double
2♠
3♦ and pass.
2♣ wouldn't show this hand for me, jsut a strong hand.
Takeout troubles
#22
Posted 2009-November-10, 03:13
gnasher, on Nov 7 2009, 06:12 PM, said:
1. Double. Shows two places to play, which is what I have. I don't particularly want to play 3♠ in a 4-3 fit instead of 3/4♦ in a 5-4.
If I were planning to drive game, I'd bid 4♣.
2. 2♣. If that doesn't show this, what does it show?
3. Double. Still shows two places to play, which is what I have again.
If I were planning to drive game, I'd bid 4♣.
2. 2♣. If that doesn't show this, what does it show?
3. Double. Still shows two places to play, which is what I have again.
Agree with all those choices, and especially with the concept that a double shows 2 places to play.
#23
Posted 2009-November-10, 18:57
jdonn, on Nov 8 2009, 03:36 AM, said:
1. 3♠, I play double is general value showing and tends to be a balanced hand, so I don't want partner to get the wrong impression.
2. 2♠. Shows my values, blocks a 2♥ bid, I will be delighted to double if LHO feels pressured into 3♥, and I'm well placed to bid 3♦ if rho balances with 3♣ which is relatively likely.
3. 3♦, still a bit unbalanced to double and a bit weak as well.
2. 2♠. Shows my values, blocks a 2♥ bid, I will be delighted to double if LHO feels pressured into 3♥, and I'm well placed to bid 3♦ if rho balances with 3♣ which is relatively likely.
3. 3♦, still a bit unbalanced to double and a bit weak as well.
These bids and thoughts sum up my feelings on it as well.
2♣ seems like a possibly better "ideal bidding" start, but it leaves us more vulnerable to the opponents imo. I don't know that I'd like 3c p 4c ? for example. At the table, 2♠ rapidly communicates what is most likely to matter (imo) to partner immediately. If it goes p p RHO has a high likelihood of balancing back in with 3♣ and I can worry about diamonds then.