[eagles123]

diana_eva, on 2016-February-17, 15:45, said:

This post. Yes, was pretty entertaining. I wish he were kidding, but I doubt it.

A personal favourite:

http://www.bridgebas...-or-not-part-2/

[Caitlynne]

The modern standard treatment is that the Double is for takeout (i.e., a negative or Sputnik double) showing exactly 4 spades. In this style, responder bid 1S (not Double) with 5+ spades.

Another approach (which I think is better) is to Double to show values and a desire to bid without exactly 4 card length in spades. (With 4 card length in spades, responder bids 1S.) Using this method, you can handle awkward hands without a stopper in the opponent's heart suit where you have too good a hand to pass (e.g., KQx, xx, Axxxx, xxx where, after partner's opening bid of 1C is overcalled with 1H, you would be stuck). So you double with fewer than 4 spades or 5+ spades. But this is not standard.

There are other approaches out there too, including transfers. In this style, Double is a transfer to spades, 1S is a transfer to clubs, and so on.

[Vampyr]

Caitlynne, on 2016-February-17, 18:46, said:

So you double with fewer than 4 spades or 5+ spades. But this is not standard.

Nor is it, as far as I can tell, playable.

[helene_t]

miamijd, on 2016-February-17, 00:59, said:

a) is certainly std in the USA. "Nearly always" is right. 1s will never show 5+ spades (then you would bid 1s), but on rare occasions it might be only 3 if you have a decent hand and no other bid. For example:

1c (1h) ??

AKx xxx Kxxx xxx

Here, X seems like the best of a bunch of bad choices.

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2016-February-18, 05:45, said:

miamijd, on 2016-February-17, 00:59, said:

a) is certainly std in the USA. "Nearly always" is right. 1s will never show 5+ spades (then you would bid 1s), but on rare occasions it might be only 3 if you have a decent hand and no other bid. For example:

1c (1h) ??

AKx xxx Kxxx xxx

Here, X seems like the best of a bunch of bad choices.

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after
1♣-(1♠)-?

I think DBL is asking for trouble. It is not the type of distribution where a 4-3 major suit fit will play well
Why the rush? What is really wrong with Pass? 4333 is by nature not an offensive distribution.
However, I admit I do not subscribe to the standard concept that a 1NT rebid by opener should show 18-19 HCP when both responder and advancer pass the 1M overcall.
Responder is almost never broke in this sequence.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

rhm, on 2016-February-19, 03:11, said:

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after
1♣-(1♠)-?

I think DBL is asking for trouble. It is not the type of distribution where a 4-3 major suit fit will play well
Why the rush? What is really wrong with Pass? 4333 is by nature not an offensive distribution.
However, I admit I do not subscribe to the standard concept that a 1NT rebid by opener should show 18-19 HCP when both responder and advancer pass the 1M overcall.
Responder is almost never broke in this sequence.

Rainer Herrmann

Yes I agree that pass is reasonably safe.

As for your first question: No. I would never double spades without hearts. The difference is that here it could lead to a 3-3 fit. This won't happen if I double hearts: If partner bids 1♠, I think I can bid 2♣ without overstating my values too much.

[fromageGB]

helene_t, on 2016-February-18, 05:45, said:

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

A couple of points :

In this game you do not have thousands of bids available to accurately describe various hands, so I am happy with the explanation (if asked) that double shows 4 spades (definitely standard) even if occasionally partner might not turn out to have 4, having made what she considers the best of possible alternative bids. I think the key thing is that opener raises, or makes his bid whatever it is, on the EXPECTATION that it is 4 spades.

1NT is not a bad choice, in my view. Opener may have some spades, they are probably not going to be taking 7 tricks in spades if opener passes, and it is a reasonable contract. My choice is similar - I double as a relay for opener to describe his hand, rebidding 1NT with 12-14 balanced, or rebidding long clubs.

[fromageGB]

Zelandakh, on 2016-February-17, 16:38, said:

The times I post rubbish, it gets trashed too.

You post rubbish? I missed that one - what was it?

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2016-February-19, 03:11, said:

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after
1♣-(1♠)-?

Not that it is particularly relevant but the corrolary to the method I played as a junior (1♣ - (1♥) - X showing diamonds) is that 1NT after this 1♠ overcall also showed diamonds without any thought at all towards a spade stopper. Not a popular way of playing perhaps but it does at least provide a solution to this type of hand.

fromageGB, on 2016-February-19, 05:50, said:

You post rubbish? I missed that one - what was it?

Sadly all too frequently. I am sure if I looked back to the bridge posts I made 10 years ago I would be mortally embarassed...but luckily the really old ones are no longer available.

[PhilKing]

Stolen bid doubles FTW.

[mgoetze]

PhilKing, on 2016-February-19, 18:05, said:

Stolen bid doubles FTW.

LOL yeah it's pretty good here.