[Cyberyeti]

Bad_Wolf, on 2019-January-31, 16:24, said:

@phoenixmj Advanced players double. Partner needs to be able to "imagine" 6H simply because this is one of the hand types that starts with a double. Ignore posters suggesting an original 2H bid. The hand is significantly too weak and LTC has nothing to do with anything except poor teaching. (Other good players might mention NFBs - ie negative free bids, but that is another discussion)

It's not "significantly" too weak in many contexts, many Acol pairs will shade this bid over the overcall, and for those that do it's really quite close to good enough, if Jxx♣ was QJx or Kx(x) it's virtually auto, if it's Qxx, I'm thinking about it, probably not, but Q10x, or Qxx in a 6331 I probably do.

[nekthen]

ahydra, on 2019-January-31, 16:23, said:

This is a weak NT field (I'll make sure to point that out in future where relevant).

Thanks for responses all. Full hand was:

---

Sitting North I tried 4H, aware that it was likely going to be pushy, but feeling that we might not even beat 3S. If I'm going to bid game, perhaps 3NT is better to protect partner's spades. The defence were kind enough to never lead diamonds, but clubs were not kind enough to split, and I collected only 29%. (Quite the range of results. Three pairs somehow managed to make 4H, and one managed to concede -530! mikeh was very correct in predicting there was little difference - 8% - between +50 and +100.)

ahydra

As Bad Wolf pointed out 2N on a bare 15 is asking for trouble. Personally, I think Souths hand is so poor that I would open 1N

[P_Marlowe]

ahydra, on 2019-January-31, 16:23, said:

This is a weak NT field (I'll make sure to point that out in future where relevant).

Thanks for responses all. Full hand was:

---

Sitting North I tried 4H, aware that it was likely going to be pushy, but feeling that we might not even beat 3S. If I'm going to bid game, perhaps 3NT is better to protect partner's spades. The defence were kind enough to never lead diamonds, but clubs were not kind enough to split, and I collected only 29%. (Quite the range of results. Three pairs somehow managed to make 4H, and one managed to concede -530! mikeh was very correct in predicting there was little difference - 8% - between +50 and +100.)

ahydra

If you bid game, I believed 4H is better, but this may be wrong thinking.
To make game, you need the hearts, ..., and if you need the hearts, it may
well be, that getting 9 tricks is simpler, than getting 10.
I understand, why mikeh was passing, I surely would not have found it.

There is a joke along the lines
#1 bad player do A, because they dont know
#2 better player do B, because they know something
#3 expert do A, because they know, that there are exceptions

I am not suprised to find myself the #2 group.

PS: mikeh assumes competent oppoenents, ... i am not sure the west hand is a
proof for this assumption, I am struggling to find a reason, why West did bid 3S,
... except: it was succesful.

[nudnikbp]

4H.Partner could hold the heart king along with a decent club suit, so 4H hopefully will be playable, but it may go down 1.

[croquetfan]

negative X was invented to handle those hands where you want to overcall but only have a 4 card suit. If you use it with a 5+ suit, it becomes meaningless. Partner does not know whether to support with 3. So there is no right answer: just guess and take the blame for a the dumb double if you are wrong.