Let us assume that you are playing DONT, and therefore your way of getting a one-suiter into the auction is to double first (requesting Partner to bid 2♣ after which the long suit is revealed).  However, when Spades are the long suit there are two ways to show the one-suiter.  You can bid 2♠ directly (that is usually played as the the weaker way) or you can double followed by 2♠ (showing a stronger hand).  South’s hand qualifies for the stronger sequence, wouldn’t you say?  Is there a rule for when to bid 2♠ directly and when to go via the Double?  South has a 6-loser hand and we’d suggest that this is about as weak as can be for the stronger sequence.

When the opponents are bidding and raising and when Partner has made a Takeout Double, a Double by us is played as “responsive”.  That basic idea has been extended to apply to when Partner has overcalled rather than doubled.  How high do you play these Responsive Doubles?  Up to 4♦ or 4♥ is common.  What strength does the Responsive Double show?  The values to be able to compete at the level being doubled, so here at least game-invitational strength.  What sort of distribution is required?  Here, with two unbid suits, the Double ideally shows both of the unbid suits, but, as in the case of the Negative Double, North should at least have the unbid major.

What does Partner’s 5♠ mean?  The standard interpretation is that Partner has two Heart losers and would like us to bid slam if we’ve got the Hearts covered.  We have Heart shortness but our trumps are pitiful and our original overcall is not exactly blessed with high cards.  Here are a couple of questions:

-         Is South obliged to bid on with the Hearts covered?  It’s generally played as a “demand bid”, meaning that our discretion is not expected.  That being the case, South must bid on, even if she has serious qualms about her first bid and about the quality of her trumps.

-         What should South bid?  We suggest 6♣ saying “I have the Heart situation covered but perhaps 6♣ is a better spot”.  Good thinking, her Partner might, for example hold: ♠ AKJ8, ♥ 874, ♦ AKQ6, ♣ 987.  If that were the North hand then 6♣ would indeed be much the better slam.

Partner has doubled and South interjects with 1♥, a suit in which we have 4 cards, and which we were planning to bid ourselves.  Here are West’s options in this situation:

-         Double shows 4 Hearts which may expose a psyche by South or, more likely will suggest a 4-4 fit to Partner, regardless of the expected 4-1 break.  In terms of high-card strength, West could have virtually anything, let’s say about 6+.

-         2♥ shows 5 Hearts and less than game-invitational values.

That’s a fairly common (but not universal) agreement, and on this board it gets E-W to where they belong which is 2♥.

Most pairs play New Minor Forcing (or something similar) after Opener rebids 1NT or 2NT, and it can also be useful in this auction where a minor suit is opened and rebid.  Two such auctions are:

            1♣       1♥                                1♦        1♥

            2♣       2♦                                2♦        3♣

The first auction is merely game-invitational, the second auction forces to game.  In both cases, the first duty of Opener is to show 3-card support for Responder’s major.

Here’s a common problem … RHO opens one of a minor and we have 4 Spades and 5 Hearts … if we overcall 1♥ we’ll no doubt lose our 4-4 Spade fit (if we have one), but if we double then we risk losing our 5-3 Heart fit.  Actually, there’s a third option, and that is to make a Michaels Cue-Bid.  Yes, that’s usually 5-5 but it’s only a slight distortion and that 4-card Spade suit is strong enough to survive a 4-3 fit.  We rather like the Michaels bid here, so we are sorry to report that it works out badly on the actual hand!

Would you make a Support Double of 2♣ with that West hand?  Here are three schools of thought:

-         One extreme is always to make a Support Double with three in Partner’s suit.

-         The other extreme is only make a Support Double if you would have raised Partner had RHO passed.

-         The middle road is usually to make the Support Double, but to pass with some minimum hands with poor distribution.

If E-W were middle-of-the-roaders then West would no doubt decline the Support Double with that miserable hand and square distribution (in fact many would pass that instead of opening 1♣).

What are the options for raising Hearts here?

-         4♥:  5 is certainly the right number of Hearts for this bid, but the bid is generally played as preemptive and we’d prefer not to have that outside Ace.

-         3♥:  Also preemptive.

-         2♥:  For those with that aversion to preempting with an outside Ace, the best plan would be a simple raise to 2♥ followed by a further bid of 3♥ if necessary.

Actually, this is a good hand for Constructive Raises in Competition (CRIC), which provide two additional ways to raise Partner’s Hearts:

-         3♣:  4-card (sometimes 5-card) support with around 6-9 HCP’s and a singleton

-         3♦:  Likewise, but without the singleton

On the actual hand, a CRIC of 3♦ works very well indeed, describing the hand well and also obstructing the opponents.

With 18 HCP’s and 4-card support for Partner’s major East might consider leaping to game, but that would be something of an overbid, wouldn’t you say?  Yes, East should downgrade a tad for that dangling Q♠ and we would say that 3♥ is enough here.  In fact, on the actual deal, even 3♥ was dangerously high!

Yes, South’s Club are somewhat lacking in quality, and there are only 6 of them, but that 6-4 shape adds some extra offensive potential.  And, let’s face it, that favorable vulnerability is like a red rag to a bull for energetic preemptors.  On the actual deal, the 3♣ preempt works like a charm!  E-W are frozen out of the auction and end up defending 3♣ (making) when they could have been making their own 3♠ contract.

If E-W are playing DONT, and if they are like many aficionados of that convention, then West will be unable to resist chirping in with 2♥ (showing Hearts and Spades).  On the actual deal West will probably make 9 tricks and might be pretty pleased with himself for jumping into the fray with his 4-4 hand and wresting the contract away from N-S to score +140.  But some contracts are better left unwrested!  If West had left things well alone (he does have a balanced hand, after all) his side would have made a bunch of tricks on defense, scoring +200.

West’s untimely intervention with that 4-4 hand got his side a bad board, but suppose that N-S had not been vulnerable, and the West had held his peace.  Now down two in 1NT is a good result for N-S and West would have done better to get into the auction.  The moral is that it is not only our vulnerability that influences whether or not we should compete, it’s also their vulnerability.  In other words, we should be less inclined to butt in against vulnerable opponents, perhaps we can get a good board via a +200.

After a Jacoby Transfer, what are your methods for “super-accepting”?  We always like to promote the following method, and here we go again:

-         With a bad hand we don’t super-accept, we give a simple acceptance

-         With a medium hand we jump to 3 of Partner’s major

-         With a good hand we bid 2NT.

As usual, “bad”, “medium” and “good” are in the eye of the beholder, it’s not just a matter of “15” or “16” or “17”, it’s necessary also to downgrade the square hands and those which are loaded with quacks.  Anyway, we’d say that the East hand qualifies as “good”, 16 fine points, the right distribution, and the only quack is bolstered by an Ace.

Why do we like that method of super-accepting?  Because (a) it’s very simple, and (b) it doesn’t volunteer information to the opponents about second suits or doubletons or whatever (that information invariably proves useless to Partner and just helps the opponents defend accurately).

East’s 2NT was a “super-accept”, showing 4-card Heart support and a good hand.  How about the West hand, is it worthy of a slam try?  It’s close, but that hand would look so much better if the ♠QJ and ♦QJ were replaced with a couple of Kings, for example.  So, instead, we think that West should “re-transfer” to Hearts and settle for game.  Is there a difference between re-transferring with 3♦ followed by 4♥, and retransferring with 4♦?  Some pairs play that the slow sequence is a mild slam try, and if West is an optimistic fellow then that might be the way to go with this hand.

Against opening preempts it’s most common to play Doubles up to 4♥ as primarily for take-out, and above that for the Double to be value-showing (and quite likely to be passed).  South might double here but, opposite a passed Partner, it seems more likely that the hand belongs to the opponents.  So, inspired perhaps by the favorable vulnerability, South might bid 4NT here.  What does that mean?  It used to be played as showing a strong 3-suiter, but nowadays the preferred treatment is for it to be a two-suiter, that hand-type is more likely to occur.

After 4NT, N-S will scramble into a fit.  On the actual hand, for example, North is 2=4=6=1, and will bid 5♦, knowing that her side has a fit in at least one of the red suits.

Assuming that you play Drury, do you still play it in this situation?  Most do, and also if East had overcalled 1♠.  Next, suppose that you are playing Two-Way Drury (2♣ is 3-card support, 2♦ is 4-card support) and that the opponents overcall 2♣.  Now the suggestion is still to play the Double as Negative, and for 2♦ to be Drury but with either 3- or 4-card support.

2♣ was Drury, showing Heart support and game-invitational values.  What next?  Anyone for 4♠?  White against Red, with 5-5 distribution and no defense, North reasonably expects that either 4♠ will make or else it will prove to be a good sacrifice against the enemy 4♥.  Good thinking!  On the actual board, 4♠ has 4 top losers, and 4♥ makes 10 tricks.