[jillybean]

How do you handle this auction?
Does a support double deny 4 spades?
Is it sensible to play 2♠ here shows either a strong hand with diamonds & spades or
3 card ♥ support and 4 ♠? Without 4 card♠ opener would make a support double.

---

[fromageGB]

It might help if there was a hand and an auction ...

[jillybean]

fromageGB, on 2014-April-09, 11:00, said:

It might help if there was a hand and an auction ...

Patience, patience.

[jeffford76]

North has a support double and then south should bid spades. Why would you lose the fit?

[broze]

jeffford76, on 2014-April-09, 11:09, said:

North has a support double and then south should bid spades. Why would you lose the fit?

This. There is a problem when the South hand is weak with four-four in the Majors since most people play a 2S response to the support double as forcing and so you may play 2H in a 3-4 instead of 2S in a 4-4 but there shouldn't be a problem with this hand.

If a bid 2S would have have non-forcing for you in response to the support double I think this is non-standard and also technically inferior but there are strong players who play that way.. Perhaps that is how you missed it but your auction in the OP stops two bids too early.

[kenrexford]

I have long felt that support doubles are not always a good idea. They make a lot of sense when Responder bids 1♠. They make a lot of sense when partner bids 1♥ and RHO overcalls 1♠ or something that shows spades.

However, when Responder bids 1♥ and RHO overcalls a minor, your normal theoretical options are (1) 3-card support for hearts or (2) showing the hidden spade suit.

If the auction is specifically 1♦-P-1♥-2♣, showing a hand with 4♠/5+♦(maybe 4?) is useful and safe.

If, however, the auction is specifically 1♣-P-♥-2♦, now a double to show 4♠/5+♦ is less useful, because you are forced to the 3-level to get to the minor anyway, with a reasonable option being simply to have 2♠ not treated as a strong reverse but rather simply "sound," meaning meriting the three-level if you have to go back to clubs.

Thus, there is something to be said for doubling as support unless the auction is 1♦-P-1♥-2♣, in which case the double shows a spade-diamond hand.

Coincidentally, this is that auction.

In this auction, however, you see another problem, namely the hand without long diamonds. The solution for that problem is to have the double show four spades and either long diamonds OR 3 hearts.

[kenberg]

Very interesting.

Let's first look at North's problem. At the time he is to choose his second call he knows that pard has 4+hearts and something like 6+ highs. If opener has a minimum flattish hand with only two hearts, it seems to me that he would be happy to pass, even if he has four spades. With, say, a 4=2=4=3 shape and a minimum count he has no reason to believe his side can make anything.

Conclusion: The double shows three hearts.

Next conclusion: The double cannot deny four spades. What is he to do with four spades and three hearts if a support double denies four spades? If the double denies four spades he can't do that, and bidding 2♠ with no reason to think partner has extras and no reason to think you have an 8 card fit anywhere seems out of the question.

So it seems to me the answer is that X shows three hearts and does not deny four spades.

I can see merit in some more complicated schemes, but they, well, seem more complicated. I think shows hearts, doesn't deny spades, may well be the way to go.

[ggwhiz]

I dislike support doubles intensely and another reason, perhaps on different cards or vulnerability is when rho raises to 3 clubs. I have no answer but those that play them against me are just as often unprepared to find spades.

Without support doubles it's relatively easy to land in the correct major suit fit. By doubling 2♣ with the north hand you can only land in the best of hearts or spades but it's a touch light by my partnership standards. After I pass the South hand owns a double over any level of clubs though. I'm starting to think of putting support doubles in the same category as surprise Gerber.

[aguahombre]

Perhaps totally by accident --perhaps not -- the style preference to open 1C with 3-3 or 4-4 balanced hands might result in us not having this problem on this hand.

This is just an observation. Variances in style sometimes have unexpected by-products. However, like ggwhiz, if RHO had bid a natural 2C after our 1C opening we would be without a support double:

1C-(P)-1H-(2C or 2D)
..we would just bid 2H and let whatever happens happen; thus, partner's natural 2S continuation would get the job done anyway and we would miss the 4-4 spade fit if Responder were weaker --just like most others would after their support double.

[the hog]

I like support doubles, but I think Jefford has hit the nail on the head.

[kenberg]

Further thought:

Suppose for discussion that we agree with X by North at her second call, showing three hearts and not denying four spades. South has a bit of a problem. Usually North will not have four spades but sometimes she will so I imagine South bids 2♠. Luckily she catches pard with four spades and they have found their fit. Not that 4♠ looks like a great contract. It appears there will probably be two club losers, a spade loser, and I don't see how to avoid a heart loser except perhaps with some unlikely end play. For example maybe West holds 3=2=2=6 with the club AQ and the Kx of hearts. Say he starts with a passive diamond. Play two rounds of trump and play on diamonds. If he refuses to ruff in, then play a trump. Might work.

Added: Actually a 3=3=1=6 West hand, with ♣ A and ♥K should work as well. Playing as above, W gets out with a heart. We take the K, then the A, then play another heart and we get a club.

But for other hands, we have to worry about what happens over 2♠ when North makes the negative double, South (same holding) bids 2♠, and North does not have four. North has to have four of something, presumably diamonds on the auction, but with North announcing 8 cards in the majors it's getting to look a little grim. The 2♠ call has to be strong, but the South hand seems to qualify.

Maybe the take away message here is that if you are in fourth seat and the opponents start with 1♦-1♥, it could be really good to come in with 2♣.

[neilkaz]

jeffford76, on 2014-April-09, 11:09, said:

North has a support double and then south should bid spades. Why would you lose the fit?

We agree.

[aguahombre]

jeffford76, on 2014-April-09, 11:09, said:

North has a support double and then south should bid spades. Why would you lose the fit?

Some of us were exploring the situation where responder has a mere minimum response. The ones who agree with you are certainly right about this hand.

[mike777]

good news is when south has a minimum hand then the opp have the majority hand.

often, not always we should at least be able to compete to 2 level.

I do expect the opp will often be able to bid 3 over 2 when south is minimum.

[gordontd]

Deleted

[fromageGB]

It is for such OP hands that transfer walsh responses were invented. But remove both minor kings from South, so it is a weak 44xx, and I just support double and miss the spade fit.

[helene_t]

kenrexford, on 2014-April-09, 11:50, said:

In this auction, however, you see another problem, namely the hand without long diamonds. The solution for that problem is to have the double show four spades and either long diamonds OR 3 hearts.

I am not convinced. If you have three hearts, responder wants to be in 2♥ with most weak hands. Then opener will take 2♥ out with only two hearts, catering to a four card suit by responder. This means that when opener has two hearts and responder has five, the auction can get out of control.

I think opener should just raise with many hands with three hearts. Double shows ostensibly four spades and two-three hearts. Responder will not bid a 4-card heart suit again.

[kenrexford]

helene_t, on 2014-April-10, 03:55, said:

I am not convinced. If you have three hearts, responder wants to be in 2♥ with most weak hands. Then opener will take 2♥ out with only two hearts, catering to a four card suit by responder. This means that when opener has two hearts and responder has five, the auction can get out of control.

I think opener should just raise with many hands with three hearts. Double shows ostensibly four spades and two-three hearts. Responder will not bid a 4-card heart suit again.

opener won't take 2H out. If Responder bids 2H he has 5+. With only 4 he will bid 2D or in a rare pinch 2S or remote pass.

[helene_t]

hmmm yeah, responder can bid 2♠ on a 3-card suit if nothing else appeals. With 2434, responder Can bid 2♦. So yes you are right, it works.

[kenberg]

For most, though not here, opener either has four or more diamonds or is 4-4 in the majors if he starts with 1♦.. So with four, or more, diamonds and not 4-4 in the majors, i guess it comes to whether X should show four spades or three hearts. Suppose it shows four spades. Responder, with five hearts, then does what? I assume 2♥ is non-forcing. He has to have a bid with five hearts and 6 points, and a bid with five hearts nad 14 points, and in between as well. And of course he will sometimes have six heart.. If 3♥ shows six and strength, then with five and strength he bids 3♣ I suppose.

It seems as if we are going to have to have a lot of follow-up agreements here.

I am not really so much arguing against using the double to show spades. I can see the merit. I just think there is no free lunch. Give a little here, take a little there. When opener and responder both have minimal hands, it is tough to show shape and the 2♣ overcall makes it a good deal tougher. Using X as support will work fine when responder has five hearts, and will at least sometime work out oom when he has four. Especially if he has four diamonds. So I think I stick with using X to show three card support.