[killerz66]

---

How do you proceed? Scoring is cross-IMPs, opponents are very good players.

[gwnn]

I'm very brave. But I pass. Colours are not for children.

[helene_t]

In most partnerships I can double to show clubs but that is apparently not on the menu.

I am probably conditioned to playing against pairs who don't know what their doubles mean so I would not hesitate to bid. But obviously pass is the right call.

[killerz66]

 helene_t, on 2016-May-31, 02:35, said:

In most partnerships I can double to show clubs but that is apparently not on the menu.

I am probably conditioned to playing against pairs who don't know what their doubles mean so I would not hesitate to double. But obviously pass is the right call.

Double would have shown both majors, so the option was not included.

[P_Marlowe]

Usually I dont have the option to bid 2C nat., but if I have it,
than I will use the option.
At any other color, I would bid 3C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Jinksy]

2♣. Getting in the way as much as I dare. Against worse opps, it'd be 3♣.

[MrAce]

Pass, good players love to defend 2m doubled at imps and these colors.

[broze]

 Jinksy, on 2016-May-31, 03:26, said:

2♣. Getting in the way as much as I dare. Against worse opps, it'd be 3♣.

I think one should preempt more agressively against better opponents. Either way I'm content with 2C here.

[Tramticket]

2C. Suit quality is good and I certainly want a club lead.

[wank]

it's a pass, but 2C wouldn't be close to making your 100 worst bids of the year.

[ggwhiz]

Pass and (maybe) balance. I've gone for 1100 overcalling at the 1 level but never at the 2 level in this situation.

[Phil]

I'd pass unless I thought my opponents were clueless when it comes to interference.

[helene_t]

 ggwhiz, on 2016-May-31, 08:27, said:

Pass and (maybe) balance. I've gone for 1100 overcalling at the 1 level but never at the 2 level in this situation.

you won't get a chance to balance. They are playing a strong club system.

[apollo1201]

2C is probably not obstructive enough to embarass them, from what I can read. It might actually help them more than us. And I feel too flattish or short at these colors to venture to the 3 level and further encourage a sacrifice from partner. So I'll pass with some regrets. But wouldn't blame a 2C bid.

[ggwhiz]

 helene_t, on 2016-May-31, 08:29, said:

you won't get a chance to balance. They are playing a strong club system.

OK, pre-balance if it goes 1♦ - p - 1nt Not over 1M though since I will be on lead.

[gwnn]

Quote

OK, pre-balance if it goes 1♦ - p - 1nt Not over 1M though since I will be on lead.

That just sounds suicidal. 2C really? When you know opener has 17-19 balanced? The upside of 2C { the round before} is when opps get into some kind of a mess sorting out various strains (imagine our LHO having diamonds strong, our p raising clubs and our RHO bidding 3C over 2D,opener being 55 in the majors but having to distinguish it from 7 spades or 54 or 64 in the minors) { talking about: 1C-2C-2D-3C; and opener needs to start describing their hand at 3S or 4C,either way obviously better for us than if we had passed throughout } . When our LHO knows more or less the exact handtype of his/her partner { i. e. in the second round of bidding} it will be much easier for them to find their right strain (it could be defense against clubs) {maybe opps do play double after the second-round interference as penalty, but mainly I was just talking about responder making a Stayman or takeout double that at least shows that they have enough points and opener just passing it out} 2C {in the second round of bidding} is NOT pre-balance.

EDIT: quoted the post and clarified with italics after miamijd's reply.

This post has been edited by gwnn: 2016-June-01, 22:35

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 2 ♣ (natural)and am prepared to take full responsibility if it turns out badly at this vulnerability. At even or reverse vulnerability, I think bidding 2 ♣ (natural) should be almost certain for everyone.

Over a strong and forcing 1 ♣, eliminating the 1 level makes life more difficult for the opponents. They essentially then have to figure out what to do with a much larger subset of hands than those where more conventional bidders start with 2 ♣. And they have to do it in essentially the same bidding space.

If RHO has a strong balanced hand, LHO is very unlikely to have a ♣ stack. If LHO does have a stack, then RHO will likely have a distributional hand and be more likely to bid. In any case, neither opponent can see through the backs of your cards and will be under pressure to bid. That's not such a bad thing.

[SteveMoe]

1NT. Take away responder's tools over 1♣.

[notproven]

Pass. I'm allergic to telephone numbers.

Even if partner and I could mess up their auction (more than with a natural 2♣ call) by playing a systemic interference over their Precision 1♣ the colors and lack of shape would scare me off. Partner has to have a good hand to avoid -500, and if his hand is that good opener may not even make game. Much too big a gamble at these colors.

[mycroft]

Even if double was clubs (it isn't), doubling here seems unhelpful. Sure, in the system I play that, it shows a "suit worth being led", but it gives them two steps that you don't get back unless partner raises clubs (which puts you into death valley just as much as doing it yourself). If that were my option (2♣ in that system being the minors), I probably pass (and get frustrated when it goes 1♣-1NT; 3NT).

For 2♣ to be wrong, you have to take 5 tricks for -800 (in which case, they could have slam, if the clubs are X-1), or you have to take 6 tricks for -500 and they can't make game (lose three is pretty much a wash) and they have to work out to sit for it. I, like many strong club players, say that we like to sit for low level doubles - especially at these colours - but how often do we actually do it?

You also lose when partner with 3-to-the-Q or 4 small can't take a joke :-).

You also lose when you give the hands away to the opponents - but you win when you give the hand away to partner.

To me, it's a tossup. It also depends on how many boards I've played against this pair, and how many more I'm expecting to. Do I want to "sacrifice" this board to telegraph that I'm psychotic against their strong clubs (and then reap the -100 or -200 into game the next time I overcall)? Have I already telegraphed that I'm sane/insane against strong clubs? If it's a 3-board round and they've never heard of me and won't ever see me again - that's a reason to pass.