[MrAce]

---

Teams, 1♦ was std 2/1, 1♠ showed 5+, expert opponents and WC pd.

[ggwhiz]

Double, card showing and trusting that partner will not be leaving it in due to my heart holding.

That way I can hear about doubleton spade support (and raise to 3♠) or get to 3♦ in a manner that invites without hanging or other things I am not entirely uncomfortable with.

Mind you if partner passes the double they have a stiff spade and if I'm east they may have 3 hearts too.

[CSGibson]

double looks right, agree with reasoning laid out by the previous poster. I don't hate 2♠ or 3♦ either, but they don't really do justice to my hand, so I think of those as lesser choices, approximately equal in value. If partner leaves in the double, at least we have 2 aces and a singleton.

[wank]

Yes double. Hand is way too good for 3d or 2s. Not sure why people are worried about it being passed out.

[Hanoi5]

I'd double. Hopefully partner will support with two cards... What to do over 3♣ is the interesting question...

[Endymion77]

Double, and of course partner will support with a doubleton honor as he didn't bid over 2♥. If he bids 3♣, 3♦ should be invitational. If he bids 3♦, I would raise to 4♦.

[gszes]

If this were MP I would strongly consider passing and hoping to get +200 in 2h but at IMPS

it is just too great a risk missing a vul game for a paltry 2-3 imps. Once that decision is made

x

seems to be the best of all worlds since it leaves us well positioned for anything p bids next

and ecstatic if by some chance p passes (very unlikely unless playing ggwhiz:).

[kenrexford]

Recurring problem that is much easier with intermediate js (8-11).

[the hog]

X is ok. 2S isreasonable as well.

[CSGibson]

wank, on 2013-December-13, 15:06, said:

Not sure why people are worried about it being passed out.

I don't think anyone's worried; I think they are salivating if partner thinks its right to defend

[akhare]

X seems to the best choice; if playing with a random pard, 2♠ is a reasonable alternative.

[MrAce]

Are you all assuming that we play wjs, to suggest that 2♠ is reasonable at team game ? FYI, wjs was not available.

I thought 2♠ would be a bizzarre bid, regardless of it is the winning bid or not.....I mean we have a 1♠ opener if you are an aggressive player. If you don't like 1♠ opening, which is perfectly normal not to open, we can say "we have close to 1♠ opening" In either case, 2 ♠ would be a gross underbid of the hand as responder at teams, don't you think ?

[the hog]

MrAce, on 2013-December-15, 17:23, said:

Are you all assuming that we play wjs, to suggest that 2♠ is reasonable at team game ? FYI, wjs was not available.

I thought 2♠ would be a bizzarre bid, regardless of it is the winning bid or not.....I mean we have a 1♠ opener if you are an aggressive player. If you don't like 1♠ opening, which is perfectly normal not to open, we can say "we have close to 1♠ opening" In either case, 2 ♠ would be a gross underbid of the hand as responder at teams, don't you think ?

I don't think 2S is bizarre at all. 2S certainly suggests reasonable values. I would think the bid suggested by one poster above as 2S Intermediate, would be bizarre. This is not close to an intermediate 2S bid in terms of spade quality.
A 2S fit jump immediately would have been a nice bid.

[MrAce]

the hog, on 2013-December-15, 22:24, said:

I don't think 2S is bizarre at all. 2S certainly suggests reasonable values. I would think the bid suggested by one poster above as 2S Intermediate, would be bizarre. This is not close to an intermediate 2S bid in terms of spade quality.
A 2S fit jump immediately would have been a nice bid.

LOL

[MrAce]

---

This was what pd had, open room played part score in spades after South made a "reasonable" 2♠ bid, other table bid and made 6♦ (idk their auction at the other table) Which was -15 imps

[gnasher]

I think the North hand should bid 3♦ over 2♥. A takeout double would be a good choice too, but I assume you were unelightenedly playing support doubles.

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2013-December-16, 04:33, said:

I think the North hand should bid 3♦ over 2♥. A takeout double would be a good choice too, but I assume you were unelightenedly playing support doubles.

Yes dbl would be 3 card spades, even though 1♠ showed 5+, it's of course debatable which is better. N believed 3♦ would be better hand than this, probably because he was playing with a conservative pd and he would expect much more than this. See... being extremely conservative can hit you in different ways. Imo S not only underbid his hand grossly by 2♠ but also affected his pd. But this is just a guess, i may be wrong. They didn't comment on the bidding afterwards.

Btw, what do you think of 2♠ Andy ? By South over 2♥ and not playing wjs.

[jogs]

MrAce, on 2013-December-16, 02:43, said:

---

This was what pd had, open room played part score in spades after South made a "reasonable" 2♠ bid, other table bid and made 6♦ (idk their auction at the other table) Which was -15 imps

Hands fit perfectly.

---

Is there a game with these hands?

[mikeh]

MrAce, on 2013-December-16, 02:43, said:

---

This was what pd had, open room played part score in spades after South made a "reasonable" 2♠ bid, other table bid and made 6♦ (idk their auction at the other table) Which was -15 imps

I have no idea, and I suspect you don't, either, about how NS would or even could plausibly reach 6♦ if S were to reopen with your suggested double.

As it happens, I think the N hand has a borderline direct 3♦ on the basis of the K10 of spades and the stiff heart both being upgradable values. I suspect many, including Andy, would see 3♦ as 'clear' rather than borderline, but I am a conservative bidder by inclination.

Over 3♦, the South hand grows up significantly. The stiff club and the 2 Aces are huge, and it is fairly easy to see decent minimums on which slam is excellent. Exactly how the auction proceeds is not clear, but I can see starting with an ambiguous cue of 3♥, marking time, and following N's 3♠ with 4♦ and we may be on our way.

So if the notion is 'assign the responsibility' for missing slam: it is North all the way as far as I can see.

I don't even know that starting with a double, in the OP situation, necessarily even gets us to game. N bids what? 2♠? The same call he'd make on Qx xx AJ10xxx KQx?

Now, I happen to think that S should take another call and that N will, on the actual hand, bid game, but I think it an error to focus the discussion of this hand on S.

[ggwhiz]

After the double of 2♥ I expect it to go

2♠ - 3♠ and on a good day
4♦ - 4♥

and on a really good day 6♦ is possible but missing game is definitely not on decent fitting hands.

I guess south could be inspired enough to bid 5♦ over a 4♠ continuation (it looks like a better game than 4♠ over jogs ill fitting construction) and get raised here but I am seldom (as in never?) that sharp.

With the south hand I only had game ambitions and don't see a problem with focusing them on spades AFTER finding out whether partner has 2 of them at the 2 level which you can only discern by starting with a double....and I'm only inviting after that so 6♦ is only remotely in play.