[johnu]

 GrahamJson, on 2016-June-29, 02:02, said:

Definitely not a negative double, which should have at least tolerance for both unbidden suits, unless you play a style when you double on most strong hands. Also, doubling with good support for partner is not usually a good idea. Partner may pass the double and his experted tricks in clubs (in this example) will not materialise.

It seems to me that W should bid 3C, after which it should be easy to reach six.

After a 1♦ overcall, you can afford to have a negative double show both majors because responder can 1♥/1♠ with only 1 major. After a 2♦ overcall, you don't have that luxury if you only have 1 of the majors. So, common practice is that double shows 2 places to play. Opener needs to be aware that responder may have 4+ support for clubs.

On this hand, 6♣ is the goal, but on other hands, 4♠ or a spade partscore is the goal and bidding 3♣ may put up roadblocks in getting there.

[jogs]

 helene_t, on 2016-June-28, 07:13, said:

IMO Wests hand is a bit weak for a negative double. Dbl would not be wrong but I prefer pass.

I don't like East's 3♥ bid, though, I think it shows a purer hand and five hearts.

A plausible auctions IMO:

pass-dbl
3♦-3♥
4♣-4♦
... (will end in 5♣ or 6♣)

After it starts
pass-3♥ (as in the actual auction) I don't think East can stop below slam although it is of course a lot easier when one can see both hands.

-------1♣-2♦
p-p-3♥-p
4♣-p-4♦-p
?

This gives E-W a chance at reaching slam. Now West would need to cooperate with 4♠.

Also in the bidding box did you interchange some bids between EW and NS?
Why didn't East just rebid 2♥?

[Caitlynne]

I believe the first sin was West's failure to take a bid at his/her first turn. Surely with 5 card support headed by 3 of the top 5 honors, a side singleton, and a side 4 card suit including a prime card supported by a secondary honor, this hand is worth an immediate bid. It may be only 7 HCP, but overall it looks pretty much like a very highly constructive to game invitational raise. You MUST bid.

A negative double would be a popular choice as an inconvenient rebid (e.g., some number of hearts) can always be corrected quite comfortably to clubs (partner's first bid suit). But even 3C or 3D is far better than passing.

On another matter, I find opener's decision to bid 3H faulty as well. A jump like this should promise a 5 card suit (and, by extension, a 6 card or longer club suit) - a hand with playing strength based largely on distribution and less on power.
With a hand that is close to a strong forcing and artificial 2C opener and is not a true two suiter (but a pseudo 2 suiter), double is surely far superior. Indeed, there is no way that West, who has passed, can produce a 4S bid - and even a 3S bid would be extraordinarily unlikely. If West bails with 2S or 3C, East simply continues with 3H to show something on the order of this East hand.

I think reaching the slam is challenging simply because of the heart wastage, but it surely can be done if West bids at his/her first turn. Consider the following auctions:

-- (--) 1C (2D)
Dbl (P) 3D (P)
3S (P) 4C (P)
4H (P) 6C All Pass

The 4H bid must be a control, not a suit, since West bypassed 3H to bid spades first.

-- (--) 1C (2D)
3C (P) 3D (P)
3S (P) 4D (P)
4H (P) 6C All Pass

Again, the 4H bid must be a control.

-- (--) 1C (2D)
3D (P) 3H (P)
3S (P) 4D (P)
5C (P) 6C All Pass

Here, 4H would be an overbid since the 3D cue bid implied the values to raise to 4C. Nevertheless, opener is justified in driving to slam opposite any hand that can bid 3D. Opener's 4D bid was an effort to sniff at a grand slam.

[Winstonm]

 GrahamJson, on 2016-June-29, 02:02, said:

Definitely not a negative double, which should have at least tolerance for both unbidden suits, unless you play a style when you double on most strong hands. Also, doubling with good support for partner is not usually a good idea. Partner may pass the double and his experted tricks in clubs (in this example) will not materialise.

It seems to me that W should bid 3C, after which it should be easy to reach six.

A pretty standard way to play negative doubles (as least, as I was taught ) was that this double shows one of two hand types: A) both majors or B) one major and support for opener's suit.

As in most standard systems the 1C opening shows 3, support must be 5 in length. So, a pull of a 3H bid to 4C is the same as a direct bid of 4C but shows additionally 4 spades.

[notproven]

1) In standard American, SAYC or 2/1, a negative double guarantees tolerance for the other two suits, unless you have 5+ cards in a major and are too weak to bid at the two level (say, Axxxx Qx xx Qxxx). No exceptions. Period. If West had 10+ points and a slightly chunkier suit, most experts play that a 2♠ bid would be acceptable. Over 1♣ 1♦ West absolutely should bid 1♠ with this hand; it only promises 4♠ and tends to deny ♥.

2) In this auction, I don't mind opening 1♣. However, 2♥ would be a reverse (given West's pass). 3♥ shows a more shapely hand.

3) West's initial pass is strange. 3♣ is 100%.

[iandayre]

There is nothing wrong with a negative double with this shape. In this auction double shows either both majors, or one major and a club fit. This is far more than a 50-50 treatment.

I see several contend otherwise. Sorry, but this is a gap in your bridge knowledge. The only negative double auction that promises both unbid suits is 1C opener, 1D overcall.

[notproven]

Addition - see prior post:

4) A negative double at the one level shows 6+ points. A negative double at the two level shows 10+ points. West doesn't come close on this hand, even if you like to shade your bids. 3♣ is the bid. If East has a big hand with 4♠, you'll hear 3♠ next.

[Cyberyeti]

 iandayre, on 2016-June-29, 10:06, said:

There is nothing wrong with a negative double with this shape. In this auction double shows either both majors, or one major and a club fit. This is far more than a 50-50 treatment.

I see several contend otherwise. Sorry, but this is a gap in your bridge knowledge. The only negative double auction that promises both unbid suits is 1C opener, 1D overcall.

This is a style/system thing NOT just bridge.

People who come from a background in other systems will quite often play "both unbid suits" negative doubles.

[Stephen Tu]

 Cyberyeti, on 2016-June-29, 10:14, said:

This is a style/system thing NOT just bridge.

People who come from a background in other systems will quite often play "both unbid suits" negative doubles.

Which systems are those? Let's make the original hand same shape but say an ace stronger so no one can possibly disagree about the need to take a call. How can you possibly handle this, if double guarantees both majors? Are you going to overload the cue bid?

I can't see why one would want to put more restrictions on the lowest possible call with the most room to disambiguate.

[notproven]

This series of posts illustrates why bidding on BBO is so horrendous: most players make up their own systems and call it "Bridge". The original post is a beginner question about 2/1. So I went to Mike Lawrence's book on 2/1 - THE BOOK. You might also want to read Eddie Kantar or Marty Bergen or some other World Class player/writer, but they'll all give you the same answer to this beginner problem. Check my posts; I didn't just make up something, I confirmed all of it in Mike's book first.

Granted, many of truly expert pairs have adopted useful variations: supported by pages of system notes and hours of discussion and play. But, first they all read about the system and thoroughly understood the principles. That's why they win world class events, not because they've picked up a few dubious tips from the local club. If you want to deviate from standard, fine, but make clear what is standard first, then tell us why your variation plays better.

[MrAce]

Playing negative double to promise both unbid suits is a textbook example of how to waste a valuable tool such as negative DBL imo.

I would dbl 2 ♦ with W hand on any day that ends with Y.

[MrAce]

 notproven, on 2016-June-29, 10:09, said:

Addition - see prior post:

4) A negative double at the one level shows 6+ points. A negative double at the two level shows 10+ points. West doesn't come close on this hand, even if you like to shade your bids. 3♣ is the bid. If East has a big hand with 4♠, you'll hear 3♠ next.

How did you come up with this nonsense about 10+ hcp requirement for a negative dbl at 2 level? I personally know it is bs but can you give some reference to it? I just googled and checked the links below to see if there are others who advocate bs requirements such as 10+, haven't seen one yet. So again, please enlighten us where did you get this opinion?


http://www.bridgehan...tive_Double.htm

http://www.rpbridge.net/5a00.htm

https://en.wikipedia...Negative_double

https://www.larryco....enter/detail/27

http://www.bridgebum...tive_double.php

https://www.mrbridge...neg_doubles.pdf

[Cyberyeti]

 Stephen Tu, on 2016-June-29, 11:45, said:

Which systems are those? Let's make the original hand same shape but say an ace stronger so no one can possibly disagree about the need to take a call. How can you possibly handle this, if double guarantees both majors? Are you going to overload the cue bid?

I can't see why one would want to put more restrictions on the lowest possible call with the most room to disambiguate.

Acol for example (where the club shows 4 and you don't tend to double with support, certainly not 5).

If you were 4-3 in the majors you might double anyway, but is not routine with 4-2 or 4-1.

An A better I would bid a natural 2N with ♦ ATx and 3♦ with one of the other aces.

[neilkaz]

 MrAce, on 2016-June-29, 15:24, said:

Playing negative double to promise both unbid suits is a textbook example of how to waste a valuable tool such as negative DBL imo.

I would dbl 2 ♦ with W hand on any day that ends with Y.

As would I.

[notproven]

MrAce:

Start with Barry Crane. Over the yearsI played at least 2,000 practice hands against him when he wanted to break in a new partner for a major tournament. I'm not pretending that I was in his class, but he didn't believe in wasting his time with fools. I'll try, sometimes. In your case, I suggest you actually read Mike Lawrence, Marty Bergen, Eddie Kantar, Fred Stewart. Almost any bid that forces to the 2 level promises more than a minimum. Basic Bridge, as taught by world class players.

[MrAce]

deleted

[MrAce]

 notproven, on 2016-June-29, 18:09, said:

MrAce:

Start with Barry Crane. Over the yearsI played at least 2,000 practice hands against him when he wanted to break in a new partner for a major tournament. I'm not pretending that I was in his class, but he didn't believe in wasting his time with fools. I'll try, sometimes. In your case, I suggest you actually read Mike Lawrence, Marty Bergen, Eddie Kantar, Fred Stewart. Almost any bid that forces to the 2 level promises more than a minimum. Basic Bridge, as taught by world class players.

Before you call me fool, stop the bs and show me the articles instead of spewing silly requirements and putting the names of good players behind it! I am calling you out for it! Show us! Show us where did they require 10+ hcp for a 2 level negative double!! And stop backpedaling. You wrote 2 level negative DBL requires 10+ hcp!

OK, Let me do it for you!!

Did you say Mike Lawrence? There you go! Mike is showing with an example of minimum requirement of a negative double at 2 level. If your math is better than your opinions you can count the 7 HCP!!

http://webpages.mcgi...les%20(Lawrence).pdf

Did you say Marty Bergen? Sure! here you go.

http://www.cincybrid...ive_Doubles.pdf

I am too busy to copy and paste the links of ALL names you listed just to prove your nonsense, but I will give a name who is known by the entire world to be the MOST conservative bidder, Alvin Roth, even A.Roth in his conservative style writes in his article that 2 level negative double requires at least an 8 HCP!!!

http://csbnews.org/n...n-roth/?lang=en

So we are still waiting for you to provide something.... anything.... that supports your nonsense!

[mathboy]

Neg double is fine.It only promises one 4 cards major(not 44）after opp's two over one overcall or weak jump overcall.You can check this from Mike Lawance's book.

[msjennifer]

I agree with Cyberyetis argument.Even keeping in mind that 1C might be a prepared bid,it is too timid to pass or make a negative double.A straight forward bid of 3 C is a standout bid.i cannot understand the reasoning behind first doubling and then running or so-called "correcting to club" which can easily be confusing unless discussed previously and more so with a non established partnership.A 3 C bid leaves the opener to bid or describe his hand.Wests hand is a 8 loser hand opposite a prepared club and as per LTC 18-(7+8)=3. So there is absolutely nothing wrong in making a bid of of 3C over RHO'S 2D bid.The 3C bid does not deny a four card major suit and promises excellent club support.

[msjennifer]

 mathboy, on 2016-June-29, 21:47, said:

Neg double is fine.It only promises one 4 cards major(not 44）after opp's two over one overcall or weak jump overcall.You can check this from Mike Lawance's book.

And so it means that one expects a new partner to have read all the books that one has read ?