[jillybean]

Let's start with an easy question

---

[smerriman]

Opening hand with 6 decent hearts, 2♥.

[apollo1201]

X is ill advised, especially with a descriptive 2H available (6-cd suit, 12-14). Pattern and honor quality make us very max for the call but 3H is a bit too much I think.

[awm]

1♥; for me 2♥ is more like 8-11 (a hand where I’m trying to stop opener from bidding again and/or stop partner from inviting) rather than showing a hand that would open 1♥ and rebid 2.5♥. Double would not occur to me although I guess it would be right in the old-fashioned French balancing style some of our teammates use.

[Cyberyeti]

smerriman, on 2024-December-23, 00:52, said:

Opening hand with 6 decent hearts, 2♥.

This for us denies a second suit, could I want to play in clubs ? maybe but not that likely, but this is a nice 14 count, a little too good for 2♥ (10-13 ish) the way we play

[mw64ahw]

1♥ for me since 2♥ is either 5♥4♠ or weak ♥ depending on partner

Addition:
The hand has playing strength for 3♥ as an intermediate jump, but typically I need a stronger or longer suit for that and no side suit

[TMorris]

2 ♥ for me as well.

[jdiana]

Our jump overcalls in the balancing seat showed about 13-16 HCP and a decent 6-card suit. So, another vote for 2♥.

Maybe a little off topic but an interesting question for me is where the dividing line is between a suit overcall and double-then-bid to show a stronger hand in the balancing seat. (More applicable with a 5-card suit I think.)

[pescetom]

1H for me, 2H balancing is more like 7-10.

[jillybean]

---

I'm with the 1♥ bidders, what do you expect partner to have for his X?

[pescetom]

4= spades and 2- hearts, 9-14 HCP. Quite probably a clubs fit.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2024-December-23, 07:18, said:

---

I'm with the 1♥ bidders, what do you expect partner to have for his X?

Perhaps in terms of strength the pertinent question is what do you expect North to have for their rebid given South has shown a hand too weak to bid?
If you know this then partner's range of strength becomes deterministic, but at a minimum I would expect ~8+hcp and 8.5 modified losers or less given South's Pass and tolerance for any non-♦ rebid with at least 44 in the black suits

[apollo1201]

It should not be a penalty X. Rather some kind of responsive, with decent values (10+ to 15 that could not act), given 1H balance can be weakish. Either a ratty 5-cd S suit that did not want to overcall (in that case the hand will be minimal) or most often 4-cd only, and a tolerance but no fit for H. That leaves 4234, 4225, 5224 etc in the picture but sometimes 5233 with 3 low D. Or 5125-5134-4135 a bad day.

In all cases we will play game but sometimes slam will be a mundane hand like Axxx AQ xxx, Qxxx, or make the HA the DA. What do you bid with that over 1D? That leaves opener with a good 6 or 7-cd D suit by AKQ or KQJ + HA, and the spade QJ as side goodies to act. Not the most likely but one never knows.

I guess 3D will help assess prospects, including C contracts, if partner does not bid 3H over that.

[mycroft]

Why shouldn't it be "I had to pass last round because double is takeout"?

Opener has a "too strong to pre-empt" 2♦ opener; I've got 1100 from weak 2s before - although that was at all red, but all white, the same 800 is the same big result.

I'm not saying it's wrong to have this responsive - the kind of 14ish that couldn't bid because it's 4243 or 4234 and there is no bid over 1♦. I am asking why, not "this is a good meaning for it, and this is why", but "the obvious meaning is wrong."

[smerriman]

I don't get why it wouldn't be a penalty double. If you had the trap pass hand, what else are you meant to do now?

[pescetom]

 mycroft, on 2024-December-23, 11:38, said:

Why shouldn't it be "I had to pass last round because double is takeout"?

Opener has a "too strong to pre-empt" 2♦ opener; I've got 1100 from weak 2s before - although that was at all red, but all white, the same 800 is the same big result.

I'm not saying it's wrong to have this responsive - the kind of 14ish that couldn't bid because it's 4243 or 4234 and there is no bid over 1♦. I am asking why, not "this is a good meaning for it, and this is why", but "the obvious meaning is wrong."

Fair question, but I think the odds that partner has the hand to punish and it can deliver more than 300 are small compared to the odds of a 42xx good for game.
Or to put it another way, the 14 point 42xx has to be able to back into the auction some way and this seems the obvious candidate.

[smerriman]

 pescetom, on 2024-December-23, 12:25, said:

Or to put it another way, the 14 point 42xx has to be able to back into the auction some way and this seems the obvious candidate.

What does 2♠ show for you?

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2024-December-23, 12:25, said:

Fair question, but I think the odds that partner has the hand to punish and it can deliver more than 300 are small compared to the odds of a 42xx good for game.
Or to put it another way, the 14 point 42xx has to be able to back into the auction some way and this seems the obvious candidate.

If the 4 spades are good, I overcalled 1♠.

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2024-December-23, 12:25, said:

Fair question, but I think the odds that partner has the hand to punish and it can deliver more than 300 are small compared to the odds of a 42xx good for game.
Or to put it another way, the 14 point 42xx has to be able to back into the auction some way and this seems the obvious candidate.

Here’s how I’d analyze the notion that partner may be stuck with a 42xx 14 count.


I hold a good 14. Opener didn’t preempt initially and, opposite a passed partner, didn’t jam us with 3D, as he might well with 7 good diamonds and a minimum opening hand, a tad too good for any other opening (though see below for a hand on which he might bid 2D)..

So opener and I likely have a minimum of 26 hcp between us and maybe as many as 29-30. This doesn’t quite mean that partner can’t have 14….and he could certainly have 11 or 12….although it’s an error to assume that responder has a zero count!

Plus we reopened with 1H, not a double as we would with opening values and, say, 4=5=1=3 shape.

All of this means that, while it’s possible partner is ‘trapped’ with values but no clear direction, it is not exactly a high frequency situation

So what’s the alternative? 50 years ago the double would be seen, by all experienced players, as purely penalty. AQx xx Q109xx QJx, leaving opener with something like xx Axx AKJxxxx x

These days many pairs have agreements that make most low level doubles takeout. That’s the presumption in my main partnership.

My point is that I very much doubt that there is a ‘right’ answer to the question: what does the double mean? Well, more accurately, the ‘right’ answer is, as is so often the case, ‘what is our agreement?’

Absent a specific agreement, do we have, with this partner, the level of agreement that says, on the one hand, low level doubles are takeout or, on the other, when neither side has announced a fit and a penalty double could easily be held, it’s penalty.

So to those seeking a clear answer, I’ll be the Grinch. It’s whatever you have agreed or, failing that, whatever you guess.