[G_R__E_G]

We're red vs white, a little over half way through the session which is going very well, I'm dealer and pick up this: ♠- ♥A852 ♦AKJT9 ♣KQJ7

I opened 1♦, LHO doubles, partner passes and RHO bids 1♠. What would you do now? Would you have opened 2♣ in the first place? I chose to bid 2♠, I figured partner would take this as showing a big hand and spade shortness. Is this a reasonable assumption or does 2♠ show something else? After my 2♠ bid, bidding goes P-3♣-3♠. What now?

[han]

I don't think that you are good enough to bid 2S, so I would just double. I do agree that that's what 2S would show, and I would not open 2C with this playing standard.

[hotShot]

You are about 1 trick short of a 2♣ opening, so 1♦ is fine.
Your hand is strong enough to bid 2♠.
How is you partnership style on 1m - x - pass?
Could this be very weak without ♦?
If partner holds a ♠ stopper we are close to make 3NT, we need 2 tricks in partners hand to make 5m. You have 3-4 defence tricks and it is very likely that partner holds 4♠, so there is a good chance that 3♠ is down.
So i think dbl is the best bid now.
You showed that you are:
- strong
- short in ♠ (he should be able to guess the void)
- have tolerance for ♣ and ♥
- have a few defence tricks (because of dbl on 3♠)

Partner has to make the final decision.

[Echognome]

It's an interesting question whether one should double or bid 2♠. I think double is better on this hand as it (a) emphasises the 4 hearts in your hand and ( shows flexibility for the other suits. Whereas a cuebid of 2♠ shows your playing strength, but simply asks partner to tell you more about his hand. I would think a cuebid would be more likely with a long suit of your own than with your hand that has flexibility in all of the other suits.

But, supposing I cuebid initially, then I pass now. I feel I've already shown my strength with the cuebid and think that double suggests a different hand.

[cherdano]

Echognome, on May 18 2006, 03:45 PM, said:

It's an interesting question whether one should double or bid 2♠. I think double is better on this hand as it (a) emphasises the 4 hearts in your hand and ( shows flexibility for the other suits. Whereas a cuebid of 2♠ shows your playing strength, but simply asks partner to tell you more about his hand. I would think a cuebid would be more likely with a long suit of your own than with your hand that has flexibility in all of the other suits.

But, supposing I cuebid initially, then I pass now. I feel I've already shown my strength with the cuebid and think that double suggests a different hand.

I rather think cuebid here shows exactly a hand like this. If you have a good suit of your own, just bid it, with a jump if you like. If you have two suits, just bid the other one. If you have a balanced hand -- pass.

So while I think cuebid shows this hand type, the question is whether I am strong
enough to do so. I think yes, since I need really very little to make 4♥.

Arend

[FrancesHinden]

I don't think a cuebid shows this hand type, because I think double shows this hand.

I would double 1S.

[G_R__E_G]

Quote

How is you partnership style on 1m - x - pass?
Could this be very weak without ♦?

Yes, exactly. Partner would have less than 8 pts, and 3 or less diamonds (our 1♦ opening promises 4).

Thank you all for your input. The varying opinions remind me a lot of the voices in my head at the bridge table.

[Echognome]

cherdano, on May 18 2006, 02:05 PM, said:

I rather think cuebid here shows exactly a hand like this. If you have a good suit of your own, just bid it, with a jump if you like. If you have two suits, just bid the other one. If you have a balanced hand -- pass.

So while I think cuebid shows this hand type, the question is whether I am strong
enough to do so. I think yes, since I need really very little to make 4♥.

To me, I'd cuebid on:

♠x ♥Axx ♦AKQxxxx ♣Kx

I don't think 3♦ shows this hand. So what else am I going to do but cuebid. If you are going to bid 3♠ with this hand, what are you going to do with:

♠xx ♥AKx ♦AKxxx ♣KQx

[pclayton]

Agree with Matt; cuebid = long diamond suit.

I suppose 2♠ could be any strong hand with long diamonds; with or without a spade card. But Matt's example comes closest to what it should be I think.

Double shows the subject hand; it could be a King weaker or a King stronger.

I think 5-4-4-0's need to be pretty strong to open 2♣.

[awm]

I agree with the 1♦ opening. Hands where I would open 2♣ with 0454 shape are few and far between.

Over 1♠, I would bid 2♥. This is natural and shows extras. If the auction continues 2♠-P-P as I rather expect, I will bid 3♣.

While double is takeout and in principle okay, I don't particularly like doubling on a void. What if partner has five spades (seems fairly likely) and leaves it in? I am not that eager to defend on this hand.

The cuebid of 2♠ shows a big hand, but I don't think it's as well-defined as some people are implying. It just says "hey I have a monster hand please bid something" and I don't think it really implies a spade void or length in the unbid suits.

People often seem to underrate the utility of simply bidding their suits.

[pclayton]

Partner should also understand the risk of leaving the double in with 5 trumps.

My TOx doesn't promise a stiff trump here. I'd like to have one here, if pard choose to sit, but if partner takes it out, I'm happier with my void.

I've never understood the whole 'don't double with a void' thing. I think Larry Cohen is the one that espouses this, since its sort of anti-law. A stiff trump is nice for defense since I can can push one thru declarer and shorten dummy.

But a void trump means there's one less, and that may be in pard's hand. I sort of like defending in cases like this where we might have a 6-0 stack.

This added with my quick tricks means defending could be rather tasty.