[Poky]

IMP. Only we vul.

Scoring: IMP

---

(1♣) - pass - (1♦) - Dbl*
(1♥) - Dbl** - (pass) - 1♠
(pass) - ???

* Take-out double
** Penalty double, usually exactly 4-carder

[flytoox]

Poky, on Mar 24 2004, 09:25 AM, said:

IMP. Only we vul.

Scoring: IMP

---

(1♣) - pass - (1♦) - Dbl*
(1♥) - Dbl** - (pass) - 1♠
(pass) - ???

* Take-out double
** Penalty double, usually exactly 4-carder

Are 1C and 1D natural? Pd's 1S seems wierd. He must have a very offensive hand with good s suit. I would bid 1N now. This 1N should show some strength.

[inquiry]

Ok.. I will bite....I assume opponents playing standard since no alerts.

My very unpopular choice is.... "pass"

This is an odd auction. I would normally expect my double of 1♥ to be respected if my partner had a big balanced hand or on most hands where partner held four ♥'s, even at imps with us vulnerable. If partner had a BIG offensive hand with ♠, he could clearly afford a jump to 2♠ here (as a 1♠ sandwich overcall vul versus not vul would have already shown a nice hand). Also, if partner had a big hand with lots of ♥s, he knows the final contract will not be 1♥X and he could make a vulnerable game try with a cue-bid or a ♥ raise of some type. So take away the good hands he holds here either balanced (he would pass), spade (he would jump to 2♠, or major two suiter (he would make fit showing bid).

A second odd (frightening) thing here is the dog that didn't bark. If partner is not balanced, he is at least short in ♦ or ♣. This means that West has either long ♦ or a clear preference for ♣, and yet at favorable vul, WEST choose to PASS your 1♥X penalty double rather than raise ♣ or rebid long ♦. This marks WEST with some ♥ legnth (but clearly not four).

So what do we have? Partner doesn't have a big offensive hand with a good ♠ suit, and he doesn't have big balanced hand (pass or perhaps 3NT instead of 1♠ in view of the vulnerability), and he doesn't even have big two suiter with the majors (no cue-bid or jump over your penalty dbl). So just what can partner have for his takout double and then pull?

We have eliminated the "Strong hands" he can have, so what about weak hands? Not a weak hand with just spades (then 1♠ initially, or perhpas 2♠ initially). How about weak and balanced with five spades? Of course not, he would have passed initially. No, partner has to have ♥'s and WEST is probably looking at three ♥ as well. If I had to bet, it would seems to me that EAST is the kidder with minor two suiter, and his 1♥ was a joke, or maybe looking for ♠ stopper, maybe trying to keep us from competiting. But if this is the case, why didn't partner pass 1♥X?

I think the answer is clear, especially if you play "sandwich NT" calls. Partner has a major two suiter not strong enough use the sandwich 1NT because he didn't want to force to the two level with potential misfit. (BTW if my partner does not play sandwich NT, then I will not pass, but rather bid 1NT over 1♠)

Can the opponent's have made 1♥? Of course not, but you partner knows that 1♥X will not be the final contract. His 1♠ bid is showing where his values are located (♠'s), and suggesting a defensive line(lead ♠'s). I think logic dictates that I bid 2♥ bid (to play) here, but 2♥ is not one of the options. Luckily, if you bid 1NT, your partner will most often correct to 2♥ if he thinks you are clever enough to pass that. Another relatively save bid is "pass", as you have no game and it has the advantage of keeping the bidding low and partner is expecting pass as one option when he bid 1♠.

So let me rate the bids...
2♣ and 2♦ are non-starters...as I think both of these show a much better hand and probably better clubs (to explain no action directly over 1♣.

2NT is a tremendous overbid, and 3NT will get you a new partner fairly quickly, why punish him for trying to compete.

2♥, not an option given, to play, is probably the "right bid", although if my clubs where Jxxx and my ♠Qx I might prefer a jump to 3♥.

1NT is an alterative answer due to the fact that if 2♥ is right, partner will probalby bid it (unless he thinks you might play him for a LOT more than he actually has).

Pass -- this is imps. Even if you have 8 or 9 tricks available in ♥, winning 7 in ♠ will not be that bad a deal. And ♠ will be breaking nicely for partner on this auction I think. So in final analysis, and in part because 2♥ is not available in the poll, I choose pass over 1♠, with 1NT as close second choice. I suspect PASS will NOT be a popular choice. Also, I doubt seriously that the bidding will end in 1♠ passed out (see note below) since EW have about half the deck and likely at least an eight card ♦ fit, so I anticipate my LHO to balance, and I might get a chance to bid 2♥ afterall.

NOTE: If opener is being cute by bidding a shortish ♥ suit and hiding a ♦ fit (by not bidding 2♦ over 1♠), his pass of your partner's 1♠ assuming you would bid again might backfire on him if you pass. His partner, with ♦s but not knowing of the minor suit fit, might just assume his side has no fit. So while you may make 2♥ and even be make or down one in 1♠, they maybe cold for 3 or 4 ♦s.

Ben

[Free]

1NT... what else?

[inquiry]

Free, on Mar 24 2004, 11:17 AM, said:

1NT... what else?

2♥ and pass... pay attention...lol..... :-)

[lenze]

I disagree wih the original double of 1 ♥. I've come to the conclusion that at this level, it is best to go for your contract. I would have bid 1NT over the 1♥ bid. Having doubled 1 ♥, I now have little option but to bid 1NT

[luis]

1NT keep it simple.

[mishovnbg]

lenze, on Mar 24 2004, 10:39 PM, said:

I disagree wih the original double of 1 ♥. I've come to the conclusion that at this level, it is best to go for your contract. I would have bid 1NT over the 1♥ bid. Having doubled 1 ♥, I now have little option but to bid 1NT

Spoiler

-------------------------------------

Hi lenze!
This is not original, but "standard" double. You may be also surprised that 2♥ in same sequence is not cue bid but 5 cards ♥ and constructive, also standard. few people know another standard bid: (1♣)-p-(1♥)-2♥: natural, 6+♥, good suit, offensive hand, not cue bid!!!.
After take out double your partner show support in all unbid suits or strong hand. So if he pull your double he must be with strong hand, despite opps bidding. He can missbid or forget that my dbl is penalty, but I never play with regular p way he made mistake, because if I think he did mistake while he didn't, I do more unpleasant mistake - not trusting to partner, why I play with him then? Mistakes are unavoidable, but trusting to p is obligatory in real partnership.

I will bid 1NT: 8-11hcp, ♣ stopper.

Spoiler

-------------------------------------------------

Misho

[luis]

mishovnbg, on Mar 25 2004, 05:02 PM, said:

lenze, on Mar 24 2004, 10:39 PM, said:

I disagree wih the original double of 1 ♥. I've come to the conclusion that at this level, it is best to go for your contract. I would have bid 1NT over the 1♥ bid. Having doubled 1 ♥, I now have little option but to bid 1NT

Spoiler

-------------------------------------

Hi lenze!
This is not original, but "standard" double. You may be also surprised that 2♥ in same sequence is not cue bid but 5 cards ♥ and constructive, also standard. few people know another standard bid: (1♣)-p-(1♥)-2♥: natural, 6+♥, good suit, offensive hand, not cue bid!!!.
After take out double your partner show support in all unbid suits or strong hand. So if he pull your double he must be with strong hand, despite opps bidding. He can missbid or forget that my dbl is penalty, but I never play with regular p way he made mistake, because if I think he did mistake while he didn't, I do more unpleasant mistake - not trusting to partner, why I play with him then? Mistakes are unavoidable, but trusting to p is obligatory in real partnership.

I will bid 1NT: 8-11hcp, ♣ stopper.

Spoiler

-------------------------------------------------

Misho

At the local club when somebody asks a "what do you bid with...." question and the answer seems to be obvious I usually ask: "Oh dear, what happened after your normal bid?"
So maybe it's time to ask: "Oh dear, what happened after 1NT?"

[Trpltrbl]

1 NT, tells it all. Have HCP and ♣ stopper and balanced hand. Not sure why we have to look deep into this. Keep it simple, if you already start having trouble with these types of hands, what is going to happen if you actually get a tuff hand

Mike

[Poky]

Trpltrbl, on Mar 26 2004, 02:49 AM, said:

Not sure why we have to look deep into this.

Hmm. Only two simply questions.
1) Is your 1NT intended as forcing or not?
2) With what kind of hand would you respond 2NT and would this 2NT be forcing?

[inquiry]

Poky, on Mar 26 2004, 06:02 AM, said:

Trpltrbl, on Mar 26 2004, 02:49 AM, said:

Not sure why we have to look deep into this.

Hmm. Only two simply questions.
1) Is your 1NT intended as forcing or not?
2) With what kind of hand would you respond 2NT and would this 2NT be forcing?

I will answer your two simple question, but first, let me explain why I think there are two simple question to be asked, but that these are not directly the correct ones to be asking. I think the two simple questions should be....

1) Is parnter 1♠ bid showing a good or a bad hand,
2) What is a logical explaination of why partner pulled our 1♥ dbl'ed

To the first of MY questions, it seems a lot of posters think the auction on this hand (see #1 below) is identical to the similar sounding auction (see #2 below).

(#1)
(1♣) - pass - (1♦) - Dbl*
(1♥) - Dbl** - (pass) - 1♠

(#2)
(1♣) - pass - (1♦) - Dbl*
(pass) - 2♥ - (pass) - 1♠

These auctions are NOT similar at all. In #2, partner shows with his 1♠ rebid a great hand too strong to make a 1♠ overcall so he used a double followed by bidding his suit. Your 1♥ bid could be based on a three card suit and 0 hcp... as you were "forced to bid". Your partner need not jump to show extra value since you could have a blizzard (very, very poor hand).

In auction #1, you showed considerable values with your penatly double of 1♥, limited only by your initial pass over 1♣. If your partner had the same hand he had for his bid in auction #2, he could easily and safely afford a jump to 2♠ to share this good news with you. With your values for double and with his hand too good for simple overcall, bidding game would be a no-brainer.

No, clearly these auctions are not similar, and your partner for his 1♠ bid does NOT have the strong spade one suited hand.

So my question number two, if he doesn't have the strong spade hand, what could 1♠ be? A game try in ♥, you are vul after all? Of course not. IF you can win 10 tricks in 4♥ for +620, then they win only 3 in 1♥X for down four... and a nice fat +800. So partner can not be trying for game in ♥ and can not have good defensive hand (as others pointed out), and can not have the good spade hand.

So why did he pull 1♥ double? The reason should be two fold. First to suggest that he does have a weak defensive hand. If he passes 1♥ and they now bid 2♦, all doubles would be penalty oriented. He wants be sure you realize that he is very light and poorly defensively. Second, he wants to offer a second place to play the contract. He is looking at four hearts, and he suspects you have four. So if they run to 2♦, he or you might bid 2♥ to play (and suggest weakness). By passing and then bidding 2♥, I think he shows a better hand, than bidding immediately. But here, he bids ♠ first, probably because his hand is well suited for ♠, your double, after all, did not express any interest in playing in ♠'s. I think his hand could easily be something like...♠KQT9x ♥Jxxx ♦Kx ♣xx. Now if your partner is not this adventuresome, you could make the spades a little stronger, or make the ♦KQ doubleton... but you get the idea, a weak hand he felt like "mixing it up" on.

Now, to your two questions....

1) is 1NT meant to be forcing? It had better not be, but you really probably don't want to play 1NT anyway. You should be much better off in 2♥... partner could have singleton ♦ for instance, and they could win something like 5 or 6♦+♣AK plus even ♠A. Not a pretty picture. Better would be a 2♥ bid.. .but since that is not EVEN an option, I will speculate that the winning bid here is something very aggressive because North "misbid" with the 1♠ bid... and he actually holds a great hand with spades.... But of course, that SHOULD BE impossible given the simple 1♠ pull of my penalty double.... I am not surprised so many people bid 1NT... of the options, 1NT is not bad.... I think the right bid is a non-forcing 2♥ over 1♠, but as I said, pass of 1♠ is also a great option... but pass or 1NT (which will get you to 2♥ I think), I think there is too much optimism in the tenor of many of the replies... I am hoping not to go for 200 or more in whatever we bid right now... .and certainly am not thinking game...

2) What kind of hand would I now bid 2NT and would it be forcing?
A 2NT bid here should show an opening bid with the ♣ suit (anything else and you would have bid directly over 1♣), and no, it is not forcing. If you want to force, cue-bid their suit.... The reason it is not forcing, is partner can be very weak. But, I doubt partner will pass 2NT because he will know of your 8 card ♥ fit... and he will probably want to get out of NT and back into ♥'s... question is will he bid game in ♥ or stop in three.....

Ben

[Poky]

1) Is parnter 1♠ bid showing a good or a bad hand.
Good hand, obviously. He didn't bid 1♠ directly on 1♦.

2) What is a logical explaination of why partner pulled our 1♥ dbl'ed?
Because he thinks 1♥x is for us a bad contract:
a ) Maybe bacause it is a maker (partner having 0/1♥),
b ) Maybe because the penalty would be too small (our side having +600/+620)

If your partner had the same hand he had for his bid in auction #2, he could easily and safely afford a jump to 2♠ to share this good news with you.
Why? A hand with 16 HCP and 5♠ isn't the same as a hand with 19 HCP and 6♠.

I think his hand could easily be something like...♠KQT9x ♥Jxxx ♦Kx ♣xx.
Sorry, but I think that pass is a 120% clear-cut with this hand on 1♥x. No need to make any nebulous bid.

[inquiry]

Poky, on Mar 26 2004, 11:11 AM, said:

1) Is parnter 1♠ bid showing a good or a bad hand.
Good hand, obviously. He didn't bid 1♠ directly on 1♦.

2) What is a logical explaination of why partner pulled our 1♥ dbl'ed?
Because he thinks 1♥x is for us a bad contract:
a ) Maybe bacause it is a maker (partner having 0/1♥),
b ) Maybe because the penalty would be too small (our side having +600/+620)

If your partner had the same hand he had for his bid in auction #2, he could easily and safely afford a jump to 2♠ to share this good news with you.
Why? A hand with 16 HCP and 5♠ isn't the same as a hand with 19 HCP and 6♠.

I think his hand could easily be something like...♠KQT9x ♥Jxxx ♦Kx ♣xx.
Sorry, but I think that pass is a 120% clear-cut with this hand on 1♥x. No need to make any nebulous bid.

I don't desire to get into a great theoretical bidding discussion here. I knew from the lack of a 2♥ option in your quiz you had given North what would be an impossible hand by the bid style I, and many others use. Now, there is little doubt that there can be difference of opinion on what bids mean, this is what makes discussing bidding so interesting....

A sandwich vul versus not vul 1♠ bid with short ♥ (0/1) would SHOW a hand of about 16 (maybe slightly less) and five spades... In otherwords, the hand you are describing was a safe and sane 1♠ overcall to begin with....

Now as far as the 120% comment. I acknowledged that many would not dbl that light, many would, and suggested in my post that you could stregnth it to get a minimum hand you would compete on with a double... so your comments are unwarrented and unnecessary... the point would be to come up with whatever minimum two suited hand norht could have for a double and see if the 1♠ over 1♥X makes senses with that hand...

I can hardly wait for you to post the north hand so we can start a discussion of rather or not people here think the hand was good enough for a double vulnerable in the sandwich position versus not vul, with shortnes in one of the other two suits instead of a simple 1♠ overcall, and if it was, was it good enough for a more agressive bid after the penatly double of 1♥.

Ben

[keylime]

After lengthy debate here's my best guess.

Pard's failure to convert the double of 1♥ says that they do not desire to defend. Pard's failure to bid 1NT says their diamond stop is horrid and/or lacking. Pard's failure to bid Sandwich NT denies 5-4 shape in the majors. Pard's failure to cuebid 2♣/♦ infers a relatively balanced hand OR a hand that is 3 suited. Lastly, the biggie to me, pard failed to bid 2♥ to show interest in game.

My best guess: pard is either 4-1-4-4 or 4-0-4-5 with horrible diamonds and around 10-12 HCP. If partner was stronger they would have taken a completely different course of action. Pard's just competing.

[dogsbreath]

1NT. Not happy to pass 1s. agree that something odd is going on but i am not mis-discribing my hand with this bid. seems natural and simple. Rgds Dog

[Poky]

inquiry, on Mar 26 2004, 06:23 PM, said:

I can hardly wait for you to post the north hand so we can start a discussion of rather or not people here think the hand was good enough for a double vulnerable in the sandwich position versus not vul, with shortnes in one of the other two suits instead of a simple 1♠ overcall, and if it was, was it good enough for a more agressive bid after the penatly double of 1♥.

This was the doubler's hand:

Scoring: IMP

---

The auction went ...1NT - all pass. +4, +210.

[flytoox]

Poky, on Mar 29 2004, 09:46 AM, said:

inquiry, on Mar 26 2004, 06:23 PM, said:

I can hardly wait for you to post the north hand so we can start a discussion of rather or not people here think the hand was good enough for a double vulnerable in the sandwich position versus not vul, with shortnes in one of the other two suits instead of a simple 1♠ overcall, and if it was, was it good enough for a more agressive bid after the penatly double of 1♥.

This was the doubler's hand:

Scoring: IMP

---

The auction went ...1NT - all pass. +4, +210.

Double is wrong imho, he should bid 1s.

[inquiry]

Poky, on Mar 29 2004, 04:46 AM, said:

inquiry, on Mar 26 2004, 06:23 PM, said:

I can hardly wait for you to post the north hand so we can start a discussion of rather or not people here think the hand was good enough for a double vulnerable in the sandwich position versus not vul, with shortnes in one of the other two suits instead of a simple 1♠ overcall, and if it was, was it good enough for a more agressive bid after the penatly double of 1♥.

This was the doubler's hand:

Scoring: IMP

---

The auction went ...1NT - all pass. +4, +210.

Defensive bidding is a matter of style and personal taste. Here, with the hand shown, DOUBLE in the sandwich position simply would never occur to me to a possible bid. For me, this is a simple 1♠ overcall.

Here is how I play sandwich bids, ESPECIALLY VUL.

• New suit, a pretty good hand. No need to bid on total junk. That is, a minimum sandwich 1♠ overcall is much better than a minimum overcall if only one opponent has bid. So this hand is just a sound 1♠ overcall, certainly it is more than minimum, but given the vulnerability it really isn't that much more than a minimum sandwich overcall (vul versus non-vul)
  
• 1NT would be weakish takeout to the two unbid suits
  
• DBL is a stronger takeout to the other two suits
  
• 2NT is wild distribution takeout to the other two suits.

I think the bidding should have been...
(1♣)-P-(1♦)-1♠
( P) - 1N - ( P) - 3N
all pass

Since 1NT shows some real values, North's hand is good enough to push for game. But at the very least, north should invite and south is good enough to go on given his initial pass and his simple 1NT response.

Ok, so what went on with this hand?

North was "worried" that south was doubling 1♥ on the ♥'s he promised (since he made a take out double). So of course he bids. When South bid 1NT, north is thinking
1) I already showed a monster hand with my 1♠ rebid, and
2) partner must not be able to stand ♠, and maybe weak so he passed.

The real culprit here, however, is north's bidding, not south. South did nothing wrong . The penalty double of 1♥ is right, and although I suggested pass of 1♠ would be ok, and that I would have preferred to bid 2♥, I also noted that 1NT is not bad either...as did like 90% of the other posters. BTW, my clear choice of second bid with south (2♥) would have resulted in game being bid...because north will still be bidding, but 1NT should have worked as well.

Even playing doubles as "screwed up" as this north player did (at least imho), north's hand is too good to pass south's 1NT. At the very least, he should invite game. South simply has to have more than just ♥'s to make a penatly double and then to bid 1NT. So in final analysis North made, imho, three bad bids. First he doubled with a hand that should have made a simple 1♠ overcall, second he rebid 1♠--sort of forced on him becuase his first double distorted the auction, I think a better rebid would have been 1NT given his hand and his first bid, and third, his final pass was too weak. The 1NT rebid can't be "balanced" big, because he would pass the 1♥X with that. So here 1NT must be short in hearts and goes back towards the type of hand that keylime argued the 1♠ bid shows. Good values, short ♥. Over this 1NT bid, game will be quickly be reached, as south will leap to 3NT after X then 1NT.

Now north will argue differently, no doubt. He will say his 1♠ showed exactly this hand... a hand with spades that was too good for a 1♠ overcall, but not good enough now for a jump to 2♠ after the penalty double while being too short in ♥ to leave the double in. The way I bid, there is no such hand, because I either overcall 1♠ or my hand would be good enough for a jump to 2♠ over the double here. Since I didn't jump, I don't have the strong spade "one suiter."

Ben

[luis]

1NT always show values so there's no reason to pass 1NT. It doesn't matter if double is right or if 1s was better passing 1NT is the problem.