This double shows?

[Codo]

Your opponents open a weak NT 11-13 or 12-14. You double for blood but your left opponent runs to a suit and pds doubles

F. E.:

 

1 NT X 2 ♥ X

 

 

What should this double be? Penalty, take out, points, or ...?

I would like to hear about the pros and cons too.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

the 2nd dbl is for blood, but it does

not promise a trump stack, it simply

says, we got them.

 

The rule is simple, if we have made a

penalty dbl, all following dbls from our side

are penalty.

 

From a frequency point, it may make sense

to play the dbl in the given seq. as neg. X,

having the agreement, that partner reopens

with shortage, but that is dangerous, since

the 2H bidder may or may not be weak.

 

And it gets even more dangerous, if the

escape bid was 2S instead of 2H.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[hotShot]

If you went for blood, stick with it.

[Guest Jlall]

Some things to consider with your partner

 

A) Through what does the first X force you

B ) What does X mean when you are in a force and when you're not in a force

 

For A, some play that the X doesn't create any force, some play it creates a force if the opps run to 2 of a minor, and some play it creates a force through 2H.

 

For B, some play that even when you're in a force doubles are takeout by both player, and some just play Xs are penalty when youre in a force and with a takeout type hand you make a forcing pass. Clearly though if you are not in a force double must be card showing and takeout oriented, otherwise partner has no bids available to him.

 

Also on this type of auction you would do well to discuss what 2N bids are etc. Some play scrambling and some play their lebensohl or transfer lebensohl applies here (I think transfer leb is very good here) and some even play it as natural to keep their Xs more pure and not strap themselves into bidding 3N with marginal hands.

[paulg]

As Justin says, a lot depends on how forcing the original double. The comments in the double/forcing pass thread may be of interest too.

 

p

[bid_em_up]

If the first X was penalty, then all subsequent doubles should be as well, imo.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

I switched to 'negative' doubles over 1NT and it seems to get me more, not less penalties. It also has a upside that holding 4-3-2-4 pattern with a doubleton(or tripleton?) in their suit, what do you bid 'if' you are playing penalty doubles? Doubling on 'just' HCP led to not uncommon foul results during my KS weak NT days.

 

Doubling on three cards is normally decent, when partner also holds three trumps, however, after partner 'passes' playing penalty doubles, he might have 2 or 3 trumps. You normally do not want to defend when the other side has an eight card fit(and sometimes a nine card fit when both of you hold 2 trumps)

 

Some do play the 'forcing' aspect as limited to 2m, however, It seems to me that it should clearly be used over a 2H bid. The jury is still out on whether you should play negative doubles over a 2S bid. I still play them here, however, with somewhat less 'faith.'

 

Regards,

Robert

[mikeh]

As Justin said, it comes down to agreement.

 

In one partnership, at partner's request, we play the second double as penalty. In another, at my request, we play the second double as takeout, with rubensohl on for constructive bidding over 2M.

 

In both partnerships, we play that the direct double of a weak NT creates a force through 2♦: the opps are allowed to play 2M but they are not allowed to play 2m undoubled.

[awm]

My preference is to play that an auction cannot be forcing if one partner could potentially have zero points, and the other partner is guaranteed another chance to call. Apparently this is very nonstandard, since many people seem to play that one hand can create a forcing pass situation all by itself without any input from partner (such as on this hand).

 

In any case, my general rule would imply that passing the 2♥ would be non-forcing. In general I like takeout doubles in low-level auctions, which is pretty much a necessary treatment here if pass is NF. So in my partnerships, advancer's double is takeout of hearts. With a penalty double advancer would pass and let opener double. If opponents psyched the hearts and hearts happen to break evenly between our two hands, and advancer has sufficiently good hearts to want to convert the hoped-for penalty double from opener, sometimes they "get us."

[Finch]

'Standard' is to play it as penalties, but this standard is (IMO) technically wrong.

 

By the way, this is an auction where the UI law is very commonly infracted. A large number of people playing double for penalties differentiate between the stonking penalty DOUBLE and the 'I have high cards and don't want to pass but not much in the way of trumps' double. A smaller number of people then pull or not depending on the volume of the double.

 

I play this as take-out with everybody, but it promises either a doubleton heart or a very defensively orientated hand with a singleton: partner will always pass with 4 trumps and often pass with three good trumps if he fancies defending.

 

To decide which is best is the same as any other system problem: what is the relative frequency of the relevant hand types, and what is the associated gain/loss. I come at this backwards: as the original 2nd seat doubler of 1NT opposite a hand that cannot act on its own over 2H, is it more likely that I can beat 2H on my own, or that I want to compete the part-score, or that it wants to find partner's long suit? In this respect the auction is analogous to 1NT (2H) P P x which is virtually universally played as take-out. So I think it pretty obvious that 2nd seat's 2nd double should be for take-out.

 

Now if your partner's double is going to be for take-out, does it make sense to have your double as penalties? Sure, it's possible to play that way but usually double is the same from both sides (note that the concept of 'over' or 'under' is much less relevant when the length is in one hand but the high cards are in the other).

 

We can then observe:

 

If double is penalty, 4th hand will be stuck for a bid on a hand with values but no clear action e.g. 4234 6-count. He either has to double and hope they aren't in too big a fit, or bid a 4-card suit, or make an amorphous cue bid on a hand not strong enough to drive game, or pass and hope partner can act. This is a common hand-type.

 

If double is penalty, 4th hand has to bid on, say, a 4225 9-count because he can't afford to pass. That gives up on any chance of a penalty. If double is take-out, 4th hand has to bid (particularly at red) on, say, a 3433 9-count because he can't afford to pass. That gives up on any chance of a penalty. I believe these two hands effectively cancel, so you can't use either argument as a reason to play the other meaning for double! You can use them as an argument for playing a forcing pass, but that then raises other issues.

 

 

If I have a heart void (and values) or offensive singleton I bid or cue-bid depending on distribution.

 

With a strict penalty double I have to pass and hope partner re-opens, or bid NT (I happen to play pass as forcing over 2C/2D only but as Justin says this is down to agreement. The only difference is that if pass is forcing, you can pass confidently with a penalty double.)