[rogerclee]

IMPs, All White, Second Seat

♠KQx ♥AJT9x ♦xx ♣AQx

(1NT) - Dbl - (2♣) - 2♠
(P) - ?

1NT is 10-12, 2♣ is ♣+other. No specific discussion about 2♠.

[han]

I play that pass if forcing over 2C and partner's 2S shows a weak hand. We have a good hand for spades but I think we should pass.

[mike777]

rogerclee, on Aug 3 2008, 10:19 PM, said:

IMPs, All White, Second Seat

♠KQx ♥AJT9x ♦xx ♣AQx

(1NT) - Dbl - (2♣) - 2♠
(P) - ?

1NT is 10-12, 2♣ is ♣+other. No specific discussion about 2♠.

3C

As a nonexpert given 2s is undiscussed I cuebid 3c.

[MFA]

I play pass as forcing with T/O doubles from both sides. 2♠ shows something, since one would pass and pull with a bad hand.

3♠ is middle of the road in my usual style against the miniNT.

[kfay]

han, on Aug 3 2008, 10:31 PM, said:

I play that pass if forcing over 2C and partner's 2S shows a weak hand. We have a good hand for spades but I think we should pass.

If this is true then I shall pass.

If it is not true then thou shalt invite.

[y66]

invite

[hotShot]

You seem to play dbl as penalty showing 16+ with a balanced hand.
I don't see anything in your hand that is not already shown,so unless 2♠ is forcing, the bid is pass.

[kgr]

hotShot, on Aug 4 2008, 04:12 PM, said:

You seem to play dbl as penalty showing 16+ with a balanced hand.
I don't see anything in your hand that is not already shown,so unless 2♠ is forcing, the bid is pass.

jlall said:

our hand is not much more than minimum

1NT is 10-12.
If you play penalty DBL over that (probably a good idea?), what is the minimum in direct position?
Over weak 1NT (12-14) I play it as 14+, over 10-12 I would think the minimum is 12..?

[jdonn]

kgr, on Aug 4 2008, 10:15 AM, said:

1NT is 10-12.
If you play penalty DBL over that (probably a good idea?), what is the minimum in direct position?
Over weak 1NT (12-14) I play it as 14+, over 10-12 I would think the minimum is 12..?

Penalty double of any strength weak notrump should show at least a strong notrump, 15+ (can often stretch with 14). It's true they can steal a game if your strength is very evenly divided, but get much weaker than that and you simply get your side into trouble too often. This is pretty much expert standard I believe.

It's very old fashioned and not good to have double of notrump show "their range or better" or something like that.

[MFA]

jdonn, on Aug 4 2008, 10:45 AM, said:

kgr, on Aug 4 2008, 10:15 AM, said:

1NT is 10-12.
If you play penalty DBL over that (probably a good idea?), what is the minimum in direct position?
Over weak 1NT (12-14) I play it as 14+, over 10-12 I would think the minimum is 12..?

Penalty double of any strength weak notrump should show at least a strong notrump, 15+ (can often stretch with 14). It's true they can steal a game if your strength is very evenly divided, but get much weaker than that and you simply get your side into trouble too often. This is pretty much expert standard I believe.

It's very old fashioned and not good to have double of notrump show "their range or better" or something like that.

I think we have had this a couple of times before, but just for the record, I still disagree with this.

I believe that one should double a weakNT or a miniNT rather aggressively, not just for the balanced 25hcp games. The aggressive doubles tend to do well, when partner has a mediocre hand with some playing strength. These hands, that would be frozen out otherwise, are very common and will typically produce a partscore or even a game opposite a decent fit.

So 14 vs weakNT and 13 vs miniNT with the usual upgrades if my 13 or 12 looks very good.

[gnasher]

rogerclee, on Aug 4 2008, 04:19 AM, said:

No specific discussion about 2♠.

I wouldn't be in this situation.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Aug 4 2008, 05:05 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Aug 4 2008, 04:19 AM, said:

No specific discussion about 2♠.

I wouldn't be in this situation.

This will probably sound ruder than I mean it to, but if that is the case then why did you post?

[the hog]

Given the lack of information about the double's strength and the nature of the 2S bid, I think this is a clear invite. You have nice H spots sitting over the opener.

[benlessard]

A close call but I think that because the X doesnt necesseraly show a balanced hand i should strive to raise partner. Partner may have a 6 card S suit and 8 pts but doesnt want to bid 3S in case i have a 1444 shape or a similar hand with a stiff spade.

[gnasher]

jdonn, on Aug 4 2008, 11:32 PM, said:

This will probably sound ruder than I mean it to, but if that is the case then why did you post?

Because it pleased me to do so.

[joshs]

Vital information has been left out (I don't think it changes anything but...):

Our agreement was that the x of NT showed a strong NT or better but did not establish a force and x by either side is takeout (continuations are as over 1N by us). Consequently 2S is not a zero count, its just a hand that would compete to 2S over a strong NT.