[jillybean]

---

[mw64ahw]

An easy X to start-what sort of ♣ is being played

[jillybean]

1♣ 3+

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2024-May-10, 11:47, said:

---

I don't see how you can avoid doubling. The only advance that will trouble you is in hearts; in that case, bid diamonds without a jump (or a huddle) and hope for the best.

[jillybean]

---

How do you play this?

[akwoo]

How good are you playing partner to be? (Note: I'm not asking how good is partner - sometimes for pedagogy/development purposes you're assuming partner to be better than they are.)

As long as partner is not panicking at playing in a Moysian, I'm very willing to play in a 4-3 fit in hearts on this hand, so I'm willing to pretend to have 4 hearts if partner mentions them.

If partner bids 2♣, I assume that is forcing to suit agreement, so I bid 2♦. Over 2♥, I bid 4♥ (or some other bid showing a strong hand with a heart fit if we have one); over 2♠ I bid 3N.

[mw64ahw]

Having X partner is initially expecting a takeout shape. I would have bid 2♣ with 44 in the Majors and/or some value. Now 2♦ feels like a minimum response, I'll move forward with 2N as the best option which communicates the point count and lack of Major suit fit.

[mikeh]

snip

[mw64ahw]

As an alternative take in my main partnership we play X as Power (15+) . 2♣ would be at least invitational trying to establish a Major suit fit. 2♥ then shows at most 3♥2♠, but not balanced with a GF hand. Now back to responder.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the alternative to a power T/O is pass, sometimes you are too strong to act.
The question always is, what is you followup after partners most likely responses?
And quite often he will respond in a major, how happy are you after that.

You could always say, that you intend bidding NT, but it is not clear, that
you are making all on your own 1NT.

In your given seq. 2C is 2-places to play, usually 44 in the majors constr. values,
lets say 8-10, the big question is, how far this one forces.
In N/A, if I recall a answer to one of my question, until suit agreement.

If partner showes life, I am bidding 3NT.

with kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-11, 02:49, said:

Hi,

the alternative to a power T/O is pass, sometimes you are too strong to act.
The question always is, what is you followup after partners most likely responses?
And quite often he will respond in a major, how happy are you after that.

You could always say, that you intend bidding NT, but it is not clear, that
you are making all on your own 1NT.

In your given seq. 2C is 2-places to play, usually 44 in the majors constr. values,
lets say 8-10, the big question is, how far this one forces.
In N/A, if I recall a answer to one of my question, until suit agreement.

If partner showes life, I am bidding 3NT.

with kind regards
Marlowe

That this was posted as a problem, pd probably had xxxx, Qxxx, Ax, Axx, 6♣ was cold, 3N wasn't, but made on the nose with spades 4-4

[pescetom]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-11, 02:49, said:

In your given seq. 2C is 2-places to play, usually 44 in the majors constr. values,
lets say 8-10

I take note of this and another post with similar interpretation of 2C.
I understood and play that the cue shows an opening strength hand and no clear strain, thus creating a game forcing auction and asking doubler to describe their hand.
Has it diminished to (an admittedly practical) "pick a major, constructive" ?

[DavidKok]

pescetom, on 2024-May-11, 14:51, said:

I take note of this and another post with similar interpretation of 2C.
I understood and play that the cue shows an opening strength hand and no clear strain, thus creating a game forcing auction and asking doubler to describe their hand.
Has it diminished to (an admittedly practical) "pick a major, constructive" ?

'Diminished' is the wrong word. There are two main styles for responding to takeout doubles (of 1m in particular) that I'm familiar with. I've run into one more internationally, especially in the USA, and the other more in the Netherlands (and I've been told it is more common in other places in Europe as well).

The first style permits jumping to 2M on a four card suit. For example on (1♣)-X-(P)-?, it looks something like:

• Pass: Penalty double of 1♣.
  
• 1♦: 3(+)♦, 0-8 points (usually 4 cards but may be 3 in a pinch).
  
• 1♥: 3(+)♥, 0-8 points (almost always 4(+) cards, but e.g. 3=3=2=5 weak may choose to run).
  
• 1♠: 4(+)♠, 0-8 points.
  
• 1NT: 8-11 points, balanced. Typically denies a 4cM.
  
• 2♣: GF, nebulous.
  
• 2♦: 9-11 5(+)♦.
  
• 2♥: 9-11 4(+)♥.
  
• 2♠: 9-11 4(+)♠.
  
• 2NT: 12-13 points, balanced.
  
• 3♣: GF with 4=4 in the majors.

By contrast, the second style requires a five card suit to jump to 2M. It looks like:

• Pass: Penalty double of 1♣.
  
• 1♦: 3(+)♦, 0-8 points (usually 4 cards but may be 3 in a pinch).
  
• 1♥: 3(+)♥, 0-8 points (almost always 4(+) cards, but e.g. 3=3=2=5 weak may choose to run).
  
• 1♠: 4(+)♠, 0-8 points.
  
• 1NT: 8-11 points, balanced. May have a 4cM.
  
• 2♣: Inv(+), one or both 4cM (with only one, enough values to pull to 2NT).
  
• 2♦: 9-11 5(+)♦.
  
• 2♥: 9-11 5(+)♥.
  
• 2♠: 9-11 5(+)♠.
  
• 2NT: 12-13 points, balanced. Typically denies a 4cM.

The five card requirement means partner can more safely double with (43) in the majors (or even 3=3 in the majors, if you like danger), and can more safely re-raise a jump shift based on a decent fit but no extras. Also doubler can re-evaluate their hand based on the implied fit if we bid 2♣ and doubler has both majors, something that I consider a nice upside. In return having to go through 2♣ to show the four card suit requires a different set of continuations. Also the 8-11 ish hands with one 4cM but not the other struggle - those have to choose between 2♣ and risk 2M in the 4-3 or 2NT, or go low with 1M (lying about values) or 1NT (concealing a 4cM). Though I'd argue the first set of responses doesn't deal with that much better - (1♣)-X-(P)-2♥; (P)-? and now what if you have three card support. Always pass? Pull to 2NT? We retain the option of playing the 4-3 fit in the second style, so if that's our plan nothing is lost.
Furthermore the second set has no way to bid really strong hands - usually you'd start with 2♣ with a 4cM and then bid on, and jump to 3NT without a 4cM. With a very strong hand with a very long suit you may have a problem. Thankfully those are not only rare, they are also the hands where the opponents are most likely to make a preemptive raise, and also you can usually count out the hand (opener to your left, partner has a takeout double, we have a strong hand, that's pretty much 40) and steer to the right contract by making big jumps.

[mw64ahw]

The scheme I play over a Power X could be played with minor modifications over a standard takeout, so over 1♣
Pass Penalty
1♦ Herbert negative 0-7 then scramble for the Major suit fit or a long minor
1♥ 5♥ 0-7
1♠ 5♠ 0-7
1N BD 8-10
2♣ GI non promissory, but looking for a Major suit fit
2R M transfer 8+
etc.

[jillybean]

Sorry, sorry, I've been very ill and just getting back to this now.

---

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2024-May-12, 01:40, said:

'Diminished' is the wrong word. There are two main styles for responding to takeout doubles (of 1m in particular) that I'm familiar with. I've run into one more internationally, especially in the USA, and the other more in the Netherlands (and I've been told it is more common in other places in Europe as well).

The first style permits jumping to 2M on a four card suit. For example on (1♣)-X-(P)-?, it looks something like:

• Pass: Penalty double of 1♣.
  
• 1♦: 3(+)♦, 0-8 points (usually 4 cards but may be 3 in a pinch).
  
• 1♥: 3(+)♥, 0-8 points (almost always 4(+) cards, but e.g. 3=3=2=5 weak may choose to run).
  
• 1♠: 4(+)♠, 0-8 points.
  
• 1NT: 8-11 points, balanced. Typically denies a 4cM.
  
• 2♣: GF, nebulous.
  
• 2♦: 9-11 5(+)♦.
  
• 2♥: 9-11 4(+)♥.
  
• 2♠: 9-11 4(+)♠.
  
• 2NT: 12-13 points, balanced.
  
• 3♣: GF with 4=4 in the majors.

By contrast, the second style requires a five card suit to jump to 2M. It looks like:

• Pass: Penalty double of 1♣.
  
• 1♦: 3(+)♦, 0-8 points (usually 4 cards but may be 3 in a pinch).
  
• 1♥: 3(+)♥, 0-8 points (almost always 4(+) cards, but e.g. 3=3=2=5 weak may choose to run).
  
• 1♠: 4(+)♠, 0-8 points.
  
• 1NT: 8-11 points, balanced. May have a 4cM.
  
• 2♣: Inv(+), one or both 4cM (with only one, enough values to pull to 2NT).
  
• 2♦: 9-11 5(+)♦.
  
• 2♥: 9-11 5(+)♥.
  
• 2♠: 9-11 5(+)♠.
  
• 2NT: 12-13 points, balanced. Typically denies a 4cM.

The five card requirement means partner can more safely double with (43) in the majors (or even 3=3 in the majors, if you like danger), and can more safely re-raise a jump shift based on a decent fit but no extras. Also doubler can re-evaluate their hand based on the implied fit if we bid 2♣ and doubler has both majors, something that I consider a nice upside. In return having to go through 2♣ to show the four card suit requires a different set of continuations. Also the 8-11 ish hands with one 4cM but not the other struggle - those have to choose between 2♣ and risk 2M in the 4-3 or 2NT, or go low with 1M (lying about values) or 1NT (concealing a 4cM). Though I'd argue the first set of responses doesn't deal with that much better - (1♣)-X-(P)-2♥; (P)-? and now what if you have three card support. Always pass? Pull to 2NT? We retain the option of playing the 4-3 fit in the second style, so if that's our plan nothing is lost.
Furthermore the second set has no way to bid really strong hands - usually you'd start with 2♣ with a 4cM and then bid on, and jump to 3NT without a 4cM. With a very strong hand with a very long suit you may have a problem. Thankfully those are not only rare, they are also the hands where the opponents are most likely to make a preemptive raise, and also you can usually count out the hand (opener to your left, partner has a takeout double, we have a strong hand, that's pretty much 40) and steer to the right contract by making big jumps.

Thanks, I haven't come across the second (NL) style before, it is interesting.
What developments do you play over 2♣ showing one or both 4cM ?

[helene_t]

I start with double and then I rebid notrumps if partner bids spades, and 2♣ if they bid hearts.
Hopefully we have the agreement that partner will respond 1♠ with 4-4 majors, so first 1♥ and then 2♠ would show 4-5 with extras, in which case we can bid 4♥.

By the way, one of my partner's once bid 1♦ with a hand very similar to this one, I think it was 20 points. I have sympathy for this, by not doubling you are not suggesting any spades tolerance.

[Cyberyeti]

What do people play 1♣-X-P-3♣ as ?

[helene_t]

Partner's 2♣ bid certainly doesn't show 5-5 in the majors, so 4♥ is premature.

I don't like the American forcing-to-suit-agreement, I would like to stop in 2M when responder has an invitational hand only.

I am not sure if 2♦ is now forcing in the Dutch style, I think this depends on whether we would double with a 3352 minimum. Personally I wouldn't, so 2♦ is now forcing, I hope. The problem we have is that we need to convince partner that we are playing 3NT if they have 5 spades and 4 hearts. Maybe 2NT sounds more convincing than the slow route via 2♦. But either way, partner will get a chance to bid spades if they have five of them, and then will hopefully respect our 3NT.

I think I bid 2NT.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-May-14, 08:14, said:

What do people play 1♣-X-P-3♣ as ?

Over a Power X - (41)44 GF