[jillybean]

---

1n=10-12
X=penalty

Lead ♦Q

Is there anything here you would have done differently?

[frank0]

If your bidding method include showing ♥+♦ it's better to use it than to X with marginal. Especially when you are short in ♠. If you X with short spade, they usually run to ♠ and preempt you out from bidding.

[nigel_k]

I agree with frank0 and in general you shouldn't lighten your initial actions just because they do. But I understand double if you have no way to show hearts and diamonds. It was quite unlucky that you have so much in diamonds and 2♠X would be pretty good if North's minor suits were 3-5 instead of 5-3. Also, it looks like maybe the contract is down one if you keep playing diamonds, giving a ruff and discard on the third round, but there could be a line I have missed.

[jillybean]

Over their weak nt we were playing X=penalty and all other bids transfer, so no ability to the 2 suits.

I missed the optimal defense,,
http://www.bridgebas...rname=jillybean

[hrothgar]

frank0, on 2012-April-10, 20:30, said:

If your bidding method include showing ♥+♦ it's better to use it than to X with marginal. Especially when you are short in ♠. If you X with short spade, they usually run to ♠ and preempt you out from bidding.

Kathryn and I aren't a regular partnership and don't have firm agreements regarding a 10-12 NT.

Art and co were nice enough to prealert this, at which time Kathryn and I agreed

X = penalty
2♣ = majors
2♦ = Hearts
2♥ = Spades
2♠ = Clubs
2N = Diamonds

The only alternative to double would have been transferring to Diamonds and then reversing into Hearts.
I didn't think that the hand was nearly strong enough for that...

[quiddity]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-11, 06:24, said:

The only alternative to double would have been transferring to Diamonds and then reversing into Hearts.
I didn't think that the hand was nearly strong enough for that...

I thought the original double was ok, but I wouldn't sit for 2S-X!

[jillybean]

I thought the original double was fine, I was wondering about my double.

[Phil]

Remember something about defending weak NT's. You want to double 1N or the runout if its clear, but the main goal is getting to a playable spot and not head-hunting. Sometimes that means getting to 3N ourselves.

With that in mind, I'd probably transfer to 2♦ as N. We have values for competing since we aren't getting involved with a 9 count. We should be able to handle most follow-ups.

I wouldn't like it very much if my partner pulled to 2♠ over the double.

[rmnka447]

There's no assurance that 2 ♠ will go down if you Dbl it. You have a lousy 8 HCP opposite about maybe an average 13-14 HCP. Also, you know that the opponents have at least a 7 card fit. So pass the 2 ♠ bid.

Now if partner reopens with a Dbl showing extra values, you can convert to a penalty double.

In this hand, partner is likely to reopen with a 3 ♦ bid and you will be delighted.

[benlessard]

The 1st double is normal. I think the 2nd double is slightly too greedy (2 trumps tricks but not much else). I expect 2S undoubled to be the normal spot since north doesnt have enough to make a 2nd double.

[paulg]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-11, 06:24, said:

The only alternative to double would have been transferring to Diamonds and then reversing into Hearts.
I didn't think that the hand was nearly strong enough for that...

I appreciate the problem of an irregular partnership, but with hindsight I think that transferring and then bidding hearts is fine with this hand. This sequence should essentially be limited by the failure to double and would be my preference in a regular partnership playing these methods.

Given the circumstances I think it would be tough to be overly critical of either double. Things don't work out occasionally.

[hrothgar]

paulg, on 2012-April-12, 02:32, said:

I appreciate the problem of an irregular partnership, but with hindsight I think that transferring and then bidding hearts is fine with this hand. This sequence should essentially be limited by the failure to double and would be my preference in a regular partnership playing these methods.

Given the circumstances I think it would be tough to be overly critical of either double. Things don't work out occasionally.

In order to transfer, I'd need to bid 2NT --> Diamonds and then rebid 3H

[paulg]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-12, 06:00, said:

In order to transfer, I'd need to bid 2NT --> Diamonds and then rebid 3H

Sorry, I should read your methods more carefully. You would need more for this

[helene_t]

hrothgar, on 2012-April-11, 06:24, said:

The only alternative to double would have been transferring to Diamonds and then reversing into Hearts.
I didn't think that the hand was nearly strong enough for that...

The failure to dbl would limit your hand so you are strong enough. But obviously you don't have enough shape.

[mike777]

thought a penalty double of a 10-12 nt showed a bit more than this?

so pass and then balance with x over 2s by opp?