[han]

Playing IMPs, all white, you hold x Qxxxx x AK10xxx.

LHO opens 1NT (15-17) RHO (Steve Landen) bids 2H, transfer. What is your plan?

Are you going to show both suits, or just one?

If Steve bids 3NT next, do you act over that?

[the hog]

I bid 2S showing H and a minor

[Free]

The_Hog, on Jan 24 2005, 05:38 AM, said:

I bid 2S showing H and a minor

Nice one, I might find that at the table as well.

After 3NT I'll pass, since all suits won't break nicely

[joker_gib]

The_Hog, on Jan 23 2005, 11:38 PM, said:

I bid 2S showing H and a minor

Same for me !

[shanbari]

2s by me either, however i suspect 3c could be winning bid here, due to 3nt contract. isn't it ?

shan

[Fasteddy]

I'm not sure 2S shows hearts and a minor without prior agreement. Might it not simply be a takeout of spades? I'd bid 3C. If I could bid spades at the 3-level, I'd do so. Over 3NT, I'd pass.

[inquiry]

Fasteddy, on Jan 25 2005, 10:46 PM, said:

I'm not sure 2S shows hearts and a minor without prior agreement. Might it not simply be a takeout of spades? I'd bid 3C. If I could bid spades at the 3-level, I'd do so. Over 3NT, I'd pass.

The theory (if you want to add a theory) is that 2♠ is a michales cue-bid, and it is certainly playable. I prefer, however, what I think you are suggesting.. here it is spelled out...

1NT-Pass-2H-?

DBL = hearts
2S = takeout other suits
2NT = "super unusual positive", any two suiter (clubs and diamonds, hearts and diamonds, hearts and club)... responder bids three card suits up the line, and I can use equal level conversion.

Either way works, but I prefer the flexibility of 2S as general takeout.

Ben

[Winstonm]

I don't like the quality of my heart suit for sacrifice purposes, the opps seem to hold spades, the master suit, and my partner is going to be on lead and I don't want him/her to lead a heart.

I'm a 3 club bidder here. If I had the QJ10 of hearts I would show the two suiter.

WinstonM

[luis]

3c, if they are going to play the hand I want a club lead.
I'm surprised nobody mentioned clubs.

[jillybean]

The_Hog, on Jan 23 2005, 09:38 PM, said:

I bid 2S showing H and a minor

So this is michaels over a transfer, I like it!

1nt - p - 2H - 2S showing H&minor
1nt - p - 2D - 2H showing S&minor

Could I expect a pickup partner to know this?

Is michaels with 5/4 ok or do you always promise 5/5?

jillybean2

[Free]

jillybean2, on Jan 26 2005, 04:55 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Jan 23 2005, 09:38 PM, said:

I bid 2S showing H and a minor

So this is michaels over a transfer, I like it!

1nt - p - 2H - 2S showing H&minor
1nt - p - 2D - 2H showing S&minor

Could I expect a pickup partner to know this?

Is michaels with 5/4 ok or do you always promise 5/5?

jillybean2

I usually play as follows:

IF my Major will be played at least at 3-level, you need 55+
IF my Major can be played at 2-level, then I only need 5+M and 4+m

So:

1♥ - 2♥ promisses 5+♠ and 4+m
1♠ - 2♠ promisses 5+♥ and 5+m

[fred]

inquiry, on Jan 26 2005, 04:06 AM, said:

Fasteddy, on Jan 25 2005, 10:46 PM, said:

I'm not sure 2S shows hearts and a minor without prior agreement. Might it not simply be a takeout of spades? I'd bid 3C. If I could bid spades at the 3-level, I'd do so. Over 3NT, I'd pass.

The theory (if you want to add a theory) is that 2♠ is a michales cue-bid, and it is certainly playable. I prefer, however, what I think you are suggesting.. here it is spelled out...

1NT-Pass-2H-?

DBL = hearts
2S = takeout other suits
2NT = "super unusual positive", any two suiter (clubs and diamonds, hearts and diamonds, hearts and club)... responder bids three card suits up the line, and I can use equal level conversion.

Either way works, but I prefer the flexibility of 2S as general takeout.

Ben

Well I suppose the time had to come sooner or later. Remarkably, this is the first time that I can recall that I completely disagree with one of Ben's posts!

I think you should play the "cuebid" of the transfer suit as Michaels and pass with the "general takeout" hand.

The reason is that, because of the transfer, you are sure to get another chance to bid. You should take advantage of this opportunity and listen to another round of bidding. You can then double at your next turn with the "general takeout" hand if it seems like a smart thing to do (for example, if RHO's next call is pass you can double for takeout, but if RHO's next call is 3NT you will be happy that you stayed out of the auction).

When you have a 5-6 hand like the one in question here, you don't care that much how strong the opponents are - you want to get into the auction and do so at a safe level. If instead you have, say, a 1444 13-count, it is best to wait and see where the opps are going before deciding whether or not you want to be involved.

Ben's approach will work better than mine on some deals, but I feel pretty strongly that my approach will gain more than it loses.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[fred]

Here is another example of the same principle (though I don't think it applies quite as strongly here):

Should a double of Drury be "takeout of the major opened" or "lead directing"?

As far as I can tell there is no strong consensus among the expert community in this area, but I think there is a clearly "right" answer to this question. I will post my reasoning after people have had a chance to think about this.

Maybe I should have created a new thread for this, but this situation is analogous in some ways to the issues being discussed in this thread.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[inquiry]

I actually have a cup-half full agreement here...

If their major is hearts, double is takeout. If their major is spades, double is lead directing. So all I can say, is every onee will probably agree with me on half the hands... lol.... My logic is we are unliley to out bid them is their suit is spades, so I want the lead directing benefit of the double then... if they have hearts, we have a chance to outbid them a tthe two or three level if we can find a fit in spades.

Ben

[shanbari]

fred, on Jan 26 2005, 08:34 PM, said:

Here is another example of the same principle (though I don't think it applies quite as strongly here):

Should a double of Drury be "takeout of the major opened" or "lead directing"?

...

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

regarding to drury, i would choose 2s cuebid as michael, double of 2c/2d drury as compete bid with that suit, (may not be the lead directing as ben suggested, however not sure of which way is better).

shan

[han]

fred, on Jan 26 2005, 08:34 PM, said:

Here is another example of the same principle (though I don't think it applies quite as strongly here):

Should a double of Drury be "takeout of the major opened" or "lead directing"?

As far as I can tell there is no strong consensus among the expert community in this area, but I think there is a clearly "right" answer to this question. I will post my reasoning after people have had a chance to think about this.

Maybe I should have created a new thread for this, but this situation is analogous in some ways to the issues being discussed in this thread.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

No need to wait Fred, it seems obvious to me that you prefer the double as lead directing, and a delayed double of 2M as take-out. If this situation is at all similar, then your reasoning must be that it is safe to double if they bid 2S next, while if they go to 4S then you shouldn't come in with the take-out double, but a lead-directing double could be useful.

However, it seems to me that the delayed double is not safe at all, as they tend to have the balanced of strength, and are often in a 4-3 fit! Wouldn't it be nice if you could take-out double immediately over 2C (which seems safe) so that you don't have to balanced over 2H or 2S? To me this situation seems similar to the 1S-3C minimal Bergen raise, where I play the direct double as take-out, not lead directing.

Looking forward to read your opinion.

[fred]

Yes, I prefer double as leading directing because I think it is best to wait when you have a takeout double and see how the auction goes.

You make a good point, Hannie, and this is one of the reasons why I said that the case for waiting with a "takeout double hand" is not as strong here as it is when the opponents use a Jacoby transfer. Still, I think I can make a good case that the upside of waiting with the takeout hand and using double as lead directing is greater than the downside of not being able to double for takeout immediately.

Consider what happens after Drury is used. I will assume for the sake of argument that the opponents use "reverse Drury" (which is by far the most common form of this convention at least in the USA). I have no justification other than experience for the following numbers:

1) About 50% of the time opener will either jump to game or make some kind of slam investigation his partner uses Drury.

2) About 25% of the time opener will bid 2D in response to Drury (saying "I have a real opening bid, but my hand is not strong enough to commit to game opposite a minimum Drury response").

3) About 25% of the time opener with rebid 2 of his major in response to Drury (saying "I do not have a real opening bid").

If 1) takes place, you will almost always be better off staying silent with the "takeout double" hand. Making a takeout double could lead to a good sacrifice, but when you are a passed hand and your partner could not act over their opening bid, you usually will not want to get involved in high-level bidding. The downside of doubling for takeout in this case is that you are very likely to make it easier for the declarer to guess well.

On the other hand, if the opponents are about to bid a game or slam, being able to make a lead-directing double can be very important. On some deals the lack of a lead directing double in clubs will also help partner (for example, if he has xxx in both clubs and another unbid suit, he will know that leading the other suit is more likely to work out).

If 2) takes place you will get to hear both opponents bid another time before making your decision as to whether or not you want to get involved. If you had a marginal double to begin with, you might choose to pass now (and if RHO bids 2NT at his second turn for example, you will know that it is probably wrong to compete even if you have a sound takeout double).

If 3) takes place you will know that it is probably right to compete even if you have a marginal takeout double.

One other point: at matchpoints this discussion becomes a lot more complicated, but at IMPs the type 1) hands are the most important hands to get right.

Your point about the opponents possibly being in a 4-3 fit is certainly valid, but in the real world players (even very good ones) do not open 4-card majors as much as they should (at least in my view).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[han]

Very interesting, I think your point about the way a take-out double can help declarer in 4M is especially convincing.

Now I'm looking forward to read Ben's post in which he gives the percentages for what happened after people at BBO used drury!

[flytoox]

Fred, this is thought-provoking. Does same argument apply to Bergen raise? For example, 1M-P-3C-?? 3C=7-9HCP 4card raise.

Thanks in advance.


Hongjun