[alexat11]

♠86
♥AK9743
♦K87
♣T9

Your partner, first to bid, starts with 1club, opponent pass, you bid 1 heart, opponent jumps in bids 1 spade. Your partner doubles (support), opponent pass. What is your bid?
Thanks!

[mw64ahw]

Opponent jumps in 1♠?
You have enough for 4♥

[alexat11]

mw64ahw, on 2023-November-09, 22:49, said:

Opponent jumps in 1♠?

Sorry, I am editing it
thanks for the answer

[mw64ahw]

You have enough for 4♥ after revaluation 15tp the way I play.
With an invitational hand in ♥ some may have a direct 3♥ bid rather 1♥
I go via 1♦ with a 3♥ rebid to show this hand if opener is minimum.

[apollo1201]

You have a 6-cd suit headed by AK and a side K (who, furthermore, is not in opp’s suit where it would look badly placed). Plenty enough to confidently bid 4H, sure of a fit* (see below).

Partner is warned at the same time, should they have extras, that you don’t consider slam.

In all cases, partner should not be too minimal for this X. I don’t thing trying to stop on a dime a 3H is winning strategy.

A quacky 4333 12-HCP should avoid Xing. We are forcing responder to bid when they could have only 4 hearts and a min hand, so we need to have a playable spot somewhere.

X should show an elegant hand (at least 13-14 5332 with no wated S honors, or 5431 with playable suits, should responder since opener forced us to bid), sometimes only 2-cd support* and e.g. no S stopper.

[pescetom]

apollo1201, on 2023-November-10, 11:54, said:

Plenty enough to confidently bid 4H, sure of a fit* (see below).

To confidently bid (legitimate since Star Trek) but not to bid confidently (with evident confidence in absence of screens).

[akwoo]

I play that double is mandatory on every hand with 3 hearts and every other call denies 3 hearts, so apollo's assumptions don't apply to me.

I'm only bidding 3♥ at MPs. I'd be willing to bid 4 if I had a spade singleton.

At IMPs, I'll bid 4 if red or behind or in a Swiss against weaker opps.

[bobade]

3H. This is an invitational strength hand. But 4H, vul at IMPS is a reasonable risk.