[raist]

explain your choice a little bit thanks

[Mbodell]

You have 4 hearts and enough values to X. Playing a normal style of take out doubles I'd want to show that. Bidding 2♦ doesn't deny 4 hearts, but it does make it harder to find our fit. We are strong enough that if LHO bids 2♠ and partner passes, a not improbably situation, we can further describe our hand and move towards a diamond or nt strain.

[Codo]

If you have good agreements and if you do not play NFBs, you may bid your diamonds first with really strong long diamonds (AKqxxx f.e.) and double spades or bid hearts by yourself later.

If one of the conditions does not fit in your system, better double even then.

With your hand, this is an easy double.

[whereagles]

Better dbl, since it copes better with a spade bid by LHO. If you had like a 4450 then 2♦ would be just about as good.

[mikeh]

I think it is close between 2♦ and double.

The problem with 2♦ is that if advancer bids 2♠, it isn't clear you are getting back to hearts......no matter what partner does. If he passes, as he is apt to do (given your hcp and both opps bidding, he rates to be minimum), a double brings him back in, but will he bypass both minors? Say with 1=4=3=5? And there are other problems that can arise.

The problem with double is that if we don't have a heart fit and advancer bids 2♠, what do we do? We can reopen with a double, but that almost surely leads to 3♣ on say 2=3=3=5....and what do we do over that with our soft stopper, and misfit hand. And there are other problems that can arise.

For me the tiebreaker is that one shouldn't assume that advancer is always bidding 2♠...if he doesn't bid 2♠, then it seems to me that 2♦ is far superior to double.

It promises a higher minimum strength than does double, it makes a 2♥ rebid by opener very easy, we have no problem if partner bids 2N on, say, Kx in spades, and so on.

We may have a problem sequence no matter what we do...I am not suggesting 2♦ is a panacea. But it gets my (close) vote.

[Phil]

The reason to double and not show the diamonds is that sometimes you get buried in spades but this seems less of a concern with ♠Qxx.

If I get a 2♠ raise on my left, pass, pass, I can double, and then bid 3♥ which should imply a flexible hand.

So 2♦.

[aguahombre]

To me, the question was whether responder has a game forcing hand. If it is, then bidding the longer suit first seems fine, because later showing 4 hearts establishes GF.

This puts me in the neg double camp. I don't think I get to call this hand a GF, and still go along with non-Roth opening bids.

[P_Marlowe]

X.


I think, you can survive 2D, but if they bid 2S, you prefer to hear
3H over 3D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hanp]

I voted for double preferably. I don't have strong feelings here with bad hearts, good diamonds and a notrump oriented spade holding. An advantage of double is that partner is more likely to declare.

[mikeh]

hanp, on Aug 20 2010, 05:04 PM, said:

I voted for double preferably. I don't have strong feelings here with bad hearts, good diamonds and a notrump oriented spade holding. An advantage of double is that partner is more likely to declare.

There I was thinking that that was a disadvantage han is far more humble than most of us.