[Jinksy]

---

IMP teams. Select multiple options if you think there were multiple misbids. Which of the calls are close?

[mcphee]

The double of 3C is supposed to suggest something other than the players current mental state. Not thrilled with 2H and 1NT just doesn't look suitable. Frankly even though I have only 2 spades they are big tickets making 2S the choice for me.

[helene_t]

given your methods it is questionable if w can afford a nonforcing pass so double is ok. e should bid 3s

[MrAce]

helene_t, on 2016-November-23, 02:35, said:

given your methods it is questionable if w can afford a nonforcing pass so double is ok. e should bid 3s

What do you think double of W showed?
Why do you believe he can not pass? Do you think 2♥ bidder has 13-15 hcp and they miss game?
And if you believe double of 3♣ by West is showing values, what do you think double by East would show?
East would definitely double with 13+ so I do not get why you think W can not pass.

Jinksy, on 2016-November-22, 18:03, said:

IMP teams. Select multiple options if you think there were multiple misbids. Which of the calls are close?

This is the type of mistake that I see a lot in BBF.
I said this in the past and keep on saying that people at some point have to understand the difference between pass out seat and non pass out seat calls.
Seems like our West thought he was on pass out seat, when he was not.

[ggwhiz]

I agree that the double of 3♣ is pretty hopeless. What on earth was it supposed to show?

Playing aggressive overcalls doesn't mean you deny a good hand, especially at this vul.

[ahydra]

West shouldn't double here, he needs at least another king or so for that (after which the 3NT bid is more than reasonable, though you might try 3S assuming that would be forcing). Of course, passing could also lead to a bad result as I don't see East keeping it open opposite what could be a 5242 ♠AKxxx and out, with 3C quite likely making. Such is life when an opponent is dealt a long suit at favourable vulnerability.

ahydra

[WesleyC]

Agree with the rest of the respondents that West shouldn't double 3C.

On a related note, especially if you play aggressive overcalls, you might want to consider playing constructive but non-forcing 2 level advances.

[nullve]

I don't think a style where 11 hcp and 5 hearts is enough for a F1 2♥ advance to a "fairly aggressive" 1♠ overcall is playable. (After a 1♠ opening the analogous style would be to play the 2♥ response as 8+, 5+ H, F1, wouldn't it?)

I don't understand the criticism of West's (takeout) double. He has extras (given the lightish overcall style), short clubs, doubleton hearts and a sixth spade. What else does he need? (I'm assuming that 2♥ didn't set up a force over 3♣, in which case X of 3♣ would be for penalties.)

[rmnka447]

Playing "new suit forcing" over partner's overcall allows advancer a little more freedom to introduce a new suit with a hand where you can preference back to overcaller's suit. I see no problem with East using it here to bid 2 ♥. If one of West's ♠ were a ♥, it would lead to a nice ♥ partial.

Once advancer has forced, it's up to overcaller to define the nature of the overcall. This follows a key principle of good bidding that, as soon as possible in any auction, someone has to limit their hand. This helps the partnership know what ballpark they are playing in.

If South had passed instead of bidding 3 ♣, I believe West's bid should have been 2 ♠ showing less than an opener. It's close, but the West hand has made a VUL overcall on a very poor suit and just an 11 count. IMO, any other bid by West in this sequence should show opening values or more.

Once South has bid 3 ♣, a similar logic applies, any direct free call other than pass by West should show opening values. A pass in this situation denies opening values. IMO, pass is definitely the right call with West's hand.

Then in pass-out seat, East has to make a decision whether to compete further. If East decides to compete, I think Double is the clear choice. It should say "I'd like to compete further, but am not sure what to bid." But I'd find it hard to criticize anyone who chooses pass when partner can be aggressively overcalling.

I don't like the 3 NT call either. East does have a stopper, but South should be showing 6+ ♣ with the free 3 ♣ call. Even though West has doubled, there's no guarantee that West holds anything in ♣. That means that 9 running tricks would need to available after the stop is knocked out. With all the quacks in East's hand, West would have to hold a lot of cards/controls to make that happen.

[Jinksy]

Do people have a view on whether East's 3♠ (or rather, West's double, if not passed) would be gameforcing?

[monikrazy]

The 2♥ seems like a real stretch. The 3 level could be way too high. Going with a low 1NT with a weakish 11 seems much better.

The double of 3C also seems dubious. Even if its ok on values it suggests more defense in clubs and doesn't show the extra length in spades. Pass or 3S could both be ok here, partner can keep the auction going, and there is a heart tolerance to fall back on,

[P_Marlowe]

Jinksy, on 2016-November-26, 04:38, said:

Do people have a view on whether East's 3♠ (or rather, West's double, if not passed) would be gameforcing?

At first blink, I did not think, that 3S is GF, but ...
2H should show inv. strength, so I would assume, that the X
accepts the invitation.
The X basically say, this is our hand, so ... yes 3S should be
GF, since the X created a gf seq.