Alternative to support double

[Wackojack]

A partner of mine argues the case for an alternative to the support doubles. He says that double is best used to show 4 cards in the unbid suit. Thus

1♣ no 1♠ 2♦

dbl shows 4 hearts

1♦ no 1♥ 2♣

dble shows 4 spades

In some cases precise distribution is shown e.g.

1♣ no 1♥ 1♠

dble shows 1445 distribution

 

Partner's major can be raised with 3 e.g.

1♣ no 1♥ 1♠

2♥ could be on 3 particularly with a shortage in spades.

 

Also in other sequences where support doubles were not intended to apply: e.g

1♠ no 2♣ 2♦

dble shows 4 hearts ??? (would you not bid 4 hearts here to show 4?)

The general rule would be that a double after a 3rd suit intervention shows 4 cards in the 4th suit when it is not a penalty double. I am not sure one can make an easy rule as to when the double would be for penalties. Obvious considerations are the level of intervention, if the double is under or over the overcaller and who if any has found a fit.

 

Is this approach flawed?

[whereagles]

It is not flawed. In fact, I believe it is far superior to support doubles ;)

[inquiry]

I prefer to play it this way, and I do not play support doubles in most partnerships. If memory serves me correctly, in their partnership bidding book Robson/Segal argue that other uses of the double are better than support double.

 

The popularity of support double (and redoubles) suggest that many (most?) others disagree with the concept that takeout is better use of the double. But I don't mind raising with three cards, and the hands with the "other suit" can be difficult to bid if you don't have the double available.

[Free]

In some cases precise distribution is shown e.g.

1♣ no 1♥ 1♠

dble shows 1445 distribution

What's a 1445 distribution? ;)

[Finch]

First point: I don't think support doubles work well in conjunction with a weak NT, so let's assume this is all with a strong NT.

 

Second point: you haven't specified what you do with 3-card support for partner and 4 cards in the unbid suit: double, or raise? Whichever you choose, you may miss a fit in the other suit.

 

Third point: I think you need to consider each possible auction individually. Take

 

1C P 1S 2D

?

 

If partner has 4 hearts, then he will also have 5 spades. So the '4 hearts' double won't allow you to reach an 8-card fit that you otherwise can't, although admittedly the 4-4 fit may be superior. However, the support double works better in two obvious circumstances

 

i) Partner has a mild game try with 5-4 in the majors: he can bid 2H (rather than having to bid 3H to invite over your 4-hearts double)

ii) Partner doesn't have a problem with a 5332 distribution over the double: if you make a '4 hearts' double does he rebid 2H to play in the 4-3 fit, or 2S? If 2S, what does he do with 6 spades?

 

If you take

1D P 1H 2C

?

 

Playing double to show 4S is more likely to gain over a support double, because partner could be 4-4 in the majors and you find the fit, while if you started with a 4243 nice hand you otherwise have to pass.

[foo]

IMHO Frances makes a very good point: the utility of Support X and XX's depends on the auction.

 

I'll also note in passing that my system of choice is basically KS, think of it as 2/1 GF w/ 1N= 12-14 and a few tweaks, and Support X's and XX's have always worked very well for me.

 

1C-pa-1D-1H;??

Since you can show 4+S at the one level, Support X's win.

 

1C-pa-1D-1S;??

Which is more important to you:

a ) the ability to show 4+H in a hand not strong enough to Reverse?

b ) the ablity to differentiate 3card and 4card support for GOP's minor?

1m-pa-1H-1S;??

Same question, but now the Reverse suit is D's and the possible fit is in H's.

Clearly it could be argued that being able to show a Major or Major suit support is more important than doing the same thing with a minor suit.

 

1m-pa-1M-2om;??

Which is more important:

a ) showing the unbid Major in a hand not strong enough to Reverse?

b ) differentiating 3card and 4card support for GOP's Major?

Two old sayings are "Support with support" and "Misfits defend. GF misfits play 3N".

They both argue that Support X's are the better idea here.

 

1m-pa-1H-1S;??

If 1m was "1D", you have no problems showing 4+C here.

IF 1m was "1C", the same logic about misfits and supporting GOP's Major apply.

Support X's win here.

 

So for auctions that begin 1m, Support X's and XX's are better except when there's an unbid Major to show when Opener's hand is not strong enough to Reverse.

What about auctions that begin 1M?

 

1H-pa-1S-2m??

I think it is fairly clear that what GOP needs to know ASAP is how good your spade support is...

 

1M-pa-2m-... Hold It. Are They =really= diving into Our 2/1 auction? Regardless of whether you play 2/1 GF or not, the odds are that They Have Made A Mistake and the issue is not supporting GOP or showing an unbid suit. The issue is most likely figuring out whether playing the hand or hitting them rate to get Us a better score.

 

In sum, Support X's and XX's have been shown to have high utility in most auctions.

That's why they are so popular :-)

[mike777]

"1C-pa-1D-1S;??

Which is more important to you:

a ) the ability to show 4+H in a hand not strong enough to Reverse?

b ) the ablity to differentiate 3card and 4card support for GOP's minor?

1m-pa-1H-1S;??

Same question, but now the Reverse suit is D's and the possible fit is in H's.

Clearly it could be argued that being able to show a Major or Major suit support is more important than doing the same thing with a minor suit."

 

 

1) Keep in mind that those playing Walsh showing 4h by opener and less than reverse becomes a very minor issue. Pard has denied a 4 card major unless she has a game force hand.

2) Playing reverse Flannery over one of a minor also solves the 4+h, 5+s and constructive, less than invite, hcp hands.

3) That does not mean support x is perfect or cannot have problem hands.

[han]

Third point: I think you need to consider each possible auction individually. Take

 

1C P 1S 2D

?

 

If partner has 4 hearts, then he will also have 5 spades. So the '4 hearts' double won't allow you to reach an 8-card fit that you otherwise can't, although admittedly the 4-4 fit may be superior. However, the support double works better in two obvious circumstances

 

I don't think that this is necessarily true Frances. If you can double to show hearts with a hand that would otherwise pass (some 2-4-2-5 shape) then partner may be much better placed if the opponents raise diamonds next. Without this double you may be shut out and nevert find your heart fit.

 

Having said that, I do like support doubles here. I think that it is very important to distinguish between a 3-card raise and a 4-card raise. The argument heard most often is that partner will be better placed in competitive auctions, but I think that an even more important argument is that the extra trump gives far better chances for game.

[mike777]

Third point: I think you need to consider each possible auction individually. Take

 

1C P 1S 2D

?

 

If partner has 4 hearts, then he will also have 5 spades. So the '4 hearts' double won't allow you to reach an 8-card fit that you otherwise can't, although admittedly the 4-4 fit may be superior. However, the support double works better in two obvious circumstances

 

I don't think that this is necessarily true Frances. If you can double to show hearts with a hand that would otherwise pass (some 2-4-2-5 shape) then partner may be much better placed if the opponents raise diamonds next. Without this double you may be shut out and nevert find your heart fit.

 

Having said that, I do like support doubles here. I think that it is very important to distinguish between a 3-card raise and a 4-card raise. The argument heard most often is that partner will be better placed in competitive auctions, but I think that an even more important argument is that the extra trump gives far better chances for game.

Again playing reverse flannery, if Pard has 4H on this hand they will have an invite or game force hand. Why not let them know about your 3 spades. Pard can still rebid 2H over your x.

 

If the bidding goes:

1c=p=1s=2d

p=3d=? pard will just bid 3H with her invite or game force hand.

[awm]

I like to play takeout doubles in these auctions. Such a double basically implies:

 

(1) Shortness, rarely more than two cards, in the opponents' suit.

(2) Three or more cards in the unbid suit.

(3) Usually three cards in partner's suit; occasionally doubleton honor.

 

There are a number of advantages to this treatment, for example:

 

(1) It becomes easy for partner to convert to penalties if the opponents have stepped out of line.

(2) Partner's balancing double is well-defined (also takeout) whereas after a support double it is somewhat nebulous (good hand with no clear direction seems to be the standard).

(3) We don't find ourselves competing in a 4-3 fit when opponents have no particular fit either. This is nice because when nobody has a fit we are often best off to defend or play notrumps, especially when length in the opposing suit is fairly evenly divided between our hands.

(4) Most of the hands where you make a support double and opponents bump the auction, leaving partner well-placed to decide whether to compete, you are still doubling. Opponents fit in their suit makes shortness much more likely.

(5) If I pass with three-card support (yes I sometimes pass with three-card support) and partner passes it out, defending is often right. If opponents bump the auction or in any case defending is wrong, partner normally has shortness and balances.

(6) The takeout double makes it easier to find side-suit fits. The common examples of this are 1♣-Pass-1♥-2♦ (finding the spade fit is hard if double is penalty or support and responder is minimum), 1♣-Pass-1♦-1♠-X (not playing Walsh you could miss hearts here), 1♣-Pass-1♠-2♥-X (playing Walsh, you could have a huge diamond fit here). Basically any situation where bidding the fourth suit would be a reverse you're better placed.

 

Really, the biggest advantage to takeout doubles here is that the partnership is always on familiar ground. Everyone plays takeout doubles in lots of auctions. Support double auctions often seem confused in the later rounds, especially when you don't actually have the 8-card major suit fit.

[pigpenz]

yes i prefer to play this also instead of support doubles

[joshs]

(2) Partner's balancing double is well-defined (also takeout) whereas after a support double it is somewhat nebulous (good hand with no clear direction seems to be the standard).

(

Actually I think its takeout, at least moderate extras. But as with most other x's you can make some offshape x's if you are strong enough to bid again and can handle the auction.

 

In the auction

1C-P-1S-2H

P-P-x

 

I would expect a minimum of about a 9 count here, with takeout shape. Maybe an 8 count will do with a singleton in hearts.

[kfgauss]

(2) Partner's balancing double is well-defined (also takeout) whereas after a support double it is somewhat nebulous (good hand with no clear direction seems to be the standard).

(

Actually I think its takeout, at least moderate extras. But as with most other x's you can make some offshape x's if you are strong enough to bid again and can handle the auction.

 

In the auction

1C-P-1S-2H

P-P-x

 

I would expect a minimum of about a 9 count here, with takeout shape. Maybe an 8 count will do with a singleton in hearts.

I play (and have been told it's standard, but am not certain) that 3C and 3D here are just competitive (3D would be something like 4-6), so double gets overloaded and includes lots of good hands (including forcing club raises, forcing 5S-5D hands, etc etc) and X..3m is forcing. I also double on competitive takeout shapes (ie this is sort of like delayed negative free bids, but I don't play NFB in other settings).

 

I'm not sure which of your descriptions this is the same as (or if it's neither).

 

Andy

 

PS As for support doubles, I use them in all auctions except 1C P 1D 1S (double shows 4 hearts here), but play that they are not mandatory (ie 4333's often don't make them).

[Double !]

who ever said that support doubles were the best way to utilize the double in this situation?

 

IMHO, support doubles are primarily a matchpoint-oriented convention to ensure that the partnership doesn't miss a 5-3 partscore in a competitive situation, and is due, to a significant degree, from playing strong 1NT openers. I don't think you'll see too many weak NT players using support doubles because non-1NT openers will tend to show stronger hands. When I first played them, my fine P and I agreed that they were 2-way: either 3-card support and/or extra values.

 

But, so many people now use them that it seems to becoming more of the norm than the exception.

 

DHL

[foo]

1) Keep in mind that those playing Walsh showing 4 H's by opener and less than reverse becomes a very minor issue. Pard has denied a 4 card major unless she has a game force hand.

2) Playing reverse Flannery over one of a minor also solves the 4+h, 5+s and constructive, less than invite, HCP hands.

3) That does not mean Support X is perfect or cannot have problem hands.

r1a) Even playing traditional Walsh style, being able to put Their strong hand on Opening Lead or being able to have the hand with the greater number of Asymmetric Guards Declare is a good thing.

 

r1b) Shape information and the degree of fit or misfit is important enough, particularly in contested or potentially contested auctions, that I play "Invitational+ Walsh" instead of "GF Walsh". It should be noted that when I can I play 1N= 12-14, so a traditionally invitational Responder w/ ~10-11 HCP often turns out to be GF anyway...

 

r2) IMHO, playing any form of Flannery in order to handle 45?? hands of less than Reverse strength is a "cure" worse than the disease... :)

 

r3) I never said Support X's and XX's were perfect. In fact, I don't think I've ever said any bidding treatment is perfect. There's just no such thing.

In fact, I thought I was explicit in my opinion that using X and XX to show 4+ cards in the unbid Major when no one has laid claim to it yet is IMHO more important than showing the degree of support for GOP's minor:

1C-pa-1D-1S;X => 4 H's

1D-pa-2C-2M;X => 4 cards in OM

1M-pa-2C-2D;X => 4 cards in OM

[mike777]

1) Reverse flannery(has many names) is played by responder hand over 1 of a minor opening bid.

 

It shows 4+h and 5+s and less than an invite hand but constructive(not zero).

 

2) If responder has a game force(Walsh) hand it will very often be the stronger hand in this auction, not opener, for me. :).

 

3) As for RHO butting into our game force 2/1 auctions since for me pard really will have a nice hand 14+ very often maybe I need to just x them more or at the very least punish them in the play for their impudence.. :D I do not play support x in a 2/1 auction. I think I would play pass as a minimum junky opener, and x as penalty since if pard is short in the overcall suit her next bid may be a slam try in my first bid suit not a reopening x. :)

1s=p=2c=(2d)

p=p=2s(slam try)

 

Bottom line if not playing support x's works for you why bother to change. I am happy with them but can remember a rare few hands when I could have lived without them.