[sathyab]

---

You're South with the above hand, NS Vul, BAM scoring, East is dealer

Bidding goes:

E------S------W------N

2C*----p-----2nt*----P

3C-----p------p------X

P------?

2♣* = 11-15, 5♣ + 4 card Major or 6+♣

2nt* = weak hand in ♣ or strong hand to be clarified later

[Fluffy]

3♠ for me, I will pass over 4♣ from opps, but at least will be able to bid 4♥ over partner´s 4♣

[aguahombre]

Call me crazy (Why not? I am.), but I choose 4C now. Guarantees the correct trump fit, and they will bid 4C anyway, so might as well. It wasn't one of the choices for the poll, because the OP isn't crazy.

[whereagles]

4C is my bid too, and there's nothing crazy about it. Actually, it's quite obvious if pard can be trusted to have his bids.

Reason: pard passed 2NT and seems to have some 3 clubs. He must have some sort of strong NT hand, so game seems in the picture. Since pard with 44 majors might have doubled 2NT anyway, he probably has only 1 of those, making 4C even more important.

[Hanoi5]

I thought 4♣ was too much. Why didn't partner enter before? 4=4=4=1 in front of another $=4=4=1 won't do much good. 3♠.

[gnasher]

3♦. Partner didn't double 2NT, so we can't possibly have enough for game. Since we're merely contesting the partscore, all suits are equal, so I may as well bid my best one.

[Phil]

gnasher, on 2011-December-13, 07:07, said:

3♦. Partner didn't double 2NT, so we can't possibly have enough for game. Since we're merely contesting the partscore, all suits are equal, so I may as well bid my best one.

Did you notice its BAM?

[gnasher]

Phil, on 2011-December-13, 09:24, said:

Did you notice its BAM?

No, I didn't. I'd bid 3♠ at BAM.

[sathyab]

http://bridgewinners...-3c-or-balance-

[JLOGIC]

Pro tip: Play X of 2N as a light takeout, and pass then X is stronger. This lets you get in over 2N with the light takeout hand type without risking anything.

[aguahombre]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-25, 15:20, said:

Pro tip: Play X of 2N as a light takeout, and pass then X is stronger. This lets you get in over 2N with the light takeout hand type without risking anything.

How does that work when, over 2NT, we don't yet know if responder on our right is weak or strong and partner has not acted directly after 2C? Just asking.

The part about not risking anything is what I don't understand. Can't opener just pass and find out whether responder wants to kill us?

[Phil]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-25, 15:20, said:

Pro tip: Play X of 2N as a light takeout, and pass then X is stronger. This lets you get in over 2N with the light takeout hand type without risking anything.

I would think the opposite would be true. If RHO has a GF two suiter, this is an auction we want to steer clear of, especially with a 'light takeout'. If we have a solid hand, then the chances are greater RHO is making the nuisance raise to 3{cl] via 2N, and if we have a good hand we have better protection when RHO is loaded.

I would not think LHO is obligated to accept the transfer after 2N - (x) - but there may be nuances.

[sathyab]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-25, 15:20, said:

Pro tip: Play X of 2N as a light takeout, and pass then X is stronger. This lets you get in over 2N with the light takeout hand type without risking anything.

It doesn't matter what you play here. As long as you play immediate double of 2nt or subsequent double of 3♣ as t/o in the classical sense of shortness in ♣s, you can not enter the auction at all, as your hand doesn't qualify as either kind of t/o. When the auction becomes to you after 3♣ you have to produce an action double and partner has to play his role by passing, with the understanding that the doubler can not be short in ♣s. As I mentioned in the other poll, if your partnership is aggressive enough to double opener's 3♣ with such hands anticipating balancing problems for partner, that's great, as partner has enough to convert, otherwise partner has a practically impossible balancing problem. Well, of course nobody says you have to do anything. Defending 3♣ undoubled to lose the board is perfectly fine, especially if you're the opposing side.

[JLOGIC]

sathyab, on 2011-December-25, 16:50, said:

It doesn't matter what you play here. As long as you play immediate double of 2nt or subsequent double of 3♣ as t/o in the classical sense of shortness in ♣s, you can not enter the auction at all, as your hand doesn't qualify as either kind of t/o. When the auction becomes to you after 3♣ you have to produce an action double and partner has to play his role by passing, with the understanding that the doubler can not be short in ♣s. As I mentioned in the other poll, if your partnership is aggressive enough to double opener's 3♣ with such hands anticipating balancing problems for partner, that's great, as partner has enough to convert, otherwise partner has a practically impossible balancing problem. Well, of course nobody says you have to do anything. Defending 3♣ undoubled to lose the board is perfectly fine, especially if you're the opposing side.

[aguahombre]

Yes, Justin. But could you explain what Phil and I are missing about that direct double of 2NT?

[JLOGIC]

aguahombre, on 2011-December-25, 22:12, said:

Yes, Justin. But could you explain what Phil and I are missing about that direct double of 2NT?

I suppose it depends on what "GF hand to be clarified later" means. Assuming it is a 5-5+ GF 2 suiter (not clubs) which is what "everyone" who I have seen play this 2N bid as plays it, then the odds that they have the GF 2 suiter rather than just a raise to 3C are very small to begin with. I have played this way for many years now, and I have only had the GF 5-5+ maybe 3 times ever. If you then take into account that you have short clubs, length everywhere else, and some values, it becomes even less likely.

ETA: I have, however, seen people go for a number several times on 2C p 2N p 3C p p X. I have also gone for a number on that auction. It was suggested to me by Geoff Hampson to reverse X of 2N and balancing with a double. Admittedly, it's different depending on what the strong hand types included in 2N were, I probably should not have assumed, but I think I know who this board was played against if it was in the Reisinger.

[sathyab]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-26, 01:53, said:

I suppose it depends on what "GF hand to be clarified later" means. Assuming it is a 5-5+ GF 2 suiter (not clubs) which is what "everyone" who I have seen play this 2N bid as plays it, then the odds that they have the GF 2 suiter rather than just a raise to 3C are very small to begin with. I have played this way for many years now, and I have only had the GF 5-5+ maybe 3 times ever. If you then take into account that you have short clubs, length everywhere else, and some values, it becomes even less likely.

ETA: I have, however, seen people go for a number several times on 2C p 2N p 3C p p X. I have also gone for a number on that auction. It was suggested to me by Geoff Hampson to reverse X of 2N and balancing with a double. Admittedly, it's different depending on what the strong hand types included in 2N were, I probably should not have assumed, but I think I know who this board was played against if it was in the Reisinger.

Even if you assume that 2nt is rarely GF in other suits and that it's most often a prelude to a weak sign-off in ♣s, how can you double 2nt when you have length in ♣s yourself ?

[gnasher]

I don't think Justin is suggesting treating K9 A742 K73 KJ94 as a "light takeout" double. Or at least I hope he's not.

Regarding the poll on Bridgewinners, you definitely can't act once partner has shown interest.
Do you have UI? Yes.
Does the UI suggest double over pass? Yes.
Is pass a logical alternative? Yes.
So double is illegal.

Regarding the question of whether you should act in an unpolluted auction, your argument seems to be "On this deal, if I'd passed we'd have lost the board; therefore it's right to act." A single deal is a single data point; the fact that you got lucky (very lucky, looking at the two hands) this time doesn't make it right to double.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-December-26, 04:00, said:

I don't think Justin is suggesting treating K9 A742 K73 KJ94 as a "light takeout" double. Or at least I hope he's not.

Huh? I must not have read the thread very well, I don't even know that hand lol.

[gnasher]

JLOGIC, on 2011-December-26, 04:28, said:

Huh? I must not have read the thread very well, I don't even know that hand lol.

You have to follow the link Satthya posted to a poll on BridgeWinners:
http://bridgewinners...-3c-or-balance-