[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2021-April-15, 15:00, said:

Double stopper in ♣, K♠ following the strong hand - I'm counting 8 tricks with an extra one from partner with responder passing.

Oh, X followed by 3nt

[mycroft]

1♣-X-1♥-p;2♥ - 3♦ now? What does partner think they need to bid 3NT? 4♦? what if partner advances 1♠, and still 2♥?
1♣-X-3♣-p;p - 3♦ now? 3NT and hope? Surely partner will never bid 3NT.

When third hand passes, or when you have the higher suit, double-and-bid is great, both with this hand and when you just overcall (and partner doesn't have to protect this hand). When third hand doesn't pass, at best you're neutral; frequently behind.

Having said that, I don't consider double-and-bid with this hand wrong; but I wouldn't want any less, and I bid 1♦ (playing standard).

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2021-April-15, 15:06, said:

Oh, X followed by 3nt

No X-that suggests a stronger hand if you follow up with 3NT for me. Not really a Gambling 3NT as you have a stronger hand the 1♣ bid and expect a ♣ lead?

[sfi]

jillybean, on 2021-April-15, 14:22, said:

For me and I imagine everyone else, this is a clear 1♦ overcall.

It's not worth a double and bid in diamonds, but I might double and bid NT on the hand.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-April-15, 11:11, said:

this is a matter of style, when I polled xxx, void, AKx, AKQ10xxx over 1♥ on bridgewinners, of those that chose between 2♣ and x (a load chose 3♥), it was 13:3 in favour of the simple overcall.

That hand plays stronger than this one for me despite the lower HCP count so I X and bid 3♣ initially over 1♥

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2021-April-15, 22:46, said:

That hand plays stronger than this one for me despite the lower HCP count so I X and bid 3♣ initially over 1♥

I am completely baffled by your posts, you said earlier..

mw64ahw, on 2021-April-15, 14:35, said:

That's worth a 3NT overcall

and then

mw64ahw, on 2021-April-15, 15:00, said:

Double stopper in ♣, K♠ following the strong hand - I'm counting 8 tricks with an extra one from partner with responder passing.

and

mw64ahw, on 2021-April-15, 22:36, said:

No X-that suggests a stronger hand if you follow up with 3NT for me. Not really a Gambling 3NT as you have a stronger hand the 1♣ bid and expect a ♣ lead?

I think the replies have become disjointed, at least they have for me!

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2021-April-16, 01:47, said:

I am completely baffled by your posts, you said earlier..


and then

and

I think the replies have become disjointed, at least they have for me!

They are consistent for me

3NT would be my call on East's hand (16+ points/stopper & decent minor), because of the double ♣ stopper and K♠ & because I can count 8 tricks. (♥s could be an issue, but that's the risk I take)
X followed by 3NT would suggest an Extra-Strong hand 21+points. With a slightly different ♦ orientated hand where I couldn't count 8 tricks it would be X followed by 2♦ as per the bidding above.

The example provided by Cyberyeti is (xxx, void, AKx, AKQ10xxx) is a different type of hand that won't play in 3NT). I X that and then bid at the 3 level to show a Strong hand. This hand is offensively stronger for me with a modified loosing trick count of 3.5 versus 6 for East's ♦orientated hand.

[Winstonm]

AL78, on 2021-April-15, 14:32, said:

I would double then bid diamonds with that hand. Seven playing tricks and the ♠K is likely a trick given an entry to dummy. If a simple overcall can be done on a hand that good, it puts a lot of pressure on partner to find a bid with a scattered 7 or 8 count or risk missing game. The hand is so good that 3NT is there with just one trick opposite, admittedly thanks to a very favourable layout.

That's cutting it awfully close when the only reason it makes is because west holds the 7 of hearts.

[Douglas43]

I'd Double. Just too good for an overcall with KQJ10xx and AK, K.

[Douglas43]

Winstonm, on 2021-April-16, 07:46, said:

That's cutting it awfully close when the only reason it makes is because west holds the 7 of hearts.

The 8 or 10 would also do the job.

[Winstonm]

Douglas43, on 2021-April-16, 12:04, said:

The 8 or 10 would also do the job.

On this particular deal it’s the 7 as south holds neither 8 or 10

[Douglas43]

Winstonm, on 2021-April-16, 12:19, said:

On this particular deal it's the 7 as south holds neither 8 or 10

I think maybe we are cross purposes. I thought you meant on the layout of the heart suit the 7 is crucial. From the viewpoint of the partnership (assuming West has A but not K or Q and knowing east has J9) I think West's suit is good enough if West has 4 cards headed by the Ace and including 10, 8 or 7. Assuming that we ignore, A, K, Q, J and 9, there are three spaces in West's suit and the chance that none of these is the 10, 8 or 7 is 5/8 x 4/7 x 3/6 or less than 20%.More than 80% of the time, West has one of these cards.

Very sorry if you meant something different.

(I am assuming that replying to the take-out double at the minimum level shows 0-7hcp and then raising shows better than minimum, say 4-7hcp)

[Winstonm]

Douglas43, on 2021-April-17, 11:44, said:

I think maybe we are cross purposes. I thought you meant on the layout of the heart suit the 7 is crucial. From the viewpoint of the partnership (assuming West has A but not K or Q and knowing east has J9) I think West's suit is good enough if West has 4 cards headed by the Ace and including 10, 8 or 7. Assuming that we ignore, A, K, Q, J and 9, there are three spaces in West's suit and the chance that none of these is the 10, 8 or 7 is 5/8 x 4/7 x 3/6 or less than 20%.More than 80% of the time, West has one of these cards.

Very sorry if you meant something different.

(I am assuming that replying to the take-out double at the minimum level shows 0-7hcp and then raising shows better than minimum, say 4-7hcp)

No problem whatsoever. All I meant was on this deal opening leader cannot overtake the third heart because of the 7 in dummy - so declarer can win the first or second heart. Ducking hearts twice dooms the contract. In other words, if you exchange the 7 and the 6 in the two hands, the contract cannot be made on a low heart lead.

[jillybean]

jillybean, on 2021-April-14, 19:19, said:

---

Stephen Tu, on 2021-April-14, 21:26, said:

You already screwed up the first round of the auction. You can still have a spade fit at this point, partner can have a very strong 4x5+x hand. When you have both majors and not enough to cue bid, you should bid 1S first so that you can comfortably bid 2H next if partner cues or bids 2d. Then on this auction if partner prefers to 2S you can bid 3D.

This is unlike responding to a minor suit opening bid. This is because when responding to an opening bid, opener is expected to bid major suits up the line after your forcing response, so bidding lower of 4 cd suits reveals either fit. After a takeout double, doubler won't bid spades over 1h since that shows 5+. Bidding higher ranking allows you to show both more economically without getting awkwardly high if doubler takes a preference, and get both suits in if opps compete to 2c only.

I've discussed this with my partner and we don't understand West bidding S first here. We don't see a problem in allowing the doubler to bid 1♠/1♥ with 4.
1♠ followed by 2♥ appears to bury the ♥ suit or misrepresent length of the ♠ suit.

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2021-April-18, 14:04, said:

I've discussed this with my partner and we don't understand West bidding S first here. We don't see a problem in allowing the doubler to bid 1♠/1♥ with 4.
1♠ followed by 2♥ appears to bury the ♥ suit or misrepresent length of the ♠ suit.

The reason W bids spades first as is ABSOLUTELY expert standard is so you can bid naturally and not have to worry that when the auction goes 1♦-X-P-1♥-P-2♣ that you've missed a spade fit.

If you bid 1♠ then 2♥, you can get back to 2♠, if you bid 1♥ then 2♠ you can't get back to 2♥, and if opener rebids 1♠ with a longer minor you'll play a 4-2 spade fit opposite a bust with a 6-4 minor suit fit.

[AL78]

jillybean, on 2021-April-18, 14:04, said:

I've discussed this with my partner and we don't understand West bidding S first here. We don't see a problem in allowing the doubler to bid 1♠/1♥ with 4.
1♠ followed by 2♥ appears to bury the ♥ suit or misrepresent length of the ♠ suit.

Responding to a takeout double is not the same as opening in a suit followed by bidding a new suit. Responding with the higher ranked major means that in the awkward case your partner bids a new suit (like here), you can show both your suits at the two level and have the option of playing in either of them there. If you ahow the hearts and partner bids a new suit, if you then show the spades you are forcing the auction to the three level when partner wants to show preference for your hearts.

[jillybean]

jillybean, on 2021-April-14, 19:19, said:

---

Won't partner expect 5♠, 4♥'s, or do I support ♦ and bury a potential ♥ fit?

[Cyberyeti]

jillybean, on 2021-April-18, 14:48, said:

Won't partner expect 5♠, 4♥'s, or do I support ♦ and bury a potential ♥ fit?

Partner should know this only guarantees 4-4. It's complicated because you also have 3 diamonds, if he bids 2♠ you can pull to 3♦ and I think this shows 443.