[Furlan]

---

IMPs. No relevant agreements. Do you move?

[S2000magic]

Because a minimum double by partner, including, say, the ♣ K and the ♦ K Q, could produce 10 tricks, there's an argument for bidding 4♦ immediately.

Because partner has another chance to act (say, with a second double), there's an argument for passing the decision around to partner.

I'd be inclined to bid; I think that it's too much to ask of partner to reopen the bidding on what may be a minimum hand. I trust that over 4♦, partner won't raise without close to an opening hand. We'll see.

[dkham]

Partner might not have diamonds, perhaps the double only showed hearts?

I would pass or reluctantly bid 4♣. Not likely to be doubled but if it is maybe I can stumble into 4♦.

[gnasher]

Assuming the style where double only promises hearts, 4♦ would be both dangerous and, in my opinion, forcing. The way to bring diamonds into the picture is to double. That also allows the possibility of playing in 3NT, which might or might not be a good idea.

[the_clown]

4♣. Bid what you have

[Hanoi5]

Partner being a passed hand and doubling a 1♠ overcall does not neccessarily put me in a minor suit game. I think it's better to double, though 4♦ is very tempting.

[billw55]

 Hanoi5, on 2012-April-25, 05:53, said:

Partner being a passed hand and doubling a 1♠ overcall does not neccessarily put me in a minor suit game.

This. And 3NT is certainly partner's responsibility. So I pass; partner has another call and while my hand is good, it is not *that* much better than I have already shown.

[han]

Too light to double, nothing else but pass comes to mind.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 gnasher, on 2012-April-25, 03:55, said:

The way to bring diamonds into the picture is to double.

This would be another example of Richard Pavlicek's Competitive DBL: , “I want to compete further but I am not sure what to bid.”

p - ( p ) - 1C - ( 1S )
X - ( 3S ) - X

[ahydra]

The more I look at it the more I would pass, but at the table I'd probably bid 4C :/ Certainly the hand is too weak for 4D unless double definitely shows diamonds. Not sure about an X - for some reason the hand "doesn't look right" for it, not least because partner might bid 4H if he has a 9-count with 5 hearts, which will not end well.

ahydra

[rmnka447]

What does the 3 ♠ bid show?

If it's invitational, then I think pass is correct.

If it's preemptive (say 5-8 with 4 ♠s), then it's a matter of style. I tend to believe a DBl would show something 15+ HCP and no clear cut direction, so I'd probably pass hoping partner could find a way to reopen over 3 ♠ in passout seat. If you play a DBL could be somewhat lighter, then that would be the right call.

If partner finds a reopening double, then 4 ♦ looks right to me.

[MrAce]

Pass

[jdeegan]

I don't think 4♦ makes any sense - pard has not really promised the suit. I hate to pass despite Timo's example. Double is too moderne for me. I would just bid 4♣ knowing it was a crapshoot. Odds are the opps don't have 4♠, but they might. I really think it is our hand, so make the otherguys make the last decision.

[daveharty]

 jdeegan, on 2012-April-28, 04:46, said:

...make the otherguys make the last decision.

I think your RHO might be saying the same thing right now.

[Furlan]

Poll added.

dkham said:

Partner might not have diamonds, perhaps the double only showed hearts?

Indeed, he didn't promise diamonds.

rmnka447 said:

What does the 3 ♠ bid show?

Preemptive.

[ggwhiz]

Pass. After a weak 3♠ bid, partner can look at a few of them and maybe know what to do. I don't.