[TWO4BRIDGE]

han, on 2011-July-15, 16:09, said:

The agreement I have with my regular partner is not transfer based, and I can't say whether it is clever, but it is more specific about suit lengths. Double promises 4+ spades but does not promise or deny 4+ hearts.

I'm interested in the method also.

One expert had a similar agreement after ( which she said originated in the Memphis area ):

1C - ( 1D ) - ??

1H = 4+
1S = 5+
and " Negative doubles at all levels guarantee spades and say nada about hearts. "

Since she said " at all levels", I'm assuming after:
1D - ( 2C ) - ??

2H = 4+
2S = 5+
and
DBL = 4 spades and "says nada about hearts"

[jogs]

jmcw, on 2011-July-16, 10:30, said:

A negative free bid was not an option. 2 of a new suit would show 10+ and be F1.

The double showed a minimum of about 8 with no upper limit if balanced.

1♦ - (2♣) - X

I have no idea if there is a consensus way to play this neg dbl?
I prefer new suit non-forcing.

♠K43 ♥ KQJ76 ♦ 543 ♣ 64

1♦ - (2♣) - X - (p)
2♦ - (p) - 2♥ non forcing

seems safer than

1♦ - (2♣) - X - (p)
2NT - (p) - 3♥ non forcing

At least that's how I feel.

If dbl then 2♥ is forcing, how would you bid the hand shown?

[whereagles]

jogs, on 2011-July-16, 06:55, said:

Assuming the OP is not playing neg free bids. With
♠ K43 ♥ KQJ76 ♦ 543 ♣ 64
Doesn't responder wish to be allowed to show hearts
on the two level?

Yes, but you can't have it all so I would try 2♥ on that hand. I'm a passed hand anyway, so pard won't take me too seriously.

[kenberg]

I would also bid 2♥ with that example hand with five hearts, and I would do it passed hand or not. It's forcing but not game forcing, I have a good five card suit and a hand with decent values. With a lesser hand I have a problem, but not with this one.


With the original hand I guess I try 2NT. I am glad to see the hand posted because I think this frequent situation is not well treated in the literature. After 2NT, partner knows that I have at least four diamonds (I have to have four of something) and so there is something to be said for taking me back to diamonds whenever he is, say, 4=3=4=2. If he is 4=4=2=3 maybe spades would have been better but that's not certain. Nothing works all the time.

[jogs]

kenberg, on 2011-July-16, 17:02, said:

. Nothing works all the time.

That's certainly true. When opponents put pressure on us, we'll be lucky to be right 60-70% of the time. Cohen and Bergen say bid up to the level of your trumps. But they neglect to mention that flat patterns are unlucky. With a 4-4 fit and 20 HCP, the expected tricks is 7 1/2, not 8. Flat patterns produce fewer tricks than trumps.
2♦ gives the partnership a greater chance of declaring on the two level. Which should lead to a greater percentage of plus results.

[the_dude]

IIRC, a very similar hand was the topic of one of those "Expert's Forums" in the 90s. The voting was pretty evenly divided between 2D (good suit, most flexible), 2H (cheapest major), and 2S (best major). It's a crap shoot more or less...

[jmcw]

the_dude, on 2011-July-17, 17:29, said:

IIRC, a very similar hand was the topic of one of those "Expert's Forums" in the 90s. The voting was pretty evenly divided between 2D (good suit, most flexible), 2H (cheapest major), and 2S (best major). It's a crap shoot more or less...

Was 2NT considered?, or just an oversight on your post?.

Can 2NT ever be right here?, if so what should it show?

[the_dude]

jmcw, on 2011-July-17, 20:33, said:

Was 2NT considered?, or just an oversight on your post?.

Can 2NT ever be right here?, if so what should it show?

It wasn't an oversight on my part .. I just do not remember it being one of the popular choices of the panel.

That being said, my understanding is that most experts play 2NT on this auction can be made on a good 14 and does *not* show 18-19 balanced. It wouldn't be my choice, though, as it is the most space-consuming of actions and not necessarily the best contract.

[jogs]

the_dude, on 2011-July-18, 09:32, said:

It wasn't an oversight on my part .. I just do not remember it being one of the popular choices of the panel.

That being said, my understanding is that most experts play 2NT on this auction can be made on a good 14 and does *not* show 18-19 balanced. It wouldn't be my choice, though, as it is the most space-consuming of actions and not necessarily the best contract.

It's probably never right to bid 2NT. Bypasses three steps. The vast majority of the time we want to play on the two level and not 2NT. 4333 produces fewer tricks than all other patterns.

[pirate22]

i play negative x's in all positions But with "Full Range neg x's"
as follows....... this is important..

a neg x = 8-11 points any shape.
1n/t=12-14 with a stop.
3cl = 12-14 no stop
2n/t=15+ with stop.
SO WITH THE HANDS SHOWN-the opener {1D} knows the combined count
with each reply...... so rebid 2n/t,which tells the neg x,
you have no 4 card major,remember the x has any shape....
if the neg x now bids a major it will have 5 cards and be somewhere
in the 10/11 points.

PLUS THE FACT IF THE BIDDING GOES-- 1D--2CL--2H/2SP/2D--
THIS WILL SHOW LESS THAN 8 POINTS,and competing.

also if pard passes 2cl he is also less than 8 points