[kfay]

Scoring: IMP

1♣-(2♣)-?

---

2♣ is the majors.

[ArtK78]

3♣ seems reasonable. If partner cue bids anything, bid 3NT.

EDIT: I did not include the 2♥ bid (limit raise or better in clubs) in my short answer, as I didn't think that this collection of junk was worth a limit raise. Since it was mentioned in another post (although without any explanation as to exactly what the 2♥ bid meant) I thought I would add this edit.

I refer to this convention as Unusual over Michaels (a somewhat awkward name, to say the least). Does anyone have a better name for this convention? Michaels over Michaels doesn't make any sense, and, obviously, Unusual over Unusual is not right, since they bid Michaels.

[jjbrr]

I gave you my vote yesterday, but just for completeness, 2♥ is my choice.

[pooltuna]

ArtK78, on Apr 29 2010, 09:28 AM, said:

3♣ seems reasonable. If partner cue bids anything, bid 3NT.

Probably 3♣ is right but you might be able to make a case for a] stolen bid X or b]support X

[Phil]

Good hand for a card showing x.

Flawed 3♣ seems like reasonable choice. Not fond of 2N and this is a weird looking limit raise - to me anyway.

[Phil]

pooltuna, on Apr 29 2010, 09:45 AM, said:

...stolen bid X or b]support X

Tunas that suggest either of these in this auction should be gaffed

[akhare]

3.5 ♣. Will 2♣....director...oops...I mean 3♣ convey the message ?

[jdonn]

2♥ wtp?

[j0i]

I would bid 2♥ showing a good ♣ raise

[jillybean]

Interesting hand, 2♥, 2N, 3♣ are all considerations.

What would 1♣ (2♣) X show, "cards, 8+ points"?

[mikeh]

double is silly. Surely we all agree that one cannot double and then pass the hand out in a partscore declared by the opps?

Even if the bidding is nice and quiet, say it is 2♠ back to us, are we happy? Or if partner doubles 2♥...are we happy?

To me the choices are the modest overbid of 2♥ or the modest underbid of 3♣. I assume that partner won't hold a balanced 15-17 count, so game prospects look remote with this soft hand and sterile shape...both argue for 3♣...but I go for the overbid of 2♥. It's a bidders' game.

JB: I think the standard treatment of double is announcing ownership of the hand, with defensive prospects...it invites partner to hammer them if he has a good holding in the suit to which 4th seat runs (say K10x or better).

There are two sequences to discuss: double then double: is that optional? Or pure penalty?

eg 1♣  (2♣)  x  (2♥)
     P    (P)    x

If you play this double then double as optional (as I do), then pass and double is pure penalty. So if you are loaded in the majors, and want to defend whatever they run to, and are prepared for the embarrassment of 'your lead, partner' against 2♣...which never happens as often as it should....pass then double.

[helene_t]

I think 3♣ is enough.

Dunno what 2NT means, I suppose it could be natural but wouldn't a hand with a natural 2NT bid double?

[kfay]

mikeh, on Apr 29 2010, 06:13 PM, said:

double is silly. Surely we all agree that one cannot double and then pass the hand out in a partscore declared by the opps?

Well, I'm not so sure.

Frankly there have been many hands where I'd like to double and sit if partner could pull a red card. I don't think that we've necessarily put ourselves in a force. Like you say, doesn't double invite partner to cooperate and we can just pass and smash if we don't care what he thinks?

Certainly this isn't the hand for this double though, I agree with you there. Whether or not we can double and then pass out on a different holding... I'm not convinced.

[mikeh]

kfay, on Apr 29 2010, 11:34 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 29 2010, 06:13 PM, said:

double is silly. Surely we all agree that one cannot double and then pass the hand out in a partscore declared by the opps?

Well, I'm not so sure.

Frankly there have been many hands where I'd like to double and sit if partner could pull a red card. I don't think that we've necessarily put ourselves in a force. Like you say, doesn't double invite partner to cooperate and we can just pass and smash if we don't care what he thinks?

Certainly this isn't the hand for this double though, I agree with you there. Whether or not we can double and then pass out on a different holding... I'm not convinced.

The problem is that I don't think you can have it both ways. I agree that there are many hands on which one wants to double but then pass if partner passes, but that approach puts too much pressure on partner, who then has to make a bid ahead of you whenever he has extras, even when he has no clear direction...which not only leads to confusion but also detracts from the meaning of his action, when pass is no longer an option for him. I don't know what the answer to this dilemma is.

[Jlall]

Thought it was an auto X

[aguahombre]

hate having only 4 clubs for either 2H or 3C. Maybe a real wus-out with pass, then 3C if it goes 2M P P back to me.

[peachy]

2H, "lower for lower", limit raise or better in clubs. Admittedly pretty minimum so 3C is a close second choice. Dbl would be interested in defending something but this hand IMO is not suited for that, not yet.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on Apr 29 2010, 04:13 PM, said:

JB: I think the standard treatment of double is announcing ownership of the hand, with defensive prospects...it invites partner to hammer them if he has a good holding in the suit to which 4th seat runs (say K10x or better).

There are two sequences to discuss: double then double: is that optional? Or pure penalty?

eg 1♣  (2♣)  x  (2♥)
       P    (P)    x

If you play this double then double as optional (as I do), then pass and double is pure penalty. So if you are loaded in the majors, and want to defend whatever they run to, and are prepared for the embarrassment of 'your lead, partner' against 2♣...which never happens as often as it should....pass then double.

Thanks. I had a very useful discussion with my partner on this, I will revisit this in a couple of months to see if we remember our agreement.

[Jlall]

If you're trying to raise clubs in some way, how is X then raising clubs not much better than doing it immediately? You always have only 4 clubs not 5, and you usually just have a balanced hand with some values.

Another plus, they might bid 2S and partner might be able to crack it in which case you're happy to sit since they're in a big misfit (partner is probably 4423).

3C looks more like x xxx Jxxx KQTxx to me, not something like this.

I do not feel the need to immediately show club support for fear of preemption in a major if I X since my hand is so balanced/scattered/defensive, and I only have 4 clubs.

[hanp]

Completely agree with mikeh, I also double.