct?

[gwnn]

4♥ does not seem to me like an impossible bid.

xx
Q7xxxxx
xxx
x

I'd just pass, discontent. 5♦ should be natural btw.

At None vulnerable, I try not to double on good hands with a singleton in an unbid major if there's an alternative, and I believe 2♦ was an alternative.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 I guess, I would double, since I dont like 2NT,
and the hand is too strong for 2D
#2 why should 4H be surprising, sometimes partner
looks at a weak two type hand, ... but for whatever
reason, he did not want to open 2H
... I would pass 4H, maybe it makes

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mcphee]

Making a t/o dble is not my style and I do not at all consider 2D too weak. When you make a t/o dble partner has every right to expect 3 card H and 4H is certainly not one of the bids I would like to hear should I choose that action. Taking the view that the hand is too strong for that action makes me wonder how you feel when 4H comes up?

[P_Marlowe]

mcphee, on Feb 6 2008, 08:59 AM, said:

Taking the view that the hand is too strong for that action makes me wonder how you feel when 4H comes up?

... bored.

Just another bottle of beer I have to
order.

For that matter, it would not be much
different, if I would catch a 3H answer,
I am not 100% sure, I really want to
play 3NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

Expecting pd to bid any number of Hearts makes X suspicious.
But 2 Diamond is no alternative, you may even play there.

So maybe a little offshape 2 NT call, followed by 3 Spade to show a strong minor two suiter? Ok, if pd choose 3 Club with xxx,KQJxxx,32,98, this will be no fun, but maybe....

[helene_t]

2NT followed by 3NT. Distorted, but anything else I can think of would be worse IMHO.

[ArtK78]

I have brought up this type of takeout double before. I made one in the GNT in Chicago with a similar type of hand (the majors were reversed) and my partner was not happy, even though we got a very good result.

The point is that unless one believes that the hand is strong enough to bid over partner's expected heart response at ANY LEVEL, the hand is not good enough for a takeout double.

Many posters are saying that they are going to pass 4♥. How do you like a 4♥ contract opposite this hand:

x KQJTxx Jxxx xx?

You may very well make 4♥, but 6♦ is trivial (and 6♥ may also be trivial).

Or how about this one:

x KQxxx Jxx Kxxx?

4♥ may make or it may go down, but now 6 of either minor is cold.

Personally, I would overcall 2♦ on the hand. It is possible that we will miss a game if partner passes 2♦, but that is not a sure thing. 3NT is the most likely game, and if partner passes 2♦ it is far from clear that we will have 9 tricks before the opponents have 5. And 5 of a minor requires some help from partner. If partner acts after our 2♦ bid, we should get to game, perhaps slam.

[mikeh]

I wouldn't double even with this moose of a hand... not because I fear 4♥...if any partner of mine bid 4♥, I'd expect to have some play.. he will have looong hearts and a very weak suit.. I may well only need a 3-2 break in trump.

The reason I wouldn't double is more mundane. I don't like my options over a more typical 2♥ response. Bidding a 5 card suit at the 3-level seems wrong. Bidding some number of notrump, with the virtually assured spade lead, seems like a path to a minus score.

This hand really isn't that great, despite the hcp. We have a very poor spade holding, probably no dummy entry to hook clubs and no way to stay in dummy when we do hook clubs. Unless partner fits diamonds, doubling and bidding either diamonds or notrump looks like a sure way to go minus.

Put me down for 2♦. I'm not through yet unless it goes all pass. As Al Roth used to say, in a different context, if I can get past this round, I'll be okay. And while I am not holding out a lot of hope that partner will bid, there must be good chances of a negative double on my left or a reopening on my right. Then I will probably bid 3♣. Partner may be able to draw some inferences (perhaps inaccurate ones) from my failure to bid an unusual 2N.

Make my spade holding the A10x, and that would be enough to get me to double and bid notrump, it is that close.

[Apollo81]

I would double. The chances of partner blasting 4♥ are greatly reduced since he is a passed hand.

[Apollo81]

Incidentally, what would you do if for some reason you weren't playing Unusual 2NT? Would you bid 2NT? I'd be pretty tempted.

[ArtK78]

Apollo81, on Feb 6 2008, 12:44 PM, said:

Incidentally, what would you do if for some reason you weren't playing Unusual 2NT?  Would you bid 2NT?  I'd be pretty tempted.

As this question is relevant only in some universe of which I am not aware, I cannot answer this question.

[SoTired]

Personally, I don't see what's wrong with an unusual 2N followed by 3S? Have I missed something.

[Apollo81]

SoTired, on Feb 6 2008, 01:03 PM, said:

Personally, I don't see what's wrong with an unusual 2N followed by 3S? Have I missed something.

You're forcing to the 4-level opposite a possible misfit 0-count.

[skjaeran]

I'm with Mike on this one: 2♦

[jdonn]

I'd double and go so far as to say sorry guys but I think overcalling is sick. You will miss tons of games, and lets say they reopen on your right, you still can never show nearly this much so you will never be out of the woods. Consider that if partner has almost any hand with Kxxxx of clubs you have a slam regardless of the rest of his hand. My second choice besides double is overcalling 3NT and I put that way ahead of 2♦.

[mikeh]

I tried a simulation, but the results are inconclusive. The constraints were awkward as well... and I rejected some hands that others might allow, and probably vice versa. I also had to make assumptions about the actions that the other players would take on the various possible auctions, commencing with double, 2N or 2♦.

The 2N then 3♠ was a clear loser, even if we assumed that advancer would interprete 3♠ correctly (showing a stopper as well as a big hand) which I doubt can be safely assumed. The sequence simply drove the hand too high too often.

As between double and 2♦: the best outcomes were reaching 3N. This almost never happened after 2♦ nor after double followed by 3♦ over 2♥... because advancer almost always lacked the strength to move over 2♦ or the stopper to bid over the strong sequence of double then diamonds. So to reach the best game (there were more successful 3N contracts available than 5 minor) we have to double then bid notrump.

Unfortunately, the best way to get a minus score (other than 2N then 3♠) was double then notrump... we'd go down in some contracts when 3♦ made... often because we couldn't get to dummy to take a winning club hook.

If we were red, then my feeling was that the winning route would usually be double then notrump. As it is, I think that 2♦ is the most frequent winner, x then notrump is the best chance to pick up the most imps, 2N then 3♠ is very poor, and double then 3♦ not much better.

BTW, if you intend to double then bid diamonds, you rarely get a better result than overcalling, and on some hands you get too high when the opps would have passed out 2♦, which is why I'd prefer an overcall to a plan of doubling then diamonds.

This sample was small: I didn't have unlimited time so I ran off 100 hands and looked at about 40, after eliminating half a dozen or so due to implausibility on the auction.