[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the following hand features 1-2 points that may or be interesting for regular partnerships to discuss.
Playing MP, Green vs. Red (corrected) you are in 3rd and pick up

♠Kxx
♥Jxxx
♦Jxx
♣AKx

You play a 5 card major system with weak NT, but partner will open a minor in case he happens to be
44 with a 4 card spade suit, 44 in the majors would be opened with 2D.

The bidding seq.

1♣ - (X) - XX (1) - 1♦
Pass (2) - 1♥ - Pass (2) - Pass
X (3) - Pass - ???

(1) In view of the suit quality and the vulnerability
We never really discussed it, how high does the XX generate a Forcing Pass
(2) Forcing, but X would be for T/O
(3) see (2)

With kind regards
Marlowe

[DavidKok]

I prefer not to play this style of XX, in no small part for this reason. It is very difficult to penalise the opponents at the 1-level (and still tricky at the 2-level), so I think it is better to describe our hand and find our best spot instead.
The auction smells. Our LHO thought 1♦ would be good, we have three of them, and partner has a takeout double of hearts. But the doubler then pulled from diamonds, indicating a likely offshape takeout double. 4=4=2=3 perhaps? If partner has a strong notrump we should be fine for 3NT, but if partner has an unbalanced minimum, especially 3=1=4=5 or so, I don't really know where we belong. Though this would give our LHO 4♥4♦, in which case they should have bid hearts rather than diamonds. Perhaps doubler has 4=5 in the majors?
To make matters even worse, the colours suggest bidding. We need to set their contract by four tricks to beat our vulnerable game, which is possible but not likely.
In conclusion, I don't know what to do here. I would probably bid on and look for 3NT, as I would have in my current agreements over their takeout double.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

sry we are green vs. Red.

Red vs. Green, I would go for my own contract, even at eq. vul., this was the reason
behind my alert (1).

And the opponents are not very strong, but I tend to ignore this.

There is a 2nd question, what do you do, if 1D reaches you.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[DavidKok]

Ah, with the colours reversed there's a bigger case for defending. Now only two off will beat our game, and I will sit for 1♥X. I think the most inconvenient hand partner could have is a 3=1=3=6 with strong diamonds, but it doesn't pay to look for doom everywhere. It's still just a guess, but now I think the odds are tilted the other way.

[Gilithin]

DavidKok, on 2023-November-29, 03:09, said:

Ah, with the colours reversed there's a bigger case for defending. Now only two off will beat our game, and I will sit for 1♥X. I think the most inconvenient hand partner could have is a 3=1=3=6 with strong diamonds, but it doesn't pay to look for doom everywhere. It's still just a guess, but now I think the odds are tilted the other way.

Playing this method, partner cannot have that hand as it is not a Double. Partner's Double here shows a hand that would have passed a Double in the traditional scheme, typically 3 hearts but sometimes 2 or 4. If OP were not playing the normal P/X inversion scheme here I am sure they would have told us.