[kfay]

Scoring: IMP

(1NT)-2♦*-(2♥)-3♦
(4♥)-X-(P)-?

---

2♦ shows diamonds and a major.

[han]

The opponents have a big heart fit so it looks like partner has spades and diamonds. I'd bid 4S.

[FrancesHinden]

Without any detailed discussion with partner on this sequence, i would assume that partner has diamonds and hearts and has doubled for penalties. It's none of my business - I have only 3 diamonds, and I have a side suit ace, what's the problem?

Perhaps RHO thought 2H was a transfer to spades and LHO didn't.

(It's a silly auction anyway: RHO bid 2H, usually meant as 'to play' and suddenly LHO can raise to game?)

[Apollo81]

I think this is the sort of situation where you need to know whether RHO could have intended 2♥ as a transfer. If I think that is at all likely then I'd pass. Otherwise I'd bid 4♠ since it's highly unlikely that partner's major is hearts.

[kfay]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 19 2007, 11:36 AM, said:

Perhaps RHO thought 2H was a transfer to spades and LHO didn't.

(It's a silly auction anyway: RHO bid 2H, usually meant as 'to play' and suddenly LHO can raise to game?)

Silly auctions happen. We have to deal. These are two competent opponents at a sectional tournament and 2♥ is definitely not a transfer. Isn't RHO converting 4♥X to 4♠? This seems like a silly consideration to me.

[keylime]

This is a thought-provoking hand.

It definitely looks like the 1NT bidder, assuming the standard 15-17 range, is trying to entice us as the intervening side into a large penalty. I wouldn't be surprised to see 5 spades in the 1NT bidder if I took a call now.

The pluses of my hand: 1. I own the club ace. 2. I have length in spades, to cover the other major. 3. I have a heart in case we defend. 4. I raised pard and he's doubled a voluntarily bid game.

The minuses: 1. If pard meant his double as takeout, then this could be a p'ship issue after the hand is over. 2. What kind of hand is the 1NT bidder raising to game on if it isn't based on a spade stack in addition to hearts? 3. Could it be offshape, like a 2-4-2-5 hand? 4. Pard found a double here - are they freakish enough to try to prompt me? 5. Is pard looking at only 1 hand and not catering to mine after my 3♦ raise - inferring a x-4-5-x?

I'm passing, and leading trumps immediately if they choose to leave it in hearts. Versus a spade pull tho, I'm smacking it.

Very good hand problem. Will send to my pard.

[han]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 19 2007, 11:36 AM, said:

Without any detailed discussion with partner on this sequence, i would assume that partner has diamonds and hearts and has doubled for penalties. It's none of my business - I have only 3 diamonds, and I have a side suit ace, what's the problem?

Perhaps RHO thought 2H was a transfer to spades and LHO didn't.

(It's a silly auction anyway: RHO bid 2H, usually meant as 'to play' and suddenly LHO can raise to game?)

Why is this a silly auction? Can't opener have a really good hand for hearts, so good that he thinks even 3H would be too little? Isn't that exactly what the auction sounds like? Assuming that we are playing a competent pair it seems really clear that this is the case, and that partner has a strong hand with spades and diamonds.

[han]

keylime, on Nov 19 2007, 12:17 PM, said:

It definitely looks like the 1NT bidder, assuming the standard 15-17 range, is trying to entice us as the intervening side into a large penalty. I wouldn't be surprised to see 5 spades in the 1NT bidder if I took a call now.

Are you human?

[jdonn]

Seems like partner has hearts. If I hadn't raised and the rest of the auction had been the same then it would be takeout, but I can't see that after raising.

[jdonn]

Hannie, on Nov 19 2007, 12:42 PM, said:

Why is this a silly auction? Can't opener have a really good hand for hearts, so good that he thinks even 3H would be too little?

Are you human?

[keylime]

Han,

Consider this for a moment.

Let's open 1NT on this hand: KJT9x AQJ xx KQx.

Our non-descript NT has become a monster if we the overcaller take a call other than pass. Additionally, it caters to EITHER major being trumps if you're not sure what the trump suit is. Remember, we're not having to be sane here since the opps took a non-forcing call of 2♥ and jacked it up to 4 without concern.

Since pard has doubled here, and you're staring at spade length, pard to me is barring me from another call. Maybe a hand of AQ KT9x Axxxx xx.

[ArtK78]

Thank partner for doubling 4♥ so that you are not tempted into bidding 4♠ on this auction.

Why is this a problem? The double is for penalties. There is no chance - ZERO CHANCE - that it is for takeout.

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Nov 19 2007, 06:55 PM, said:

Seems like partner has hearts. If I hadn't raised and the rest of the auction had been the same then it would be takeout, but I can't see that after raising.

Yes. Once I've raised partner's suit, double is for penalties.

(2S fit over 2H would have been cute, but unfortunately partner will think it means I've just got long spades and no diamond fit)

[whereagles]

Well, I for one think dbl is "hearts, wtp?"

[MFA]

Hmm, guess I don't know this defense.
Is it 5+♦, 4+M? Or 5+♦, 4M? Or 5/4 either way?
Why did I have to bid 3♦? Can't we get to spades over 2♥? Hmm.

Anyway. This double is penalty, I suppose, but partner doesn't have to have 4 hearts. Perhaps he is 4351 with enough cards for a penalty double. Or 4252, why not? Partner could be quite strong here.

4♠ is a bit tempting, but if partner does have spades, he tends to have aces (and kings) in ♠+♦, and secondary stuff in ♥ (+♣). So with our ♣A also, we should do fine against 4♥x.

[Codo]

I believe that anybody who reads less then 4 good Hearts in pds double is wrong. He has length and strength in Heart.

[han]

OK, so let me ask this dumb question. Not even considering that the opponents have shown a huge fit here, why is it better to play this double as penalties?

Isn't it far more likely that they will bid and raise the major that partner does not have? And therefore, won't "I have a strong hand with diamonds and spades" be a much more common occurance than "I have a strong hand with hearts and diamonds"? Also, wouldn't you want to double when you have a strong hand with spades and diamonds, giving partner the opportunity to pass or pull, while you can happily pass when the opponents stumbled into your second suit?

If your partnership has a generic rule that makes this double a clear penalty double then ok, I can't argue with that. But isn't it (a) more useful to play thise one as takeout and ( very likely that partner intented it as takeout given the auction?

[Blofeld]

I think Han's reasoning makes sense.

[ArtK78]

The problem with playing the double as strong without the suit is that there is not much out there for it to be strong. LHO's 1NT opening showed 15-17 (at least, I am assuming that is true since I was not told otherwise). Partner has shown two suits - diamonds and a major. RHO competed to 2♥. That does not show a bust (and it is illogical to bid with a bust), but it should be to play. I have an ace. There just isn't that much left for partner to have a strong hand.

And, if partner does have a strong hand with spades and diamonds, why doesn't he just bid 4♠? I have already bid diamonds freely, so if he does have a strong distributional hand he knows that diamonds is safe if I cannot stand spades. And if I had good hearts, I would not have bid 3♦ freely over 2♥ without very good diamonds.

[By the way, I still don't understand why I didn't bid 2♠ over 2♥ assuming that 2♥ is natural.]

Partner rates to have a reasonable hand - probably in the 13-16 point range. But that doesn't mean that he should double without trumps on this auction. If he has an offensive powerhouse, he can bid. If not, he can pass - unless he knows he has 4♥ beat and does not fear a run.

The basic principal behind DONT (and that appears to be what your side is playing) is to get into the auction and out of the auction as quickly as possible. Double should mean double. Bids should mean what they say. Getting into the opponent's 1NT auctions usually puts them on the defensive, complicating their auctions. If you are going to start to make nebulous doubles in situations like this, you are defeating the purpose of DONT - you are complicating your own auction.