[andrei]

IMP, both vul

2/1, 1♦ opening shows minim 4 cards

---

With one of two finesses on, 4♠ made easily.

Which calls you disagree with?

[Phil]

I like South's pass. If partner floats 2C youre happy. I understand 2S since you arent certain of a 44 fit. North didnt do anything terrible. So no real blame here.

If anything its a system problem. Playing weak NT or an unbalanced diamond south should bid more aggressively.

[ggwhiz]

South can make an immediate negative double if you play that it just promises 1 major with a place to go when partner bids the other one. Diamonds here which is hardly clear cut.

Or South can pass the re-opening double, probably even less clear cut.

I might choose door #2 at matchpoints and might choose door #1 for the imp upside if it works but only 50/50 ish. 3♦ on the moyse down a couple against our own plus is the downside or getting too high to lose 6 or 7 imps may well happen.

[mike777]

 andrei, on 2017-February-01, 09:25, said:

IMP, both vul

2/1, 1♦ opening shows minim 4 cards

---

With one of two finesses on, 4♠ made easily.

Which calls you disagree with?

north might open 1nt if 15-17
south might bid more if you play sound opening bids, south is close to gf but at least invite

if you open lite and 1d no blame expect to bid the same
good example to open offshape 1nt when opening lite. 2 suited hands in this midrange can be tough when opening lite

[Kaitlyn S]

The thing that makes this hand so tough is that both sides have an undiagnosed double fit. Give North three spades and four hearts, more likely from South's point of view, and you don't want to be anywhere.

By the way, what would 3D by South mean? Having failed to bid 2D directly, I think it has to mean three diamonds and a high degree of game interest from the previous pass. If North guesses to bid 3S all is good but North might guess that South has hearts and just play 3D.

[wank]

off the top of my head....

2nt constructive with h+d
3C constructive with both majors - can't have a GF here
3d constructive with s+d

[SteveMoe]

Neg Double (South) followed by 3♠ (North)

[nekthen]

 SteveMoe, on 2017-February-01, 19:51, said:

Neg Double (South) followed by 3♠ (North)

Does a neg dbl show 4♠ now?

I think neg dbl is reasonable showing 4 cards in a major and ♦ tolerance but 2♠ from North
then 3♠ from South at match points or 4♠ imps

[helene_t]

I don't think there is any blame to share here.

Paying Kleinman's methods in which the reopening double shows extras, or playing weak NT, would help.

Kaitlyn's suggestion to bid 3♦ is interesting but opener could be 4342. And on this hand I am not convinced that North would move unless 3♦ specifically promises spades, which I suppose it doesn't. You could probably play 3♦ as showing this hand while 3♦ shows a similar hand with the majors reversed ....

[GrahamJson]

This looks to me like a hand where you just have to accept a poor score and move on. No partnership or system will reach the optimum contract every hand. In this case both players have made reasonable bids so there is no real blame. Of course it may be possible to have advanced agreements that would help in this particular situation, as has been suggested, but they often lead to problems elsewhere.

[Cyberyeti]

Agree no blame, bad 15 with the stiff king opposite flat 8, not going to make game often

[Joe_Old]

I like South's pass because I expect slightly more value for a 2 level negative double. I would then respond 3♠, showing 8-9 HCP and implying some ♦ value. If we play a 4-3 fit, then I expect partner to be short in ♣, so at least I'm not getting tapped in the wrong hand. This also assumes that partner won't reopen on absolute garbage. I am partly swayed by the need to reach the vulnerable game at IMPs.

[Phil]

 helene_t, on 2017-February-02, 07:55, said:

I don't think there is any blame to share here.

Paying Kleinman's methods in which the reopening double shows extras, or playing weak NT, would help.

Kaitlyn's suggestion to bid 3♦ is interesting but opener could be 4342. And on this hand I am not convinced that North would move unless 3♦ specifically promises spades, which I suppose it doesn't. You could probably play 3♦ as showing this hand while 3♦ shows a similar hand with the majors reversed ....

Kleinman really suggests a reopening double shows extras?

[msjennifer]

In my opinion the reopening double by North does not show extras .iIt also does not promise four cards in both majors. 2S might be based on even four small cards.We realise the possibility of a game when we see both hands which is not possible on the table.South can not make a negative dbl with only Six ( forget the CQ) HCP and only a small doubleton in hearts.Just forget the deal unless we can devise a new method (??!!)applicable for one such deal and useless for Innumerable others.

[rmnka447]

I don't see any real blame here either. Tough hand to bid.

I agree with the auction through 2 ♠. Responder doesn't have quite enough for a 2 level negative double. 2 ♠ in the second round seems right.

If there is any blame at all, it needs to be with opener. Opener might push with a 15 support value for a thin vulnerable game at IMPs by raising to 3 ♠. Even though I'm fairly aggressive at IMPs, I'm not sure I'd find that bid with this hand at the table.

[iandayre]

I blame South. Negative double the first time possible. Having not done so, must show some life (3S)

Opening 1NT isn't bad, but even if S invites, how can N accept?

[miamijd]

Sometimes you just can't find a 23 HCP game with both hands balanced (and the Kc in opener's hand looks like garbage after the overcall), especially when the opponents bid 2C over a 1D opener (the most obstructive overcall in bridge, I think).

No blame. Both N and S bid fine. A negative double isn't good at all with the South hand, because you have no escape if partner bids 2H. 3D? Really? And what's even worse, some of the time West will find a raise to 3C and partner, with 0-1 clubs, will bid 3H on a minimum opener. Now what?

North's X doesn't show extras, so it's hard to fault South for doing anything but bidding 2S, especially since the Qc is likely worthless.

Cheers,
Mike

[jogs]

♦ AQ762

♦ JT8

The diamond suit fits nicely. Neither of the North/South players can know this during the auction.

I would have bid both hands the same way as the diagram.

Next hand.

[Winstonm]

This is a non-problem as it has no real solution. Next board.

[mlbridge]

Equal vul, just pass 2 clubs double and see what happens before bidding more