[helene_t]

Playing SAYC I would assume standard treatments of forcing pass situation, so E passes (showing some interest in defending but not enough for a penalty double) and then W can double.

But this assumes that EW have an understanding about who has shown club length and who hasn't.

[Jinksy]

Zelandakh, on 2015-December-09, 07:47, said:

What I suspect happened here is that East thought their XX showed 10+hcp. So we can perhaps put this down to a simple system misunderstanding.

Misunderstanding schmisunderstanding. The only excuse for E's 3N bid is he thought P's 2♣ opening was Precision.

[wank]

all loomis, on 2015-December-09, 01:22, said:

you deserve one another. x 2d, for starters. if xx is 10+hcp, then w must at least raise 3n to 4. nothing wrong with 3c, e is presumably short in diamonds [no x] c's might be the best spot. but then he wants to play nt.
at this point you wish you had bid 2n over 2s, because clearly e is clueless.
lesson 1: playing with strangers, bid nt first.
lesson 2: be humble, passing 3n is also clueless.

lol irony. passing 3NT was fine - the redouble doesn't show 10+. as for rebidding 3C, that should show an unbalanced hand.

[billw55]

Zelandakh, on 2015-December-09, 07:47, said:

What I suspect happened here is that East thought their XX showed 10+hcp. So we can perhaps put this down to a simple system misunderstanding.

This may well be true, but east still bears some blame because his understanding was significantly less likely to be correct. Not knowing whether support doubles are in effect is a system misunderstanding. This case is more of a lesson hand for east.

[steve2005]

rmnka447, on 2015-December-08, 15:08, said:

North has interfered with a double. I assume XX shows values and that pass would be the weakest call.

Actually, the standard meaning is the other way round but
East has 12 points West open 2♣. East should not be stopping short of slam.

I would suggest bidding 2N and not stopping short of slam if not sure what XX means.

[Charlie Yu]

What's wrong with 2NT over 2D?

[steve2005]

Charlie Yu, on 2015-December-11, 13:44, said:

What's wrong with 2NT over 2D?

The real problem is the redouble. If opener thinks redouble is a bust then any bid is pretty well non-forcing, so hard to get to slam or punish opponents.
Worse opener could pass even 2N and not even in game.

[Zelandakh]

steve2005, on 2015-December-11, 22:27, said:

Worse opener could pass even 2N and not even in game.

2NT shows a balanced 8+hcp in SAYC under the general rule that bids retain their meanings after interference, so Opener ought not to be passing it.

[Charlie Yu]

steve2005, on 2015-December-11, 22:27, said:

The real problem is the redouble. If opener thinks redouble is a bust then any bid is pretty well non-forcing, so hard to get to slam or punish opponents.
Worse opener could pass even 2N and not even in game.

Nobody plays XX as a bust when you can show it with P. But immediate 2NT should be much more descriptive and stronger than XX.

[billw55]

Charlie Yu, on 2015-December-13, 01:37, said:

Nobody plays XX as a bust when you can show it with P.

It is true that people usually don't use two bids to show the same thing. But many do play that xx shows a bust, and pass shows values.

[lycier]

billw55, on 2015-December-14, 07:34, said:

It is true that people usually don't use two bids to show the same thing. But many do play that xx shows a bust, and pass shows values.

Yes,I play that, XX=deny values with a bust, pass= show values with GF.