[lilboyman]

Question: If the doubler's hand was KQx, QJxx, xxx, Kxx showing the balance of power but short of game values, would the double be a good call and, if good, what do you respond now?

[han]

I would double with that and then we'd probably play in 3NT.

[sathyab]

gnasher, on Aug 7 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

I think that a direct 3♥ by responder is non-forcing; double and convert 3♦ to 3♥ is forcing.

Most people seem to be saying that they wouldn't bid 3h with only 5 hearts even if they're decent enough to play opposite a doubleton. If you agree with that proposition, you would be bidding 3♥ with some non-invitational six-baggers and doubling with the rest of them. If you double on a hand expecting partner to bid 3♦ which you would then correct to 3♥ showing a force, isn't it possible that he has a non-descript 1♦ opener with some defensive values say a hand such as ATxx xx KJxx Axx and pass ? While it may be perfectly fine to defend with that hand when opponents are Red, what if you're Red and opponents not ? I know there's loss of bidding accuracy when opponents preempt, but to make a bid that for its further description, relies on partner continuing the auction in a certain way while not requiring it, seems troubling.

[louisg]

sathyab, on Aug 8 2008, 02:55 PM, said:

Most people seem to be saying that they wouldn't bid 3h with only 5 hearts even if they're decent enough to play opposite a doubleton. If you agree with that proposition, you would be bidding 3♥ with some non-invitational six-baggers and doubling with the rest of them. If you double on a hand expecting partner to bid 3♦ which you would then correct to 3♥ showing a force, isn't it possible that he has a non-descript 1♦ opener with some defensive values say  a hand such as ATxx xx KJxx Axx and pass ? While it may be perfectly fine to defend with that hand when opponents are Red, what if you're Red and opponents not ? I know there's loss of bidding accuracy when opponents preempt, but to make a bid that for its further description, relies on partner continuing the auction in a certain way while not requiring it, seems troubling.

The reason that double followed by 3H is forcing is that it needs to contain enough values to run the risk that partner passes the double. Those who play this way would not double with "some non-invitational six-baggers" just for this reason. Forcing hands unwilling to hear partner pass the double must either cuebid (which would promise diamond support for some) or jump to 4H.

Not perfect of course, but doubling at this level must cater to the possibility that partner is stuck passing with the sort of non-descript hand that you suggest.

[han]

Sathya, if you have a good 1-suiter and you can't stand it if partner converts the double then perhaps you can bid 4H. If you are too good for that and you still can't stand defending then you could bid 5H. Or 4C if you are not sure hearts is the spot (but if so you would often start with a double).