[Antrax]

Matchpoints.

---

According to partnership understanding, west's double is takeout-ish. Denies a minimum overcall and generally expects partner to do something smart by saying "hey, we can compete further, help me out here". So how does east help him out there?

[BunnyGo]

What were the colours?

I think that East passes to help West out.

[Antrax]

R/R, the diagram is accurate (also correct spot cards).
As an aside, soon welcome to Haifa

[jillybean]

2♠

[P_Marlowe]

2S.

The alternative being 2H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Overlooked the fact, that they opened 1H,
so 2H is out.

[jonottawa]

I'm going to guess to pass. I think we beat it over half the time. Somebody's getting a top and somebody's getting a zero.

I like 2♥ as a very close 2nd choice. Let partner place the contract. It should tend to show something like this. If he has ♠ that will play well opposite xx I think we'll hear about them soon.

[Lurpoa]

Antrax, on 2011-June-14, 23:10, said:

Matchpoints.

---

According to partnership understanding, west's double is takeout-ish. Denies a minimum overcall and generally expects partner to do something smart by saying "hey, we can compete further, help me out here". So how does east help him out there?

3NT is still a possibility.
Unlees they are red, and we not (in which case I pass), I would bid 2NT: confirming a good 1NT bid,and indicating the ♦ stopper.

[JLOGIC]

2S. Our hand is not good, we have only a jack in partners suits and no fit. We don't have good enough diamonds to pass, and we expect to make 2S.

[ggwhiz]

I'm passing. We have nicely over 1/2 the deck and all defence, no offence cards.

If they make this (which they might) it seems like they need the kind of distribution that will bury 2♠.

[Antrax]

At the table I passed, though after reading suggestions here 2♠ does sound like a good idea. 2♦ made +1 for an absolute bottom, but I think it was mainly due to a play mistake partner made: He chose to lead ♠A and dummy turned up with ♠QTxxx ♥x ♦xx ♣K or Q fifth, not sure. I played the ♠7 (standard count/attiture) and declarer played low. At this point he switched to a club that declarer won in dummy, played a heart to her ace, rufffed a heart, ruffed a spade, ruffed a heart, ruffed a club, conceded a diamond, ruffed my return, drew trumps, gave a heart to my K and lost another trick at the endgame.
So, you will first of all notice that with a 6-5 distribution she chose to open her five card suit, and her partner didn't give a false preference, which is annoying to some degree. But more importantly, I think a trump lead or at least an immediate switch after cashing the spade ace is immediately obvious, since partner sees heart shortness in dummy and knows declarer must be short in spades, and knows declarer must have some losers in hearts due to my 1NT bid. Right?

[ggwhiz]

Yeah a trump switch stands out for -180?

That shouldn't be a complete disaster as a 2♠ runout will/should be doubled and down.

[Antrax]

Isn't it 200 to us on a trump switch? I take the ♦A and lead back a trump. Now I have two heart winners (partner may have a third one if he has the J or T) and we can work on partner's club without allowing declarer a chance to use dummy's spades in any way. The bad guys take five diamond tricks, one heart and one club, not sure where their eighth will come from.

[BunnyGo]

Antrax, on 2011-June-15, 10:54, said:

Isn't it 200 to us on a trump switch? I take the ♦A and lead back a trump. Now I have two heart winners (partner may have a third one if he has the J or T) and we can work on partner's club without allowing declarer a chance to use dummy's spades in any way. The bad guys take five diamond tricks, one heart and one club, not sure where their eighth will come from.

Do you remember all 4 hands (at least the shapes of them if not all specific spots)?

[ArtK78]

I would bid 2♠ at any colors.

Partner made a takeout double (alright, OP said a "takeout-ish" double). So, absent some very compelling reason to do otherwise, I takeout the double. A8xx of diamonds along with some heart cards is not a compelling reason to sit for 2♦x. I suspect that the opps will make 2♦ more than half the time on this auction when I hold this hand.

If you reverse my red suits I would sit for 2♦x.

[Antrax]

Declarer had five hearts (AJxxx), six good diamonds (something like KQJxxx), a stiff club honor (I think) and a singleton small spade.
Dummy had two small diamonds, the heart five, five spades QTxxx and five clubs with some honor fifth.
I had the hand posted, partner had the rest. Don't think we could make 2♠ (though that's the call I would make in retrospect, if only because partner's declarer play is stronger than our partnership defense), but didn't really enjoy defending 2♦ doubled.

[mgoetze]

Antrax, on 2011-June-15, 23:32, said:

Declarer had five hearts (AJxxx), six good diamonds (something like KQJxxx), a stiff club honor (I think) and a singleton small spade.
Dummy had two small diamonds, the heart five, five spades QTxxx and five clubs with some honor fifth.
I had the hand posted, partner had the rest.

So the rest was something like a 5314 12-count? In that case I'd say double was, uh, slightly unreasonable.

[Antrax]

Oh. What was he supposed to do, then? Wait for me to balance?

[matmat]

Antrax, on 2011-June-16, 09:01, said:

Oh. What was he supposed to do, then? Wait for me to balance?

It's sort of annoying to have to dig through the whole thread to reconstruct p's hand, but, if my abacus served me right, p was something like:
AQxxx, xxx, x Axxx
?
It is, of course, a clear 1♠ overcall, but (and I might be resulting here) I think doubling 2♦ is a little much.

[Antrax]

Sorry, I don't remember what he had precisely, I think he had one more club honor (something like ATxx) and he had the spade AKJxx.

[Antrax]

Looking at the score sheet, the other results for the board were +130, +120, +90 (?!) for the bad guys or -100, -200, -500 for our side, so I guess we were beating 2♦ on proper defense.