[Cyberyeti]

Teams

---

What action do you take if double is:

a) undiscussed
b) takeout of spades

and what other actions do you consider ? please rate these on a scale of normal to barking mad.

[mgoetze]

Well, it doesn't matter much whether double was undiscussed or takeout of spades, East rates to have 4+ hearts either way. I'm going to bid 3♥ anyway, but only because the hearts are on my left and ripe for finessing out. Even if partner opened offshape with 2254 and we end up in 3NT, the heart position could be fine if he has K8 or so. I would not be so happy with hearts on my right.

Nevertheless, I consider pass a very good option too and would rate it as absolutely normal.

At matchpoints I would have some sympathy for double but at IMPs I rate it barking mad.

I would not consider any other actions than pass, double or 3♥.

[nige1]

Cyberyeti, on 2015-February-22, 15:13, said:

Teams
What action do you take if double is:
a) undiscussed
b) takeout of spades
and what other actions do you consider ? please rate these on a scale of normal to barking mad.

---

IMO Pass = 10, 3♥ = 9. Double = 5. A T/O Double would be OK but double should be penalty here. It still might work if the hand is a complete misfit. 3♥ is an overbid but might work
Edited because I assumed a strong notrump

This post has been edited by nige1: 2015-February-22, 17:07

[mr1303]

Unfortunately we can't bid 3H here as it would be GF. I'm not brave enough to double here, so pass is all that's left.

[gnasher]

When I bid 2♥, presumably I was planning the uncontested sequence 1NT-2♥;2♠-3♥. What would that have shown?

[Zelandakh]

What is our agreed system here? Some thoughts:

X is takeout; others are natural: X seems clear
X is pen; others are natural: I prefer the light overbid of 3♥ (assuming this is an overbid) - is a close call
X shows diamonds; others are transfers: 3♦ is obvious
X is takeout; red suit xfers; 3♠ shows diamonds: I am leaning towards X here but I guess most would prefer 3♦
X is pen; red suit xfers; 3♠ shows diamonds: again, 3♦ seems clear
X shows diamonds; 3♦ is GF with hearts; 3♥ is nat INV; 3♠ is nat: wtp 3♥

As with Michael, I am not sure the opps' agreement is too important per se but I might like to delve a little deeper as some pairs play the X as merely value-showing against a weak NT. Their agreement for double of a Stayman response, for example, would be relevant information as well as, obviously, the meaning of a cue bid in this and other transfer auctions.

[Cyberyeti]

3♥ is not GF
X is pens

You are an experienced husband/wife partnership
Opps are not a regular partnership

[Zelandakh]

3♥ then knowing full well it must have gone badly wrong to have been posted! I suppose either 4♥ is making or Opener is 2245 with a stack.

[helene_t]

3♥ is 5-5 invitational? Makes sense, otherwise I wouldn't have transfered to spades in the first place.

I will try that. If X is t/o of spades, he might have only three hearts. And if we go down, maybe 3♣ would have made.

[Cyberyeti]

I think this tells me what I really want to know, it occurred in a county B team match teams of 8.

What was actually going on:

W thought they'd agreed that X was T/O of spades
E didn't and thought it showed hearts
It should have been explained as undiscussed

N claimed he'd been damaged by the misexplanation and would have passed (3♣ goes down).

The bid chosen at the table was 4♥ which I thought was so completely off planet (nobody's even mentioned it) it qualified as SEWoG and he deserved the 2254 12 count and 5-1 break he got for -4. His captain was a little more diplomatic than I was but seemed to broadly agree that the bid was silly.

(Yes I am aware how you should adjust for SEWoG actions, this one is particularly complicated as 3N actually makes in some circumstances NS on this misfitting 22 count)

[gszes]

gnasher, on 2015-February-23, 03:43, said:

When I bid 2♥, presumably I was planning the uncontested sequence 1NT-2♥;2♠-3♥. What would that have shown?

Along the same lines what would 1n 2d 2h 2s have shown??? I would play gnasher's sequence as 55+ forcing and my sequence as 55+ invitational.

[Cyberyeti]

gszes, on 2015-February-23, 07:40, said:

Along the same lines what would 1n 2d 2h 2s have shown??? I would play gnasher's sequence as 55+ forcing and my sequence as 55+ invitational.

Not 100% sure, many people in England don't play Smolen so 1N-2♦-2♥-2♠ is 5+♥/4♠ F1.