[wclass___]

Scoring: IMP

1♥-P-2♣-2♠
3♦-3♠-4♣-4♠
P-P-6♣-P
P-X-P-P
P

---

[gnasher]

I don't much like South's 3♦. 6-5 is always nice, but it's a misfit and he has a minimum with bad suits.

Having bid 3♦, I think South had a clearcut double of 4♠. Making a forcing pass with a club void is really asking for trouble.

[JLOL]

Yeah south should double 4S (I don't mind 3D at all).

[mikeh]

gnasher, on May 27 2009, 10:38 AM, said:

I don't much like South's 3♦. 6-5 is always nice, but it's a misfit and he has a minimum with bad suits.

Having bid 3♦, I think South had a clearcut double of 4♠. Making a forcing pass with a club void is really asking for trouble.

I agree... I understand the urge to bid 3♦, but this hand has gone downhill really fast....

Good hand for good/bad 2N, if anyone plays it here: I don't, not when responder has bid 2/1, and I don't see any reason to change just because it would have worked here.

[jdonn]

I'm in favor of 3♦, and of course south should double 4♠.

[Cascade]

I prefer defensive tricks to double.

How does partner distinguish between this hand and one where you are also minimum but have ♠ KQx wasted?

[Codo]

I had passed 2 spade, denying the strength to rebid a newsuit at the 3. level facing a highly possible misfit.

When I am forced by system (or different judgement) to bid 3 ♦ I have to double 4♠ to deny my interest in 5 club.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

It would have been helpful, if 2NT (as some kind of Lebensohl / Good Bad)
would have been in place, to allow a differentiation between a good and a
bad 3D, I dont think, one needs a natural 2NT in this scenario, if you have
it, you can either make a forcing pass or a penalty double.

Not having this agreement in place and since pass instead of 3D would be
forcing, I think you have to bid 3D, because, if you pass and pull partners
double, this would show slam interest, so in effect the 3D bid limits openers
hand.

I also think, that because pass is forcing, 3D should show a 5 carder, i.e.
responder knowes, that the partnership has a fit.
Of course responder is looking at a 7 carder with AKQ, i.e. it is understandable,
that he insists on clubs.

I am not sure, what I would have done over 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Cascade, on May 27 2009, 08:56 PM, said:

I prefer defensive tricks to double.

How does partner distinguish between this hand and one where you are also minimum but have ♠ KQx wasted?

You already denied to hold KQx in spades with your 3D bid,
similiar you wont have xxx in spades.
Jx is not the max. holding you could have for a double, but also
not the min. holding.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

Cascade, on May 27 2009, 08:56 PM, said:

I prefer defensive tricks to double.

How does partner distinguish between this hand and one where you are also minimum but have ♠ KQx wasted?

There is unfortunately not room for distinguishing the multiple reasons you would want to say to partner "I have a strong preference for defending over declaring at this point", so we make due with what we have.

[wclass___]

Thanks for responses.

In the other room after the same auction opp bid 5♣ instead of 6♣ that slipped home.
I know that my partner(not regular) should have doubled... But i am not sure about mine 6♣ at all.

After such bidding bad breaks are very possible, or maybe we have 2 inevitable losers... Hasn't 4♣ already described what i have?
Anyway, in practise the one who makes last mistake gets abused.