Responsive Doubles

[pigpenz]

Curious as to how most people play responsive doubles these days.

I always played that if opps bid and raised after partner overcalled doubled showed points and unbid suits.

 

if opps bid two suits and partner overcalled you showed five of the other suit and doubleton support for partner

 

if opps bid and raise and partner doubled you showed hand that usually tended to deny four card major depending on what opps had bid and raised.

 

thanks

 

reason I have asked is that i dont think on BBO(ACBL Games) i have run into one pair yet that has made a responsive double :)

[whereagles]

My understanding of responsive doubles is this:

 

(1/2M) dbl (2/3M) dbl = competitive, 44 minors

 

(1/2/3m) dbl (2/3/4m) dbl = competitive, 44 majors

 

 

Some also play this variation:

 

(1♠) dbl (2♠) dbl, followed by 3♥

 

is not minors but hearts, invitational (a direct 3♥ would be weaker). This variation is not needed if you play a Lebensohl 2NT, though.

[awm]

I prefer to play slightly different meanings for responsive double in different auctions:

 

1♠-X-2♠-X: Second double shows 4♥ and a 4+ card minor; this avoids playing a 4-3 heart fit at the three-level when a better minor fit is available (double didn't promise four hearts). With minors I'd bid 2NT.

 

1♥-X-2♥-X: Second double shows minors; I'd just bid 2♠ with four (not so unhappy about the 4-3 fit at two-level).

 

1m-X-2m-X: Second double shows 4-4 majors, looking for the better major fit.

 

There are also responsive double auctions after an overcall, which I prefer to play as really showing both the unbid suits. My preference is also not to play responsive doubles when opponents bid to the three-level after a takeout double. It's my opinion that it's rarely right to compete four over three in an eight card fit, and also that many people compete to the three-level on eight or even sometimes seven cards. Certainly I often see a weak two bid raised to three on doubleton, or a four card diamond opening raised to three on four-card support, or a precision diamond (sometimes on two cards) raised to three on five-card support. In each case a trump stack is made more likely by the takeout double and I'd like to have double available to penalize.

[joshs]

I prefer to play slightly different meanings for responsive double in different auctions:

 

1♠-X-2♠-X: Second double shows 4♥ and a 4+ card minor; this avoids playing a 4-3 heart fit at the three-level when a better minor fit is available (double didn't promise four hearts). With minors I'd bid 2NT.

 

1♥-X-2♥-X: Second double shows minors; I'd just bid 2♠ with four (not so unhappy about the 4-3 fit at two-level).

 

1m-X-2m-X: Second double shows 4-4 majors, looking for the better major fit.

 

There are also responsive double auctions after an overcall, which I prefer to play as really showing both the unbid suits. My preference is also not to play responsive doubles when opponents bid to the three-level after a takeout double. It's my opinion that it's rarely right to compete four over three in an eight card fit, and also that many people compete to the three-level on eight or even sometimes seven cards. Certainly I often see a weak two bid raised to three on doubleton, or a four card diamond opening raised to three on four-card support, or a precision diamond (sometimes on two cards) raised to three on five-card support. In each case a trump stack is made more likely by the takeout double and I'd like to have double available to penalize.

If you play this way (reasonable) I think x should be your hand type OR 2 suits and a hand too good for a simple bid:

 

E.G. Over 1H-x-2H

with Kxxx Axx Kxxx xx

I think you should x and then bid 3S

[luis]

Cards, value-showing.

 

Luis

[kenrexford]

I also play "cards," but clarified slightly:

 

I do have the expected major holding, or I can tolerate you thinking I do.

I have no better alternative.

[pigpenz]

reason i was asking that i noticed that quite a few people in acbl online tourneys have their card marked for responsive doubles but they either never seem to use them when they should or they deviate by using support doubles when they should possible be responsive or penalty double orietned

[awm]

I agree with Josh that a responsive double of 2♥ followed by bidding spades should show a good hand with more than one place to play.

 

I'm curious, is "cards" in this situation a nicer way of saying "blame transfer"? I'm not sure I understand how partner's supposed to figure out what to do opposite a "cards" double that doesn't show anything about shape.

[keylime]

I play a two-way double; either responsive or showing a cuebid raise for pard's overcall. I find it's much easier to compete this way.

[whereagles]

reason i was asking that i noticed that quite a few people in acbl online tourneys have their card marked for responsive doubles but they either never seem to use them when they should or they deviate by using support doubles when they should possible be responsive or penalty double orietned

The point of checking that box is to muddy the waters in case the Director is called upon misexplanations/hesitations.

[kenrexford]

By "cards" I personally mean values without clear direction. It is not a blame-shifting move. Rather, it is a trust move. Having great confidence in partner, I double with a good offense-to-defense ratio without clear direction. Partner is invited to act using his judgment and analysis, including passing. If he uses that great judgment and lands in a poor contract, my "force" of the auction caused this and might need reassessed.