[Phil]

See poll. Thanks

[aguahombre]

Choices among the last three options are very-much dependent on the strength of 2M, and to some extend the inferences of 1D.

[gwnn]

xxx
AKxx
KQx
xxx

your call Phil ?

[fromageGB]

Very much dependent on the nature of the 1♦. For me, that 1♦ is either (1) a single suiter in diamonds, (2) a minor 2 suiter, or (3) a 3 suiter with a shortage somewhere. So X shows "values", ie "we have more than half the pack", and opener is requested to (1) bid 2♦, (2) pass, (3) pass with a major shortage, or bid hearts with a club shortage.

If I was playing a better minor 1♦ it would be values including an unspecified 4 card major.

[edit] - sorry, values = "we have more than half the pack", not "enough for 2NT", as I wrote originally.

[whereagles]

take out. Ideally both majors, but no one's perfect, so if one major only, some plan is in order.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

One method is to promise Spades "at all levels" and say "nada about Hearts".

That way:
1D - ( 2C ) - ??

2H = 4+ Hts
2S = 5+ Sp
X = 4 Sp, does not promise Hts

[Flameous]

What Qwnn says.

No really, assume it is about 7+ with 44 majors and bid accordingly. However you must handle many inv/GF hands with one major or no major and no stopper starting with double so there's no simple good explanation for it that I can come up with.

[mikeh]

This poll, and the issues reflected by the answers, is why most players will stretch to overcall 2♣ after a 1♦ opening.

I do think it useful to have a rule that opener is not permitted to jump to 4Major without extreme shape (which allows responder to correct to 5♦ or to pass with 3 cards in the major). This means that we have to overload the 3♣ cue bid by opener, but not by much.

[aguahombre]

 mikeh, on 2011-August-18, 11:30, said:

This poll, and the issues reflected by the answers, is why most players will stretch to overcall 2♣ after a 1♦ opening.

Of course, at the club they solve it by just bidding a four-card major over it if they don't have both majors

We don't play NFB, but have seriously considered doing so on this particular auction only.

[Zelandakh]

 TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-August-18, 10:56, said:

One method is to promise Spades "at all levels" and say "nada about Hearts".

That way:
1D - ( 2C ) - ??

2H = 4+ Hts
2S = 5+ Sp
X = 4 Sp, does not promise Hts

Would it not be better for X to show 4+ hearts and then use 2H and 2S for the spade hands? It just seems that we have more space to sort things out that way since the amibiguous hand starts with X rather than 2H.

[gwnn]

Han was proposing something like

x=4+♥, f
2d=4+♠, f
2♥=5+♥, nf
2♠=5+♠, nf

but maybe it was a little different. I don't think playing 2M as 4+ is playable (but I'm also sceptical about the above structure).

X=at least a 4cM
2♦=5+♥, 8+
2♥=5+♠, 8+
2♠=4+♦, mixed
2N=natural
3♣=4+♦ limit
3♦=5+♦ preemptive/mixed

is a very cool structure if you can live with an artificial 2♦.

[Lurpoa]

 Phil, on 2011-August-17, 08:52, said:

See poll. Thanks

♥



Yes, all good answers.
Best thing is to agree with your partner.


♥

[fromageGB]

 gwnn, on 2011-August-19, 02:31, said:

X=at least a 4cM
2♦=5+♥, 8+
2♥=5+♠, 8+
2♠=4+♦, mixed
2N=natural
3♣=4+♦ limit
3♦=5+♦ preemptive/mixed

is a very cool structure if you can live with an artificial 2♦.

A cool structure? Partner will get pretty heated when he has to play at the 3 level in a mediocre diamond fit, over 2 clubs intervention. Not really "lawful", but not "awful" either.

[gwnn]

Two points here:

-I think you should pass with some of the worse raises, and then you will get some nice scores against 2♣ and 3♦ will often make
-Even if we get to a bad 3♦ contract, partner will declare, so who cares?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 Zelandakh, on 2011-August-19, 01:12, said:

Would it not be better for X to show 4+ hearts and then use 2H and 2S for the spade hands? It just seems that we have more space to sort things out that way since the amibiguous hand starts with X rather than 2H.

Thx...for the "optimiization".... I think you are right.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 Zelandakh, on 2011-August-19, 01:12, said:

Would it not be better for X to show 4+ hearts and then use 2H and 2S for the spade hands? It just seems that we have more space to sort things out that way since the amibiguous hand starts with X rather than 2H.

Zel.... what about borrowing the use of 2♦!   in some fashion from gwnn's post ?

1D - ( 2C ) - ??

2D! = perhaps: 4 Hts, could have 4 Sp
2H! = 5+ Hts
2S! = 5+ Sp
X! = 4 Sp, no 4 Hts

[Zelandakh]

 TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-August-19, 07:57, said:

Zel.... what about borrowing the use of 2♦!   in some fashion from gwnn's post ?

1D - ( 2C ) - ??

2D! = perhaps 4 Hts, could have 4 Sp
2H! = 5+ Hts
2S! = 5+ Sp
X! = 4 Sp, no 4 Hts

If I was going to "borrow" 2D then I think I would go all the way with transfers. Something like

X = diamond support
2D = 4+ hearts
2H = 4+ spades
2S = spade NFB
2N = natural
3C = mixed raise
3D = weak raise

I am sure it is possible to do better than this, it is just an example from 30secs thought. Looking over there look to be too many calls devoted to diamonds but it is not possible for me to look at this in more detail just now.

[fromageGB]

 Zelandakh, on 2011-August-19, 10:58, said:

If I was going to "borrow" 2D then I think I would go all the way with transfers. Something like

X = diamond support
2D = 4+ hearts
2H = 4+ spades
2S = spade NFB
2N = natural
3C = mixed raise
3D = weak raise

I am sure it is possible to do better than this, it is just an example from 30secs thought. Looking over there look to be too many calls devoted to diamonds but it is not possible for me to look at this in more detail just now.

I agree, there is perhaps no point in the 3-bids unless they mean something different to double, and different to "transfer to something" and then bid diamonds.

The 2♠ bid is also redundant as it is covered by 2♥, and I prefer transferring to NT with the 2♠ bid, which has the advantage of making the overcaller on lead.

If you are going to make use of the 3-bids then how about
X = inititally weakish transfer to diamonds to play, but if followed by a major it shows a 4 card major and may be invitational or has a sensible escape to 3♦. It is less than a GF hand and the major rebid may be passed with a fit.
2♦ = transfer to hearts, 5 cards or more, either NFB or stronger if followed by a rebid, rebidding clubs is GF.
2♥ = transfer to spades, ditto
2♠ = transfer to NT, invitational or better
2NT = transfer to clubs, GF of some sort, a major rebid being 4 card
3♣ = asking opener to bid 3NT with a club stop
3♦ = preempt

I used to play something like this when I played a natural 1♦ and it seemed OK. Of course you can have meanings attached to opener's transfer breaks.

Including 4 card majors in the transfer to diamonds may seem unusual, and you may argue that opener will not know if you have a major if next opponent bids 3♣. But then, you don't need to know. You will not have better than a 4-4 fit, and you have more than half the points, so double is probably better than 3M. With 4 of a major and diamond support, you can rebid 3♦ over 3♣, and forget about a possible major. This does have the "downside" that you can't do this on a 7 count without diamonds, but then with any other method I would not be bidding a 4 card major at the 2 level if I had nowhere to go when partner had no fit.

And vitally important in my view - you can play in 2♦ !

[mgoetze]

I do like to play 2M forcing in this situation, but here in Germany it has pretty much become "expert standard" that 2M is nonforcing. I think it's quite pointless to discuss the meaning of double before the meaning of 2M is clarified. But generally speaking, I would like to be able to show 4-4 majors somehow.

[jdeegan]

This is a really good question. I am trying to channel Al Roth, but all I am getting is Ira Rubin. I guess the double has to handle a multitude of hands where you want to bid, but don't have a proper call.
It could be 6 or 7 ♥ or ♠ with some values. It could be the classic holding of both majors with 10+ HCP. You might have a ♦ contract in reserve. The main thing is that you have to be able to cope with whatever partner is forced to bid in response. Give him some disaster holding of 13 HCP and no shape and ask yourself how the auction is likely to go.