[GrahamJson]

For what it is worth, Robson and Segal in "Partnership bidding in bridge" use 4C (over 3D) as a "fit non jump" showing this sort of hand. Sally Horton, in "Double trouble" uses a double after a raise by responder to show any hand that has no clear bid. Usually the two other suits but can have support.

[miamijd]

gszes, on 2016-June-13, 07:09, said:

bidding 4s right away just does not make much sense since that kind of bid is preemptive. Starting with the neg x and later raising spades at least lets p know you have power for your bidding and who knows where that kind of information might lead us. the bidding will give p a strong clue as to how to play the hand and their HCP rate to be positionally improved while ours remain unaffected by postion. This makes a game "gamble" a much better proposition opposite a minimum overcall. If the opps do bid 5d it might be nice for p to have a say in the proceddings which they will never have if we bgin with 4s immediately.

4S is only preemptive if 3D is a limit raise. Assuming 3D is weak, 4S is NOT preemptive. It's a hand that wants to bid game but is not strong enough to bid 4D.

If the bid to your right was preemptive, a jump by you is strong.

[sfi]

wanoff, on 2016-June-11, 03:44, said:

Are you happy with the double of 3♦. What does it mean ?
And what now at MPs

Miamijd covered the meaning of a double fairly well. It typically shows values (say a good 10+ at this level) and 4+ cards in the other two suits. Particularly if you have minimal high-card strength you would want spade tolerance as well, so you have some assurance of a playable spot.

Doubling with this hand is just asking for trouble. You might be able to convince partner you have actual spade support if you get a chance to convert at the three or four level, but you may not. What will you do if LHO bids 5D and it is passed around to you, or if your partner bids spades again? Even if you do get to show three spades, partner is entitled to play you for at least 3-4-2-4 shape and may decide to go looking for slam with a presumed double fit (you're not going to enjoy any bid from partner over a 4S correction).

It's much better to support spades directly, and your options are 3S, 4S, and a cue bid. 3S could be right, but three aces suggest bidding more. 4S is typically a hand with more distribution and weaker in high cards. Not preemptive exactly, but descriptive. A cue could get you too high, but it does show the general nature of your hand - 3+ spades, high card values, and some defence.

It's generally a good idea to be prepared to overbid by a level to show a fit in competition. So 4D looks clear.

As to what do I do now? Prepare my excuses - I've successfully forced myself to take the last guess and it was entirely avoidable.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

double is ok, but discuss with partner, if you can use 3H to show a fit,
inv.+.

Now I would pass it out.

Double showed inv. values, but not a fit, partner was not interested, I dont
believe we can make 4S, and it is not clear, that we could make 3S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[beowulf]

mdgraham, on 2016-June-13, 04:13, said:

4S could be playable or just plain silly, and 4D could be close to making or down a couple.

It's hard to imagine any 1♠ overcall that doesn't have some play for game opposite your hand (three aces and three trumps!). Chances of getting 4!DX down more than two are probably small.

[Jinksy]

You might also bounce them from a non-making 4♠ to a non-making 5♦. Also at MPs, if you go two down undoubled or one down doubled in 4♠, you can still get a good score when they were making 3(+) diamonds.

[kenberg]

Jinksy, on 2016-June-16, 00:29, said:

You might also bounce them from a non-making 4♠ to a non-making 5♦. Also at MPs, if you go two down undoubled or one down doubled in 4♠, you can still get a good score when they were making 3(+) diamonds.

This is pretty much why I now, after 4D is passed back to me, go on to 4S.

Quite possible 4D is making, and I am guessing that there will be nine tricks in spades. I approved of the double of 3D, the hope was that a follow-up of 3S would help patner decide whether to go or not go on to 4. But that fell through and now it is a choice between 4DX and 4S. I am not passing 4D. When a pair bids 4m and makes it on the nose, they usually score well at mps.

I speculate a bit about the shape of the hands. Someone has to have four hearts. After my double, partner might well have bid 4H if he had four. My rho might have made a negative double over 1S if he had four. So no guarantee, but I think there are four hearts on my left, three everywhere else. I'm thinking lho may be something like 3=4=5=1. He was thinking that after my double, if he passes, my partner will bid 4C. He is bidding 4D to keep that from happening.

So right or wrong, I hoped to show a strong invitation by doubling and then bidding 3S, but now I go with 4S. I doubt that they will go on to 5D but if so I hit it. Enough is enough.

[Jinksy]

I feel like both bouncing and getting out for -2(+) undoubled are less likely having gone the slow way. I would have gone with 4♦ over 3, which seems to have better prospects for both.

[kenberg]

Jinksy, on 2016-June-16, 15:15, said:

I feel like both bouncing and getting out for -2(+) undoubled are less likely having gone the slow way. I would have gone with 4♦ over 3, which seems to have better prospects for both.

This may well be right.