[phikappaph]

My partner opened 1♣and RHO preempted to 3 ♠ .

My hand:
♠ Qx
♥Ax
♦AKJT9
♣Kxxx


As I recall, my partner had

♠AKx
♥Kxx
♦xxx
♣Axxx


I bid 4♦and partner passed. We made 6 when the ♦finesse worked as I shed a club on the 3rd round of spades.

I felt had I doubled, it would have been for penalty. I was averse to bidding 5♦with less than 6 and a queen of spades that probably was useless. I was worried about bidding 4 clubs as partner uses the "short club" routinely.

In retrospect,in counting partner's points, I should have assumed he had the King or Ace of spades, or 3 to the Jack.

Should I have bid 3nt without a spade stopper? Should I have doubled hoping partner would bid? Is there a way to get to 5♦ or is 3nt the answer?

[ahydra]

If you bid 4D, then partner should not have passed. 4D is 100% forcing. (edit: though I have no idea what he should actually bid. Probably 5D?)

4D looks reasonable enough on that hand now that you have no space to explore for 3NT. Playing 5cM, double is the only real alternative (most people play double as takeout up to at least 3S, if not 4D or even 7S).

ahydra

[wyman]

Welcome to the forums.

1) Had you doubled (with a random partner playing what I'd call "expert standard" or "forum standard," it would have been negative, showing 4 hearts. Partner is free to pass this, or bid 3N (or anything else, for that matter), if his hand is suitable. Note that you must have some values for a double, since you're forcing your partnership to at least 3N.

Other people have conventional meanings for a dbl here, but let's not put the cart before the horse.

2) I think your hand is good enough to force to 5m. 4D is a very good start. Except after a takeout double by the opponents (after which you may XX to show strength), a new suit by an unpassed hand is forcing. Your partner was wrong to pass here. He should have raised to 5D, and you'd play there. I would not be tempted to bid on with your hand holding ♠Qx, and partner's not too optimistic with half his honor strength in the opponents' suit, where you are likely short. I would not be unhappy missing 6♦ on these cards.

Again, welcome. There's a lot of information around the site, even if it takes some work to understand it. The novice/beginner forum is a great start, after which venturing into intermediate/advanced will get you around to doing better than the vast majority of the folks out there.

Best of luck.

[Lorne50]

4D is 100% forcing and definitely a possible bid. Partner should have raised.

4S is also possible, forcing and asking partner to describe his hand as well as he can. Here he should bid 4N (natural I hope, otherwise you have no chance) and you may play there or decide to raise (not that slam is very good).

I also play that 4N is a good club raise and 5C weaker which is more useful that using it as RKCB when the auction is cramped but that is not an option here opposite a possibly short club. It also has to be agreed with partner or a wheel will fall off!

[phikappaph]

Lorne50, on 2013-September-05, 14:57, said:

4D is 100% forcing and definitely a possible bid. Partner should have raised.

4S is also possible, forcing and asking partner to describe his hand as well as he can. Here he should bid 4N (natural I hope, otherwise you have no chance) and you may play there or decide to raise (not that slam is very good).

I also play that 4N is a good club raise and 5C weaker which is more useful that using it as RKCB when the auction is cramped but that is not an option here opposite a possibly short club. It also has to be agreed with partner or a wheel will fall off!

Thanks for the insight from everyone. I think the moral is that my partner should have bid. I also think that the bane of the average/above average bridge player is understanding partner's bid of "double". I have been reading "Mary Sez" and have been trying to improve on the when and wheres of doubling. I did not realize,for example that my doubling would have indicated 4 hearts, though I should have thought it through especially when trump had not been established.

The one bidding sequence I did not see was my bidding 4 spades and partner bidding a natural 4NT. 4NT is one of those bids that regardless of circumstances always seems to be viewed as asking for aces. I guess I am second guessing myself too much as 5 diamonds makes obviously, but looking at the hands, NT should have at least been an option. Lots of good advice here on how I can improve my skills. I appreciate the responses.

[aguahombre]

A slightly different view. What you had to work with left you only 4D, and it was certainly forcing. IMO, Pard's choice should have been 4S over 4D.

However, the negative double doesn't need to guarantee 4 hearts at this level. With some other adjustments to your agreements you could have doubled with this one...4D really should be longer than 5 cards. The adjustments? You could use Kickback over 4H for RKB; then you could double, and if partner bids the dreaded 4H here, 4N would be a scramble to pick a minor. With the given array, the negative double would land you in 3NT from partner's side.

[phikappaph]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-06, 09:13, said:

A slightly different view. What you had to work with left you only 4D, and it was certainly forcing. IMO, Pard's choice should have been 4S over 4D.

However, the negative double doesn't need to guarantee 4 hearts at this level. With some other adjustments to your agreements you could have doubled with this one...4D really should be longer than 5 cards. The adjustments? You could use Kickback over 4H for RKB; then you could double, and if partner bids the dreaded 4H here, 4N would be a scramble to pick a minor. With the given array, the negative double would land you in 3NT from partner's side.

You raised my fears! Bidding 4♦ with only five was an issue. I did it with the strength of the suit but wishing I had 6. Had partner bid 4 spades, I doubt I would have found 4nt as a natural bid and will ask him how he would have treated that bid. I would have taken the 4♠bid as a cue bid supporting my diamonds and I would have gone to 5♦.

Part of my problem arose of out partner's 1 club opening. A lot of issues are raised by the overuse of 1♣openings. In the end, while convenient it may be, it tells me nothing except my partner does not have a five card major. And no, our group would not open 1♣with 55 in the black suits regardless of the persuasive article I just read.

So, I am back to wondering absent a prior conversation and agreement how most partners view with the 14 point hand shown

1♣
3♠
Double

With 14 points and two tricks in trumps, an outside ace, even though it's a sin to double someone into game in contract bidding, I might well have passed. I would have raised the 4 diamond bid to game.

Finally, I did find the following about 4nt which I now will use:

2. When partner opens four of a minor, 4NT is natural, suggesting this may be the last making game contract. This is a surprisingly useful bid. Similarly, when partner overcalls four of a minor, 4NT is natural. However, over four of a major, 4NT should be Blackwood, since you are far less likely to want to correct the contract in this case as you are already in game. link

[Zelandakh]

I am with agua on this. The double of 3♠ does not guarantee 4 hearts for me and indeed will often be made on hands looking for help in spades for 3NT. It is more a matter of a hand without clear direction, looking for more information from partner and able to cope with whatever (reasonable) advance they make. On this hand, I actually prefer double to an immediate 4♦. Even without agua's 4NT pick a minor continuation, it is going to be rare for partner to bid 4♥ over 3NT with 3433 shape, so the chances of a club fit are extremely good.

But that also raises an interesting theoretical point. This spot reminds me in some ways of bidding 3♠ or higher over a weak 2♠ opening. There a common method is to play 3♠ as a general cue and 4m as Leaping Michaels. Could we do the same thing here, with X being the general "cue" and 4♦ Non-leaping Michaels for the red suits? It seems like it might just be worth it...

[phikappaph]

Zelandakh, on 2013-September-06, 10:08, said:

I am with agua on this. The double of 3♠ does not guarantee 4 hearts for me and indeed will often be made on hands looking for help in spades for 3NT. It is more a matter of a hand without clear direction, looking for more information from partner and able to cope with whatever (reasonable) advance they make. On this hand, I actually prefer double to an immediate 4♦. Even without agua's 4NT pick a minor continuation, it is going to be rare for partner to bid 4♥ over 3NT with 3433 shape, so the chances of a club fit are extremely good.

But that also raises an interesting theoretical point. This spot reminds me in some ways of bidding 3♠ or higher over a weak 2♠ opening. There a common method is to play 3♠ as a general cue and 4m as Leaping Michaels. Could we do the same thing here, with X being the general "cue" and 4♦ Non-leaping Michaels for the red suits? It seems like it might just be worth it...

If I adopted the Leaping Michaels rationale, I think I am back to announcing at least 4 hearts. I tend to agree with the notion that a double says the same thing. I have heard no suggestions regarding supporting partner's clubs. But if partner has 13 HCP and I have 17, we should have game somewhere. I wonder about the following:

1♣
3♠
4♦
4♠
4NT

Read a nice thread on reverses here which talked about the lesser of two evils. The question here for me is whether I am better of saying I have 6 diamonds or saying I have 4 hearts?

[aguahombre]

phikappaph, on 2013-September-06, 11:41, said:

The question here for me is whether I am better off saying I have 6 diamonds or saying I have 4 hearts?

Or the third option....noticing (per a couple of us) that you don't have to make that choice.

[phikappaph]

aguahombre, on 2013-September-06, 12:36, said:

Or the third option....noticing (per a couple of us) that you don't have to make that choice.

Upon reflection, given the fact that we would have taken 3♠, 2♥, 2♦and at least 1♣-- 2 as I recall, down 4 or 5 doubled would have been just as good as game. partner bidding or passing would have worked. I should have doubled and not bid 4♦ if for no other reason, the contract works whether he bid or passed. I guess another moral for me is to know your partner.

[neilkaz]

I'd suggest finding a PD that realizes that 4♦ is 100% forcing.