Opps are playing penalty doubles of preempts

[MickyB]

Yesterday, Blofeld and I came across a pair who were playing penalty doubles of all overcalls and 3 level openings. How would it change your strategy? This was at matchpoints, do you think the considerations are different at IMPs?

[inquiry]

Would not change mine too much. The normal penalty double auction when playing "takeout doubles" goes...

 

3any-P-P-DBL * TAKEOUT

P - PAss <--- penalty pass

 

If anything I might preempt a little more, because they lack the weapons to compete effectively without a takeout double handy. I guess the five card and very weak 6 card preempts might, however, be a little less likely.

[Gerben42]

Agree with Ben, I'd probably rather preempt more than less.

[keylime]

Ditto. I'd be trying to bury them often.

 

I used to play a scheme through 3♣ called Weiss where an immediate double of a natural preempt was pen-oriented. It was rather interesting.

[jdonn]

I join the crowd who would preempt more. They don't even gain penalties this way, they just trade the hands they achieve penalties on. In other words, they penalize when the length is in the stronger hand, but lose the penalty when the length is in the weaker hand.

[Finch]

In particular, I would make more jump overcalls and fewer simple overcalls. Something like Kx AK10xxx xx xxx is a bit good for a weak jump over 1C in my normal style but would be an immediate 2H bid here.

[zasanya]

The Fishbein convention advocates a penalty double of 3 level and higher level preempts.The take out is next higher suit .For example on a 3♥ preempt 3 ♠ is take out.The convention doesnt seem very popular but seems to have some merit.

[whereagles]

The Fishbein convention advocates a penalty double of 3 level and higher level preempts.The take out is next higher suit .For example on a 3♥ preempt 3 ♠ is take out.The convention doesnt seem very popular but seems to have some merit.

Funny that when Fishbein was played, a preempt had to have KQJT or thereabouts. Now that doubles are for take-out, people open on jack-high suits.. LOL.

[hrothgar]

Yesterday, Blofeld and I came across a pair who were playing penalty doubles of all overcalls and 3 level openings. How would it change your strategy? This was at matchpoints, do you think the considerations are different at IMPs?

Silly me... I always thought that player's weren't supposed to alter their preemptive style/methods based on the opponents defenses. In fact, I can recall at least one appeal from a North American Nationals where the player argued that his opponents passed a hand that they would have otherwise preempted with based on the fact that he was playing penalty oriented methods.

[jdonn]

Silly me...  I always thought that player's weren't supposed to alter their preemptive style/methods based on the opponents defenses.  In fact, I can recall at least one appeal from a North American Nationals where the player argued that his opponents passed a hand that they would have otherwise preempted with based on the fact that he was playing penalty oriented methods.

Seriously? I would love to see that appeal. I believe you that it exists, but I really want to read it. This rule sounds like fiction to me, you can preempt or not on any hand you feel like any time you feel like, for whatever reasons you feel like.

 

What if the opponents had the agreement that if I preempt, they must double me and pass it out there? You had better believe I would open 3♦ with nine solid diamonds.

[Free]

Silly me...  I always thought that player's weren't supposed to alter their preemptive style/methods based on the opponents defenses.  In fact, I can recall at least one appeal from a North American Nationals where the player argued that his opponents passed a hand that they would have otherwise preempted with based on the fact that he was playing penalty oriented methods.

Seriously? I would love to see that appeal. I believe you that it exists, but I really want to read it. This rule sounds like fiction to me, you can preempt or not on any hand you feel like any time you feel like, for whatever reasons you feel like.

 

What if the opponents had the agreement that if I preempt, they must double me and pass it out there? You had better believe I would open 3♦ with nine solid diamonds.

If you pass a preempt hand, you can always consider it a psych... ;)

[hrothgar]

Seriously? I would love to see that appeal. I believe you that it exists, but I really want to read it. This rule sounds like fiction to me, you can preempt or not on any hand you feel like any time you feel like, for whatever reasons you feel like.

 

What if the opponents had the agreement that if I preempt, they must double me and pass it out there? You had better believe I would open 3♦ with nine solid diamonds.

Here's the thread... (Ain't Google a grand thing)

 

Only reason that I remembered this is that it involved Bo-Yin Yang who used to be a fixture at the MIT bridge club

 

 

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...c4b0890cd98e3d7

[luis]

Seriously? I would love to see that appeal. I believe you that it exists, but I really want to read it. This rule sounds like fiction to me, you can preempt or not on any hand you feel like any time you feel like, for whatever reasons you feel like.

 

What if the opponents had the agreement that if I preempt, they must double me and pass it out there? You had better believe I would open 3♦ with nine solid diamonds.

Here's the thread... (Ain't Google a grand thing)

 

Only reason that I remembered this is that it involved Bo-Yin Yang who used to be a fixture at the MIT bridge club

 

 

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...c4b0890cd98e3d7

Very interesting.

I think that the problem was that if you change your style based on your opponents methods then you have to announce it.

But then if you announce you change your style they can change their methods and that never ends? Is there a solution?

 

A: We preempt wild

B: Then we play penalty doubles

A: Oh then we preempt solid

B: Then double is takeout

Repeat

[Finch]

Yes, there is a well-established solution.

The pair that calls first have to decide their methods first.

[willow23]

Would not bother me much...I would pre-empt as normal...Chances are they will have many bad boards and you would definately know who to play for length in the suit and most of the hcp..;)..I would like to play them..B)

[MickyB]

I preempted three times in the set of seven boards. Probably the most interesting one was this -

 

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sqxhkqtxxxxxdkcqx]133|100|Scoring: MP

I figured that 4♥ was a fair distance away, my side cards would take off the opponents' contract and that they wouldn't be able to compete effectively over a 3♥ opening without a penalty double available, so that was what I bid. As it happened, both 4♥ and 5♣ were making (partner has 2 aces, 3 hearts and a stiff club) [/hv]

[zasanya]

The Fishbein convention advocates a penalty double of 3 level and higher level preempts.The take out is next higher suit .For example on a 3♥ preempt 3 ♠ is take out.The convention doesnt seem very popular but seems to have some merit.

Funny that when Fishbein was played, a preempt had to have KQJT or thereabouts. Now that doubles are for take-out, people open on jack-high suits.. LOL.

Thats why I think double for penalty has merit.IMO it is the Jack top preempt which is difficult to handle and leads to unusual result.

[Free]

If I'd know that my opponents play penalty doubles I wouldn't change much:

- Vulnerable we use decent preempts so no real problem there

- NV vs NV is a little agressive, I might make them more solid, just in case

- NV vs V, we play garbage preempts: 0-7hcp with 5+ card suit (basicly it's like 3-level lorenzo's ;) ) The whole point of this opening style is that opponents won't penalize you anyway, because they have soooo much more to score. So I'd still get in agressively. They may have slam, and I can go -6. We usually find some kind of fit, which gives us the few tricks we need.

[the saint]

Penalty doubles?

 

I smell fear!! LUNCHTIME! ;)

 

On a similar note, I know a pair who play Lebensohl even though they continually mess it up. So I open a Weak Two on an excuse and a following wind against them.