Could have been ugly, pard not happy

Assuming the 3D was a weak raise, once again I fail to see the problem. Partner shouldn’t be bidding 3M over 3D with a weak hand, even with a 5 card suit. While doing so ‘works’ when doubler has a useful minimum, and even down 1 is good v -110, he should be passing since doubler might have a legitimate raise to game, expecting a more constructive hand. Bidding on crap has a tendency to handcuff partner. If he passes, catering to the crap hand, games will be missed when advancer has his values. If he bids, expecting partner to have his values, then you turn a plus into a minus when he doesn’t.

And when doubler has a good hand, passing allows him to double again and the partnership usually lands on its feet, since both players have done a decent job of describing their hands.

Thus this is an easy second double. Would I prefer 4=4=1=4, same hcp? Absolutely. This hand is close to a minimum precisely because of the imperfect shape, but good players don’t pass out 3D with this hand.

Weak is the most common approach these days. I used to play weak in a major but limit in a minor, but realized that doing so gave the opponents too much of an edge…after 1D (x) 2N as a weak raise allowed 4th seat, with a borderline hand, the ability to pass and bid later, since opener could never have a hand on which he should pass 2N. Bidding 3D weak puts 4th seat under pressure…if he passes, that often ends the auction.

I would ask that you provide the strength info about 3D in the OP. I doubt I’m the only one who assumed ‘weak’.

Also, it would have allowed an objective answer, now impossible since we can see that doubling again fails miserably….yes, I see how we could go +100 but in real life partner is bidding the doomed 3S.

Doing the best I can….assuming east showed a limit raise, we can pretty much assume partner has between 0 and 3 hcp, unlikely to be as many as 3. We have precisely the wrong number of diamonds. If we had a stiff, we can get ruffs in our hand. If we had 3, partner may have a stiff.

We have defence but not a lot of offence. -50 or even -100 might be a good score but we do seem to have a shot at 4 tricks on defence opposite a Yarborough, so I think it to be an error to assume that (a) 3D makes and (b) we won’t go for a worse number…imagine partner with 3=3=2=5…it’s easy to see how 4C could be a disaster.

So pass has a lot going for it. I’m a notoriously (in my circles) conservative bidder so I might find the pass. I doubt it’d be popular amongst my peers. Heck, it’s only mps. Imagine partner with xxx Jxxxx xx Jxx. We have a decent play for 140. Tbh, I think I’d probably double a second time, if only because my partners would in my shoes and getting a bad board from being aggressive feels better than getting a bad board from being too conservative.

I’m assuming club level players. Against top rated pairs, pass is even more compelling a choice since not only will they usually not leak a trick but they might even be able to double (not on the actual hand, though…they don’t know we are 2=2 in diamonds).

BBO Discussion Forums: Could have been ugly, pard not happy - BBO Discussion Forums