[monikrazy]

Red vs White at imps, 2D seems far and away the best bid. I'm not worried about missing game if partner can't make another move.

A couple of posters seem concerned that 2D doesn't convey our full values since we could bid 2D with no points but I think that is a poor argument. Partner should be able to approximate reasonable ranges from the auction and his actual hand.

Is the difference between an unshapely 9 points (KNR has this @8.6) and the scattering of values he would expect anyway really so large that we want to mislead partner with a bid of 1NT or 2H? (I think we should reserve 2H for hands that are more strongly convinced game is out there) For instance, If partner and opener both have 15 points, it would be reasonable for him to assume we have 5 points on average. I have no reason to doubt that my partner's double is intended as takeout until proven otherwise and no compelling reasons to bid anything other than my longest and strongest suit..

[Phil]

1N is the kind of bid that looks crazy to an intermediate, much less a newer player but is virtually automatic for someone better.

JLall doubled a 1♥ opening holding AQ9x Kx QJTxx JT yesterday. Think he wants to hear about honor-nothing 4th in a side minor? Don't think so.

Forum regulars smartly make takeout doubles on 4333 shape. 1N will play nicely opposite this dummy even if they run the heart suit at you,which is pretty dubious. A shaky 4-3 in a minor? No way!

Neither JLalls hand nor a 4333 would be considered a textbook TOx but here we are. A stopper less 1N makes all the sense in the world, especially in this context.

[ArtK78]

It really boils down to what your partnership expects for a takeout double.

If you are "old school," meaning that your takeout doubles promise shortness in the opponents' suit and support for all of the remaining suits, there is nothing wrong with bidding Kxxx in a minor in response to the takeout double. Furthermore, partner will NOT want to hear a NT response with a "stopper" of Jxx.

If you are doubling on virtually any 13 count to get into the auction, then 1NT on the responding hand is fine, and Kxxx of diamonds is not fine.

I happen to be more old school than most in these Fora, so I would not bid 1NT on the responding hand.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2014-May-14, 05:51, said:

It really boils down to what your partnership expects for a takeout double.

If you are "old school," meaning that your takeout doubles promise shortness in the opponents' suit and support for all of the remaining suits, there is nothing wrong with bidding Kxxx in a minor in response to the takeout double. Furthermore, partner will NOT want to hear a NT response with a "stopper" of Jxx.

If you are doubling on virtually any 13 count to get into the auction, then 1NT on the responding hand is fine, and Kxxx of diamonds is not fine.

I happen to be more old school than most in these Fora, so I would not bid 1NT on the responding hand.

It is pretty clear I am old school. But old school which does not require the perfect 4X1 for my takeout doubles nor adhere to the 13 cards/13 points style... still young enough to notice the Diamond suit is not KXXX. My doubling partner WILL want to hear an advance which somewhat describes my holding and is a reasonable choice among flawed alternatives.

What it really boils down to is whether J9XX at the 3-level or J9x at the one-level is the better way to advance with a 3-3-4-3 10-count.

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2014-May-14, 08:48, said:

It is pretty clear I am old school. But old school which does not require the perfect 4X1 for my takeout doubles nor adhere to the 13 cards/13 points style... still young enough to notice the Diamond suit is not KXXX. My doubling partner WILL want to hear an advance which somewhat describes my holding and is a reasonable choice among flawed alternatives.

What it really boils down to is whether J9XX at the 3-level or J9x at the one-level is the better way to advance with a 3-3-4-3 10-count.

Yes. My mistake. When these threads get long I often rely on memory (which failed me here) rather than go back to the OP to see the hand. Still, diamonds are my long suit and I have a 10 count (only one of which appears to be wasted). My second choice is 2♦. I will not bid 1NT.

[Lovera]

This type of hands makes declaration problem (and discussion with vary point of view confirm it): if let's talk about value we don't have 10 points because 4-3-3-3 has -1 point (svalutation) for shape and -1 for Jxx (honor not protected) than 8 points declaration on level (2♦ 4th), for 1NT bidding is required control in heart otherwise nothing 1NT and if is true that this is hand passed 2♥ required more points (12/13) (spade in N are 4th..), bye.

[kgr]

1NT for me,
but I don't have much experience with it because with my regular partner we play that 1NT is kind of Lebensohl (Leuvensohl) and therefor 2♦ shows 8-10. Easy 2♦ then.

[beatrix45]

This is a real problem hand. Imo, 2♦ is out because two bullets and the red jacks give you too good a hand. The choice is between 1NT and 3♦. RHO is the dog that did not bark in the night. Is RHO broke or just short in ♥? At the table absent any serious tells from the opponents, I wud prob bid 3♦, but 1NT looks OK as well.

[the hog]

1N for my money.

[Tramticket]

2D is a nothing bid promising as few as zero points.

3D and 1NT are both reasonable. But 2H looks like a good alternative. Normally it would be a big overbid on this hand - but given that I am already passed ...

[mcphee]

Anyone who even considers 3D please see Dr. Phil. 1NT is rather clear here, it's forward going and the best you can manage.

[MrAce]

mcphee, on 2014-November-03, 08:15, said:

Anyone who even considers 3D please see Dr. Phil. 1NT is rather clear here, it's forward going and the best you can manage.

Yea, walk ins are welcome by Phil King, you may need an appointment by Phil Clayton. Both will cure the 3♦ disease imo.

[PhilKing]

I just threw up in my mouth.

[mikeh]

PhilKing, on 2014-November-03, 16:43, said:

I just threw up in my mouth.

I knew bidding boxes were a great invention, but I'd never understood how great until now. You wouldn't miss a beat.

[cherdano]

wank, on 2014-May-13, 17:42, said:

a good partner won't drive us to 3nt with nothing in hearts himself without checking we have a stop.

I think now you are overstating the case for 1NT. If partner is 3235 without a heart stop and values to force to game, is he really going to look for 5♣ instead of 3NT opposite a balanced hand, while helping opponents to find the best lead and defense against either contract?

I agree with 1NT but I also think it will lead to losing the first 5 tricks in 3N now and then.

This is different to 1NT rebids opposite a negative double, where partner doesn't even expect a stop. Here he does.

[beatrix45]

MrAce, on 2014-November-03, 15:32, said:

Yea, walk ins are welcome by Phil King, you may need an appointment by Phil Clayton. Both will cure the 3♦ disease imo.

Disease or not, I don't seem to be looking at a ♥ stop. If pard's double is based on cards, let him/her bid 3NT after my 3♦ call. If pard has Larry Cohen's model hand - 4-1-4-4 and a minimum he/she will pass, and we will be in the right spot. No one can fault a 1nt bid, but it is a mastermind call. Why should this bid end the auction?

[beatrix45]

There must be a reason this hand keeps coming up in BBO forums. It is, imho, not really marginal. One NT is not really stupid, although your ♥ stop does not actually exist, and your hand way more than a minimum for 2♦, and it is MUCH better suited to suit play than for NT. Just bid 3♦, and let your partner work it out. One NT is not terrible, butt it is basically a dumbass bid. Even worse at IMPs than MP's.

[MrAce]

beatrix45, on 2014-November-04, 03:05, said:

There must be a reason this hand keeps coming up in BBO forums. It is, imho, not really marginal. One NT is not really stupid, although your ♥ stop does not actually exist, and your hand way more than a minimum for 2♦, and it is MUCH better suited to suit play than for NT. Just bid 3♦, and let your partner work it out. One NT is not terrible, butt it is basically a dumbass bid. Even worse at IMPs than MP's.

LOL

[helene_t]

I learned something from this thread. I would have expected the vote to be very diverse, with the experts being divided between 1♠, 1NT, 2♦, 2♥ and 3♦, and maybe a single oddie voting for 2♠ (that bid got one vote in the Dutch Ladderpuzzel on a very similar hand, though one point stronger and without the ♥J. Then, 2♥ was the overwhelming choice). While some non-experts voting pass or 2NT.

I am not used to a style in which partner could easily have a doubleton diamonds or a 4333 shape. If playing Raptor, a doubleton diamonds is obviously impossible, and if not there are no tweeners between pass and 1NT although a 15-count with xxx in hearts is possible. Opposite that hand we will probably get to a no-play 3NT anyway unless I make a very conservative 2♦ bid. If not playing Raptor a 2♣ overcall could easily be a 5-card suit although I admit that it is unlikely that p has five clubs good enough for a vulnerable overcall now that I hold the ace. Then again, holding KQTx-Qx-Qx-KQxxx I think I prefer either 1♠ or 2♣ to dbl although I would probably double playing with someone from BBF.

[the_clown]

If anyone still thinks 3♦ is even a remote possibility please scroll up and read the posts of Phil, Timo and mcphee.

I like to think that I am a good and understanding partner, but if the person opposite me bids 3♦ on this I may throw the cards in his face.

My scores:

1N -10
2N - 6
2♦-5
1♠-4
2♣-2
3NT-1
3♦-1