[nudnikbp]

Pass and possibly balance later.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2020-February-12, 06:36, said:

I'm with you as far as the 3♣ bid. But is 3♦ really a choice of game bid? If partner bid 3♦ I think that I would interpret it as showing slam interest.

We just shape out at this point bidding suits up the line

[bluenikki]

Tramticket, on 2020-February-12, 02:18, said:

Thanks, all who have replied so far. It seems that most find the double to not be silly.

My concern over the bid was that I had noted a minor hesitation and body language from East. The full deal was:

---

The intervention probably stopped us from reaching the doomed 3NT or the more successful 5♣/5♦ - I suspect that we would most likely be in 3NT in an uncontested auction. The hesitation / body language was of the minor kind that you get regularly at clubs and I didn't reserve rights / call the director but I was surprised when that eight-count went down as dummy. Our score of +300 was a top, so I didn't take any further action.

How should we have bid to 5m?

You should agree and put on cc that pass of 1-level rdbl promises 4+ in dbled suit.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-February-12, 07:50, said:

We just shape out at this point bidding suits up the line

It would certainly work well here, but at the cost of telling opps your shape. you have a balanced minimum opposite a balanced 18(ish) and look destined for 3NT. I must confess that I would just bid 3NT☹️

[Lobowolf]

Tramticket, on 2020-February-12, 02:18, said:

Thanks, all who have replied so far. It seems that most find the double to not be silly.

My concern over the bid was that I had noted a minor hesitation and body language from East. The full deal was:

---

The intervention probably stopped us from reaching the doomed 3NT or the more successful 5♣/5♦ - I suspect that we would most likely be in 3NT in an uncontested auction. The hesitation / body language was of the minor kind that you get regularly at clubs and I didn't reserve rights / call the director but I was surprised when that eight-count went down as dummy. Our score of +300 was a top, so I didn't take any further action.

How should we have bid to 5m?

From a legality perspective, a subtle distinction that is important to note is that the relevant question isn't whether the double was reasonable, but whether a pass would have been unreasonable. If passing is a logical alternative, then it can't be eschewed in favor of a bid that was suggested by the UI.

[bluenikki]

Lobowolf, on 2020-February-12, 13:24, said:

From a legality perspective, a subtle distinction that is important to note is that the relevant question isn't whether the double was reasonable, but whether a pass would have been unreasonable. If passing is a logical alternative, then it can't be eschewed in favor of a bid that was suggested by the UI.

My comment was misplaced, it seems.

Play, and mark on cc, that pass over 1-level rdbl shows 4+ in dbled suit. (not necessarily any values) . Then you can, indeed must, bid one of the suits requested, no matter what the UI might be.

[bluenikki]

nudnikbp, on 2020-February-12, 07:20, said:

Pass and possibly balance later.

Never re-open. the opps always have a GAME.

[Zelandakh]

Tramticket, on 2020-February-12, 02:18, said:

How should we have bid to 5m?

1♣ - 1♦ - (X); XX - (2♠) - P; 3♠ - 4♦; 5♦ would be one possibility. Or North could bid 3♠ over 3♦ in the original auction. Passing 3♦ was really quite a timid decision. In addition, it is not universal for the XX to show a big hand and having a more informative call available for Opener's second turn would probably make life a lot simpler.

[helene_t]

Welcome back, Lobowolf!