[mike777]

Negative doubles auctions, your preference here..1s or 2S or 3S or Cuebid or otherwise

Theme borrowed from old Barry Rigal writings

AQJx..xx..xx..AKxxx

P=1C=(1D)=X
P=?

[bluenikki]

mike777, on 2025-January-12, 07:49, said:

Negative doubles auctions, your preference here..1s or 2S or 3S or Cuebid or otherwise

Theme borrowed from old Barry Rigal writings

AQJx..xx..xx..AKxxx

P=1C=(1D)=X
P=?

I believe it _should_ be 2♠. But I wouldn't dare with a pickup partner.

[apollo1201]

Figuring out it X is 4-cd both M, you should reply to partner s 1M bid do 2S it is.

As I don t play this (to me C is either no M, or 4+ hearts, depending on my partner), I cannot answer more precisely.

I guess playing it both M gains on contested partials but prevents expressing GF fitted hands that can range from AKxx Kx Axx KJxx, AKxx Kx Ax KJxxx, AKxx Kxx x AKJxx to AQxx Kx x AKJxxx, or even stronger. Some miracle slams will be harder to find.

[pescetom]

For us X here promises majors exactly 4-4 and so 2S is clear.
FWIW I don't remember ever missing a miracle slam for this agreement. I would take 3S as forcing although that is undiscussed (thanks).

[jillybean]

For me, X says pick a major, partner has both.
2♠. wtp

[mycroft]

While I agree with all (even if with one regular partner we played this double as 4-3 or better), I think "wtp" is "so, what's 1♠?"

I'm sure we all know (our) answer (for me it's "preference, not actual support"), but that's the question being asked...

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,


we play, that 2S has the same strength, as if p would have bid 1S and we would raise.
You can make the argument, that 2S should be strong in the given seq., but sometimes p
has a bal. hand with only a 3 card major suit and no stopper in their suit, and has to
find a bid, ..., and so bidding 1H / 1S basically is just simple preference.

If you play weak NT, you dont need to cater for the weak NT hands in the given seq.,
because opener can not longer have a weak NT hand.

For whats it worth, we play a weak NT system, and still 2S does not show add. strength.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

Thanks for responses so far

I liked this problem that Barry posed, years ago.

I dont think 2S is as clear as everyone else, however I am clearly a minority of one.

When posters say 2s is clear or wtp?

[mikeh]

Whether the ‘correct bid’ is 1S or 2S depends on what your partnership agreements are. I don’t actually play negative doubles, in this sequence, in my main partnership so it doesn’t arise (no, we don’t play penalty doubles either, we play transfers starting with double = hearts)

I think it is best to have the agreement that one bids 2S with all minimum range 4 card holdings, but would allow 1S on an ugly hand, such as weak spades and something like Qxx in diamonds and 11-12 hcp.

Note that one need not jump to game with a big hand nor play 3S as forcing (I’d assume invitational) since we have 2D available to deal with all gf hands….we can clarify our spade situation next round.

[mike777]

Thanks, got me wondering
Minimum standard range for neg x here?
Given that range then
Range for 2S here?

[jillybean]

I play minimum negative double at the 1 level as 6+, although my true minimum would AJxx, especially if it's the black suit.
2S is dependant on much more than hcp. I would consider 2S with a 4216 11 count with pointy values in the 2 suits.

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2025-January-12, 16:02, said:

Note that one need not jump to game with a big hand nor play 3S as forcing (I’d assume invitational) since we have 2D available to deal with all gf hands….we can clarify our spade situation next round.

Yes you're right of course... that would have been the outcome of our discussion about 3S.

[mike777]

This hand looks pretty darn close to an invitational 3S
Or 2D if less than gf hands could start here.

[akwoo]

I wouldn't object to 3S (assuming it's invitational) playing 15-17 1N openers, but it's definitely 2S in my 12-14 partnerships (and also playing 10-12 with coded minors)