[jillybean]

---

I hope you agree with the double, what now?

[CSGibson]

I don't actually agree with the double - I think this is a 3N overcall, since you don't want partner to go to spades. X than 3N would, for me, show tolerance for spades, while a 3N overcall right away implies no tolerance for spades. Right now you are in trouble - there is no call to accurately describe your hand, since partner should correct 3N to 4♠ with 5 or 6 spades, 3♦ isn't forcing, and 3♥ will be construed as a spade raise, most likely.

[jillybean]

Is double then a new suit not forcing?

[mgoetze]

I think double-then-3[d] is OK at IMPs, at Matchpoints I would have just bid 3NT.

[Hanoi5]

A new suit after a double shows a very good hand but there are times when partner may choose to pass. In this case I think we'll be fine in 3♦ if partner decides to pass but he'd bid anything with the proper cards to make a game. S/he already showed a bad hand so the ♦K should look like a game going value; hopefully.

[VM1973]

Even if you can find and buy 6♦ you're likely to run into bad breaks after the preempt. I say 3NT.

[cherdano]

jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 00:31, said:

Is double then a new suit not forcing?

No. It shows a hand too strong to overcall, but that doesn't mean it's good enough to force to game opposite nothing. If you want to force, you have to cue.

[jillybean]

Yeah of course 3♦ is nf and that is where I played, opposite Axxx,xx,J9xx,JTx.

I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.

[ArtK78]

jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:

Yeah of course 3♦ is nf and that is where I played, opposite Axxx,xx,J9xx,JTx.

I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.

Partner should take another call over 3♦ on those cards. As has been stated above, double followed by 3♦ shows a very strong hand - one too strong to overcall 3♦. Given that a 3♦ overcall should be quite sound to begin with, double followed by 3♦ shows a VERY strong hand - just short of a game force. With a side Ace and four card support to the J, partner should not pass. In fact, partner should be thinking in terms of slam. It is not unreasonable for you to have the exact hand that you had (even without the ♠K) and slam has a lot of play. Game should definitely be bid, whether it is in NT or in diamonds.

[han]

jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:

Yeah of course 3♦ is nf and that is where I played, opposite Axxx,xx,J9xx,JTx.

I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.

3D may be too much of an underbid though, but certainly partner's pass was.

[Hanoi5]

jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:

Yeah of course 3♦ is nf and that is where I played, opposite Axxx,xx,J9xx,JTx.

I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.

He might bid 2♠ with the same hand but lacking the ♠A? Then 3♥ doesn't seem crazy/abnormal after your sequence. Lacking the ♠A 3NT could easily go down, so I stand by the 3♦ rebid.

[benlessard]

I play 2nt as good 16 to 19 so X followed by 2nt seems normal. Ive seen too many optimist 3Nt going down.