[Lord Molyb]

Lots of problems or badly fitting bids on this hand.
To begin!

---

Part 2:

---

[FrancesHinden]

If you have agreed that double (or 1S) shows exactly this hand (a take-out bid without 4 spades), that's what you do.
Otherwise you pass.

[the hog]

X for me. Denies 4S.

[Lord Molyb]

Alas, this wouldn't be a problem if either of those denied spades.

[the hog]

So then you pass. Surely one of those 2 bids should deny 4S for you.

[Lord Molyb]

Part two:

---

[Bbradley62]

2♠. Partner should now have an excellent picture of my hand: some values (about what I have) but neither 4 spades (based on my lack of a negative double) nor a heart stopper (based on my not bidding 1NT) nor significant club support. Ball's in his court.

[gszes]

Lord Molyb, on 2012-December-24, 21:56, said:

Part two:

---

While I would have x first time around (denying 4+ spades) dealing with the enforced pass
leaves me little choice here but to bid 2h. I have to show some life p can easily be lowballing
with a great hand since my previous pass promised nothing. 2h should show a maximum
pass with no clear direction.

[the hog]

3C, looks right.

[Bbradley62]

the hog, on 2012-December-24, 18:29, said:

X for me. Denies 4S.

gszes, on 2012-December-24, 23:43, said:

While I would have x first time around (denying 4+ spades)...

Does anyone in ACBLland actually play that a first-round double denies 4 spades, rather than shows 4 spades?

[ArtK78]

Bbradley62, on 2012-December-25, 00:51, said:

Does anyone in ACBLland actually play that a first-round double denies 4 spades, rather than shows 4 spades?

Yes, but it is clearly a minority treatment.

I like to play the double denies 4 spades, but everyone I play with insists that it shows 4 spades (and that a spade bid shows 5+).

[Vampyr]

ArtK78, on 2012-December-25, 01:10, said:

everyone I play with insists that it shows 4 spades (and that a spade bid shows 5+).

Yes, this is what most of my partners make me play

I think that it is much more useful to have one of double or 1♠ deny or tend to deny 4 spades than to have a way to show 4 spades, a way to show 5 spades, and no way to bid hands that have fewer spades but values and no clear direction.

[rhm]

Vampyr, on 2012-December-25, 02:09, said:

Yes, this is what most of my partners make me play

I think that it is much more useful to have one of double or 1♠ deny or tend to deny 4 spades than to have a way to show 4 spades, a way to show 5 spades, and no way to bid hands that have fewer spades but values and no clear direction.

I take the opposite somewhat old-fashioned view and believe your claim is wrong.
It is very useful to distinguish between four and five spades, in particular if LHO is going to raise or bid anything else.
This type of hand, where you have no good bid but values occurs rather infrequently and these hands despite their values tend to be defensive in nature.
An effective preempt by LHO is unlikely.
I do not adhere to the philosophy that third hand should bid with modest values if nothing fits.
I prefer that my bids are descriptive if RHO has relieved me from keeping the bidding open and Pass does not deny values and is always a real option.
For example I will not bid notrump in this position, if I believe that overcaller should be on lead in an eventual notrump contract.
I have seen too many 3NT go down for this reason.
If an overcall is passed round to opener he should not assume that you are broke (and LHO trap passed), but that you did not have a good bid.
Opener should make his normal bid. This has worked well for me.
I would simply bid 2♣ now, expecting opener to bid again if game is on opposite such a hand (he would need a monster).
Far more likely no side can make much on this deal.
Patience in the bidding is an underdeveloped virtue nowadays.

Rainer Herrmann

[Lord Molyb]

Please vote in the poll

[lamford]

I voted for double, not realising I was voting on part two which came somewhere down the thread ... It would be better to present the problem as one part. And the option to "please specify" did not seem to be present.

[lalldonn]

rhm, on 2012-December-25, 05:16, said:

I take the opposite somewhat old-fashioned view and believe your claim is wrong.
It is very useful to distinguish between four and five spades, in particular if LHO is going to raise or bid anything else.
This type of hand, where you have no good bid but values occurs rather infrequently and these hands despite their values tend to be defensive in nature.

I agree 10000%. For years I played either double or 1♠ denies four spades. Playing a treatment like that, by far the most common occurence (it wasn't even close) was that over my bid which shows 4+ or 4-5 spades the next player would bid 3♥ or 4♥ and we would be left guessing at a high level. I finally realized the difference between 4 and 5 spades is too important to give up.

Of course on the forums, showing 0-3 spades is hugely important since those are the problem hands that people post. Not that it matters on this one since I'm happy to pass the first time. I would bid 3♣ the second time.

[aguahombre]

I fully understand the importance of being able to distinguish between 4 and more spades after a 1H overcall. I do not find it to be infrequent that I am dealt responding values (even substantial values) with nothing appropriate to bid and without a spade suit.

These hands include:

--a NT response without a heart stopper
--a 1H response with 4 small
--a 1D response to 1C

We have decided that showing a now-flawed responding hand immediately is better than trying to catch up or being shut out. We also have found that the times we lament being able to distinguish between 4 and more spades are less frequent than the desciples of the traditional negative double claim.

There isn't always a prohibitive advancing raise of hearts, and we often land on our feet if there is. Every once in a while opener has 4 spades anyway. Simple raises by advancer to 2H allow the support double, so we don't lose there after only showing 4+ spades. But a simple raise after we have passed with responding values could easily knock us out.

[the hog]

Bbradley62, on 2012-December-25, 00:51, said:

Does anyone in ACBLland actually play that a first-round double denies 4 spades, rather than shows 4 spades?

I am surprised at your question. This treatment is extremely common where I played. How else would you treat the example hand; bid 1NT without a stopper, pass? Is the presence of a 5th ♠ so important for you to show that you would ignore a method whereby you can show these problem hands? After all, you still retain your 1♠ bid. Curious!

[Bbradley62]

the hog, on 2012-December-25, 18:54, said:

I am surprised at your question. This treatment is extremely common where I played. How else would you treat the example hand; bid 1NT without a stopper, pass? Is the presence of a 5th ♠ so important for you to show that you would ignore a method whereby you can show these problem hands? After all, you still retain your 1♠ bid. Curious!

With the exception of a "guest appearance" at the 1995 Atlanta NABC, I haven't played any ACBL events (club through NABC) in 20 years, so I sometimes have to ask what current/modern treatments are. In my day, a negative double meant "I have enough to bid, but nothing specific to say". The vast majority of the time, this meant you had exactly 4 of the unbid major, but not in situations like this. So, having enough to bid but lacking five spades, a heart stopper and biddable club support, I'd double the first time.

[Lord Molyb]

Part 3: (what happened at the table)

---

3 hearts asks for a stopper. So, do you bid 3♠ or 4♣?