[Dinarius]

---

IMPs.

4H is described as wide-ranging, but not big enough to double and then bid hearts.

What's your agreement on negative doubles in these situations?

Is Pass by East forcing?

Would you do the same thing at MPs?

What's your bid?

D.

[Cyberyeti]

P can't be forcing, your zero count opposite partner's weak notrump doesn't want to do anything. It's X(neg) or P and it's close, if partner tends to pass these doubles with a weak NT without 4 spades, I'm happier with it, I have 2 tricks.

[hrothgar]

I play this as a negative double

I would double

[Winstonm]

Pass - not forcing. Pre-empts work sometimes and there is no strong reason to think either side can make a 10-trick contract

[LBengtsson]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-18, 07:06, said:

P can't be forcing, your zero count opposite partner's weak notrump doesn't want to do anything. It's X(neg) or P and it's close, if partner tends to pass these doubles with a weak NT without 4 spades, I'm happier with it, I have 2 tricks.

yes, that is way I play it against aggressive preempt 4♥. negative X with option to pass for partner if he can make no other bid. X show 4♠, short in opps suit and values when partner open 1m.

[jillybean]

Pass, not forcing.
I'd like to hijack the thread and ask what you would do if partner opened 1♠

[Winstonm]

jillybean, on 2021-March-18, 09:26, said:

Pass, not forcing.
I'd like to hijack the thread and ask what you would do if partner opened 1♠

Not sure who you are asking, but I would overbid with 4S on this hand if it were 1S-4H-Me? On offense in spades this hand is probably limit raise strength (It would be better if my aces were outside and my spades were xxxx) and the pressure from opps makes me have to guess.

[nige1]

Dinarius 'IMPs.4H is described as wide-ranging, but not big enough to double and then bid hearts.What's your agreement on negative doubles in these situations?Is Pass by East forcing?Would you do the same thing at MPs?What's your bid?
++++++++++++++++++
I rank
1. Double = T/O or "Neg" "Cards" or "Action" or Transferrable values".
2. Pass = Sensible conservative action with a weak hand.

---

[apollo1201]

We have to be brave on this one (why on earth pass would be forcing when we couldn’t open the bidding and partner could have a shapely 10 or 11?).

We can pass, but X looks tempting. Ok, partner opened in 3rd and the 4H bidder could really be bidding this to make. Acting is dangerous but passing may be more.

Being a passed hand is actually a relief because partner knows we have limited strength so our X can only come from a « pure » shape and good honor structure with quick tricks.

So partner can pass because he has a flat hand and doesn’t see us belonging higher...well, am I not brining 2 aces? Let’s hope he can find 2 other tricks in his hand.

If partner bids 5m or 4NT, with an unbalanced hand, well, I have a decent support for his one or two-suiter. It could prove to be a good save when our minor tricks would get trumped at 4H because of partner’s lengths.

The only risk could be a bid of 4S with an « elegant » opening, hoping to make (we are red, partner would more often try a 10-trick game than an 11-trick game), but we end up down 1 while 4H was also going down had I passed. Not too expensive at IMPs.

Sometimes we’ll write -590 when partner sits, but it is better than -800 anywhere else...

Who said preempts work, or it’s a bidder’s game.

So sign me in for this (minimal) X, ready to take the blame on the PM.

[pescetom]

For me this is X, and not a difficult decision (although risky, of course).

[gszes]

My hand cannot be much better. A pass here will put incredible pressure on partner. A neg x will actually paint a realistic picture of our hand given our original pass. P will not be able to count on us for 2 aces so their ability to judge will be partially impaired. It just seems too risky to allow for a double game swing; Preempts work sometimes. Another consideration, If it goes 1c 4h p p 4s will we not feel compelled to make a slam try? The neg x now relieves us of this potential problem.