[bill1157]

gwnn, on Apr 29 2010, 12:09 PM, said:

yea not sure about that.. looked like an OK value bid at the time (mind you I don't like the philosophy of bidding 3M on 5 cards)

anyway I didn't like partner's double on

AKQxx
T
KQx
Kxxx

at least he had the courtesy to bring the T

all's well that ends well: LHO had all aces along with the stiff spade

seems like a horrible TO double, 1♠ is right.

Bill

[jdonn]

I do not like partner's double at all...

[mikeh]

There are two schools of thought (maybe 3?) about our 3♥ call. I assume that the OP meant 3♥ as stronger than 2♥, whereas I belong to the school that says that 3♥ is an unusual hand type...6 or 7 hearts, weak suit, weak hand..it is semi-preemptive, as well as descriptive. I had thought that was the standard meaning, but I was reading an old (but not ancient) BW the other day and in the MSC there was a real split on the meaning.

Anyway, I would have opened 2♥; would have bid 4♥; and would bid 4♥ now, unless somehow I felt that I had shown a 4=6 good suit hand.

Partner's double of 1♣ suggests that he learned to play bridge in the 1970s or earlier, or that he is at best an intermediate player. It has been standard to overcall 1♠ on this hand-type for decades.