[jillybean]

I don't reopen with a double often enough. Is this hand suitable or should I have ♥'s?

NONE VUL MP's
how about
♠JT63
♥K2
♦K74
♣AQJ8

1♣ (1♠) P (P)

[blackshoe]

If you double and partner bids 2 or 3♥, what then? OTOH, if you play negative doubles, either partner will not bid hearts, or he has less than 6 HCP.

Unless you can reopen 1NT to show a weak NT with a spade stopper, I think it's probably best to pass. OTGH, I'm no expert.

[mtvesuvius]

This is a pass, partner will very rarely have a penalty pass in this auction, and we don't want to hear X number of hearts from partner. Being a minimum only adds to the reasons not to reopen here. If partner couldn't take a call over 1♠, we don't want to be declaring anything... 1♠ looks like a fine spot to defend.

[Edit: A balancing 1N here would be 18-19 BAL so that is not an option. Even though defending 1♠ may seem weird at MPs, it seems to be the best shot at a good score (or the smallest minus)]

This post has been edited by mtvesuvius: 2010-December-09, 20:11

[jillybean]

mtvesuvius, on 2010-December-09, 20:09, said:

This is a pass, partner will very rarely have a penalty pass in this auction, and we don't want to hear X number of hearts from partner. Being a minimum only adds to the reasons not to reopen here. If partner couldn't take a call over 1♠, we don't want to be declaring anything... 1♠ looks like a fine spot to

This is exactly what happened, partner bid 3♥'s on 9875,AT6,QJ32,K6

[Phil]

jillybean, on 2010-December-09, 20:30, said:

This is exactly what happened, partner bid 3♥'s on 9875,AT6,QJ32,K6

A lot of the same cards in both our hands? 9xxx ATx Kxxx Ax maybe?

[jillybean]

Phil, on 2010-December-09, 21:16, said:

A lot of the same cards in both our hands? 9xxx ATx Kxxx Ax maybe?

fixed

[the hog]

Your hand is a clear pass. On the other hand your partner's pass is hard to fathom.

[pooltuna]

the hog, on 2010-December-09, 21:59, said:

Your hand is a clear pass. On the other hand your partner's pass is hard to fathom.

Is that because you don't mind playing 3NT without a ♠ stopper? Or you think they should risk a neg X? But I agree reopening is high risk/low reward.

[wyman]

Agree with partner's pass, agree with not balancing.

When you don't balance, your hand will be essentially face-up for partner. Should be a fun defense.

Also, even if 1S=, we got a matchpoint top for -80 the other day; just sayin'.

[gwnn]

never reopen with a weak no trump.

[pooltuna]

gwnn, on 2010-December-10, 09:31, said:

never reopen with a weak no trump.

Never !?!? so you are making an in tempo pass with ♠xx♥A987♦AKT♣KT98? While I am making an in tempo X. Of course I realize it depends on your definition of a weak NT

[mikeh]

Whenever we are thinking about reopening with a minimum opening hand (by which I mean less than a strong 1N) we should be thinking about the purpose of the reopening in the context of the hands responder may hold.

The classic and most optimistic reason for reopening is to protect partner's penalty double.

For partner to have a penalty double at the 1-level, he needs length and strength in their suit. We should assume that a non-psyching overcaller also has length and strength in his suit.

There being only so many cards available in any one suit, our possession of any significant length in their suit greatly reduces the a priori odds that partner has the penalty double hand.

Accordingly, the usual rule is that one passes with balanced or semi-balanced normal opening hands with 3+ cards in their suit.

Negative doubles are imperfect, especially when played without negative free bids. I don't like NFBs, and I have played them so this dislike isn't arbitrary, but there is no doubt but that they solve one standard problem: say you hold 2=2=3=6 8 count and RHO overcalls your partner's 1♦ opening bid with 1♠. You have to pass in a standard method and partner may be sitting there with 3=2=4=4 14 and will pass.

Now in real life, this kind of scenario doesn't happen quite as often as it might, because the opps might raise to 2♠ and you may be able to balance with 3♣, but the reality is that responder will often have an unbiddable hand with moderate values and the simple 1 level overcall preempts you completely.

Obviously, when responder holds this hand type, it will pay opener to reopen all kinds of hands that, according to the advice I set out above, should be passed. The problem is that absent a complicated and completely illegal set of signals, there is no way for opener to divine what is going on, and the risk that the double catches responder with nowhere to go outweighs (in mainstream opinion) the occasional loss from being preempted at the one-level.

Hence the standard and, in my opinion, correct view is that opener doesn't reopen balanced or semi-balanced minimum hands with 3+ in their suit. There are hands on which I wouldn't reopen with 2 cards in their suit! AQ or KQ or KJ, for example.....when you hold cards like these, you know their value has diminished due to the overcall...even AK has diminished because it won't combine with partner's cards to promote his spade holding....and your holding high honours virtually eliminates the penalty pass which is the holy grail of the reopening double (not the only purpose, but the biggest payoff purpose).

BTW, if the overcall is 1♥, this problem can be fixed by using the negative double as 4 or more spades (consider...if they had passed, 1♠ would be 4 or more spades, so how tough can this be to play?) and 1♠ becomes the 'I have values but no raise, no spade suit, no 1N bid'...typically some 5332 with 5 cards in the unbid minor and 7-9 points.

But I haven't yet heard of a 'fix' for dealing with 1♠ overcalls.

[petterb]

pooltuna, on 2010-December-10, 09:45, said:

... so you are making an in tempo pass with ♠xx♥A987♦AKT♣KT98?

That's not a weak NT, it's a 15-17 1NT opening.

http://www.jeff-gold...x+A987+AKT+KT98

[mtvesuvius]

Ted's point is still valid though. In general with "shortness" in their suit, you will want to reopen, even with the weak NT hands. Shortness is defined as a doubleton or less here IMO. As Mike said, the AK/KQ/QJ/AQ/AJ/KJ holdings may be passed, but with only a doubleton, it is still very possible partner is making a penalty pass, and therefore passing with ALL weak NT hands is not a winning style.

[gwnn]

yes I sort of forgot about a low doubleton in their suit. I guess a better rule would be for weak notrumps with a doubleton spade 'reopen if you still have a weak NT if you discount the spade points' (analogous to Fred's rule to replying to a splinter in NT auctions "co-operate if you still have a strong NT if you discount the points in my shortness).

[han]

Double with shortness, pass with length.

[ewleongusa]

jillybean, on 2010-December-09, 19:48, said:

I don't reopen with a double often enough. Is this hand suitable or should I have ♥'s?

NONE VUL MP's
how about
♠JT63
♥K2
♦K74
♣AQJ8

1♣ (1♠) P (P)

I would pass. If partner was short in spades and had some cards he would have made a negative double.
Also, a reopening double is takeout so you should have length in both the unbid suits.

Eric Leong

[han]

gwnn, on 2010-December-10, 11:18, said:

yes I sort of forgot about a low doubleton in their suit. I guess a better rule would be for weak notrumps with a doubleton spade 'reopen if you still have a weak NT if you discount the spade points' (analogous to Fred's rule to replying to a splinter in NT auctions "co-operate if you still have a strong NT if you discount the points in my shortness).

I haven't thought about this explicitly, but I don't think I agree with that Csaba. With 2-4-3-4 distribution I would typically reopen. Whether I have Ax or xx in spades is not so relevant. Of course KQ tight would be quite bad and I would pass with that.

Table feel and the style of the opponents also matters. If RHO hesitates quite a bit before passing, then you should pass sooner, but if 1S is limited by 15 HCP and a weak RHO passes in tempo, then you should reopen sooner.