TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE....

[microcap]

NEW YEAR'S SALE 2 for one... :P

 

LHO opens 1 ♦

, partner overcalls 1♠. RHO passes. You hold:

 

 

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=s86hak85d76ca10854]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

What is your call if any?

 

 

Second hand:

 

LHO opens 1NT [15-17] Partner doubles, which is penalty oriented. RHO passes again, and you hold this lovely mess:

 

 

 

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=s86hak85d76ca10854]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

What is your call if any? B)

 

Happy new year to all BBO Forum regulars!

[Walddk]

1. 2♣ whether it's forcing or not.

2. 2♠. I don't have quite enough to sit for it. Add any queen and I would.

 

Roland

[ArtK78]

Agree with Roland. I will be surprised if there are many who disagree with either action.

[pclayton]

Same here, although on #2 if I have to play penalty doubles of 1N openings, I always play our NT system on. So I would transfer to spades here.

[Walddk]

Same here, although on #2 if I have to play penalty doubles of 1N openings, I always play our NT system on. So I would transfer to spades here.

I don't like that. I assume that 2♣ would be Stayman and 2♦/♥ transfers? I want to sign off in a minor if that is my long suit with a very weak hand. Moreover, a penalty double of 1NT does not necessarily show a balanced hand, so I can't see why the system should be on.

 

Roland

[cjames]

1. 2♣ whether it's forcing or not.

2. 2♠. I don't have quite enough to sit for it. Add any queen and I would.

 

Roland

I agree with Roland.

[Apollo81]

1. 2♣ whether it's forcing or not

2. I'd sit for it

[jdonn]

Same here, although on #2 if I have to play penalty doubles of 1N openings, I always play our NT system on. So I would transfer to spades here.

I don't like that. I assume that 2♣ would be Stayman and 2♦/♥ transfers? I want to sign off in a minor if that is my long suit with a very weak hand. Moreover, a penalty double of 1NT does not necessarily show a balanced hand, so I can't see why the system should be on.

 

Roland

It's very common to play redouble runs to play in a minor. I like system on too, might as well have opener play it and sometimes you still want stayman.

 

Anyway on the second I would go to the major of course. And 2♣ on the first. Both seem rather obvious.

[Walddk]

It's very common to play redouble runs to play in a minor.

Excuse me, but how do you redouble over your partner's double? (although I agree that you sometimes would like to) :P

 

On a serious note, I find it wrong that you must sign off at the 3-level with a hand like

 

Jx

xx

xxx

Jxxxxx

 

if 2♣ is Stayman. The same goes for

 

Jx

xx

Jxxxxx

xxx

 

if 2♦ is a transfer. Partner did not open 1NT, so now we have more options in the sign-off department.

 

Roland

[ArtK78]

There are a number of times that I would like to turn the cube to 8.

 

:P

[mikeh]

On the 1st one, 2♣ seems clear. I happen to prefer this to be a one-round force, but, on this hand, I don't care :P

 

On the second, it depends on the meaning of the 'penalty double'.

 

I rarely play penalty doubles of strong 1N openers, but back when I did, one of my pet peeves was that partner pulled when I had 1N set in my own hand. xx KQJ10xx Ax Axx, I really DON'T want to double and hear partner bid 2♠, while if my double showed a balanced 16 or so, I do.

 

Since the balanced strong hand is both the traditional meaning of double and (I think) the more common holding, I pull to 2♠ on hand 2, and I agree with Roland that system on makes relatively little sense.

 

Half the time, my 5 or 6 card runout suit will be a minor (actually, when you hold bad cards like I do, it seems to happen about 53.863% of the time), and why should my choices be to get killed at the 3-level or defend a cold 1N?

 

And, after all, on these auctions, there is usually little if any advantage to 'right-siding' the contract: we all know where the hcp are and they ain't on my right B)

[keylime]

Ditto the above.

[awm]

While I don't usually play penalty doubles of strong notrumps, I have played a lot of penalty doubles of weak notrumps. In this case the doubler usually has a balanced 16 or equivalent distributional hand.

 

I agree with Roland that playing "systems on" is a bad idea. The notrump systems most people play are optimized to look for game contracts, find your major suit fits, etc. They are not particularly good for running to the best two-level partial. And of course in this auction doubler doesn't even have to hold a balanced hand.

 

My preferred method over (1NT)-X-(P), assuming pass is not forcing:

 

Pass = happy to defend 1NTX, promises a few values (typically 5+ hcp)

2♣ = Running, either clubs or any weak hand without a five-card suit

2X = at least a 5-card suit in a weak hand

2NT = any good 5-5 hand, generally preferring to bid game rather than defend

3X = natural, good six-card suit without much else

[Walddk]

xx KQJ10xx Ax Axx, I really DON'T want to double and hear partner bid 2♠, while if my double showed a balanced 16 or so, I do.

Exactly right, and that's why advancer should only pull with a hand totally useless on defence. With one exception: no 5-card suit and a bust.

 

xxx

xxxx

xxx

xxx

 

and I pass "happily" (at least until someone redoubles) :P

 

Roland

[pclayton]

Same here, although on #2 if I have to play penalty doubles of 1N openings, I always play our NT system on. So I would transfer to spades here.

I don't like that. I assume that 2♣ would be Stayman and 2♦/♥ transfers? I want to sign off in a minor if that is my long suit with a very weak hand. Moreover, a penalty double of 1NT does not necessarily show a balanced hand, so I can't see why the system should be on.

 

Roland

Getting out in 2 of a minor is a problem. You must play at the 3 level.

 

2C is really 'scrambling', not stayman. It operates like Baron. If 2 of a minor for you is natural, how do you run from 1N x'd without a 5 card suit?

 

In exchange for this, we get to let the doubler play the hand.

 

This scheme works the best when RHO's pass forces a redouble. I can still run to 2 minor if I pass and then pass after RHO converts.

[Walddk]

2C is really 'scrambling', not stayman. It operates like Baron. If 2 of a minor for you is natural, how do you run from 1N x'd without a 5 card suit?

I don't, I pass (read above). If pass is conventional forcing a redouble and that comes back to me I have time to run as pointed out by MikeH.

 

Roland

[PassedOut]

#1) 2♣

#2) Pass. The double shows a good hand and a good lead, imo.

[655321]

1. 2♣ whether it's forcing or not.

2. 2♠. I don't have quite enough to sit for it. Add any queen and I would.

 

Roland

What Roland said.

[microcap]

Thanks for the input so far---

 

on hand one, I bid 2♣ as well as most of you. Rex held [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sj10987hq105dak43c5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

He passed my 2 ♣, which I got lucky and made. But certainly ♥,♠, and NT are better spots. Comments?

 

On hand 2 I bid 2 ♠ like most of you. It didn't even occur to me to pass with that garbage.

 

Regardless of Rex's actual hand, and assuming you play double over 1NT as penalty "oriented", help me out. I tend to assume the double is balanced 15-18, and Rex always has a mostly one suited hand with an entry or 2. It has been my experience that using double for both types is a losing proposition. Comments?

:lol:

[mike777]

Thanks for the input so far---

 

on hand one, I bid 2♣ as well as most of you.  Rex held <!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> J10987 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> Q105 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> AK43 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> 5 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

 

He passed my 2 ♣, which I got lucky and made.  But certainly ♥,♠, and NT are better spots.   Comments?

 

On hand 2 I bid 2 ♠ like most of you.   It didn't even occur to me to pass with that garbage.

 

Regardless of Rex's actual hand, and assuming you play double over 1NT as penalty "oriented", help me out.   I tend to assume the double is balanced 15-18, and Rex always has a mostly one suited hand with an entry or 2.   It has been my experience that using double for both types is a losing proposition.   Comments?

:lol:

1s vul?

 

I guess it depends on your style. Here you have a bad hand (less than opener) and a bad suit. In fact almost all your hcp are outside your bid suit. :)

 

All of this in front of an unpassed partner.

[pclayton]

Thanks for the input so far---

 

on hand one, I bid 2♣ as well as most of you. Rex held [hv=d=w&v=b&s=sj10987hq105dak43c5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

He passed my 2 ♣, which I got lucky and made. But certainly ♥,♠, and NT are better spots. Comments?

 

On hand 2 I bid 2 ♠ like most of you. It didn't even occur to me to pass with that garbage.

 

Regardless of Rex's actual hand, and assuming you play double over 1NT as penalty "oriented", help me out. I tend to assume the double is balanced 15-18, and Rex always has a mostly one suited hand with an entry or 2. It has been my experience that using double for both types is a losing proposition. Comments?

:lol:

#1 - You're just fixed here, I wouldn't worry too much about it. If somehow 2♣ gets x'd, you might get to run out to a red suit.

 

#2 - I think its a BIG loser to double 1N with a strong hand and a running suit unless you are playing against total idiots that don't know how to run from 1N x'd. Double should be some kind of balanced hand, but I hope you understand that playing penalty doubles of a strong NT opening is a losing proposition to begin with.

[mikeh]

The question about the penalty double reminds me of a hand from the round-robin in the 2000 BB...one of the few good results for our team, and it wasn't that good:

 

I held a 16 count with good diamonds, missing the A. RHO opened a weak 1N, I doubled, and it went pass pass redouble all pass.. we were red v red.

 

They proceeded to make an overtrick, which, if memory serves, resulted in our being -1260.... they should have actually scored another trick, which would have made this a bad result story.

 

Our teammates played 4 card majors and opened 1♥, with my hand overcalling in LHO's stiff... they bid to the (as the cards lay) cold 6♥... not a pretty slam but one that made when my hand was squeezed mercilessly...

 

My partner had passed both the double and the redouble out of fear coupled with the hope that I actually held 7 winners.

 

Bridge is a tough game when you can go +1260 and lose imps :lol:

[ArtK78]

It is my style not to double strong NTs for penalties. Generally speaking, it is a losing proposition.

 

However, if you must double strong NTs for penalties, the doubles should not be based on power, but rather on trick taking ability - long suits and entries, or running suits. In that case, if that is your agreement, then you pass on the example hand.

[Walddk]

Double should be some kind of balanced hand, but I hope you understand that playing penalty doubles of a strong NT opening is a losing proposition to begin with.

Tell that to Michael Rosenberg. He is not exactly a loser, and he is a subscriber to penalty doubles of 1NT. Besides, if you can't double a strong NT ever, the player in 3rd seat NV v Vul has a free route. He can open 1NT on anything because you can't penalise him.

 

On several occasions, Michael, on BBO vugraph, has told the audience that what he and Zia are really interested in when looking at the opponents's convention card is what their defence is to 1NT.

 

Roland

[awm]

I've actually seen some pretty big IMP swings based on successful penalty doubles of strong notrump. It does happen.

 

But I think the argument is a frequency one. There are basically three ways you could define a penalty double:

 

(1) It's based on tricks. But this often means that 1NT is pretty much the only contract you can beat. Good opponents will run to some other partscore. In fact you may be better off passing with the "tricks" hand since opponents are much more likely to play in notrump when you do.

 

(2) It's based on values. But if your opponents really have their 15-17 hcp (or whatever) then it will be quite infrequent that you hold sufficient values to penalize. Occasionally there will be a big win when you catch opener's partner with the bad hand but almost as often there's a big loss when your partner is the one with nothing. The main benefit of the "values" double is that it lets you catch them when they psych.

 

(3) It's based on either tricks or values. This maximizes the frequency, but sometimes when you have the "tricks" hand you'll get partner pulling when you had them beat.

 

The third-seat psych of 1NT is really not without risk. There is potential to win when LHO has a penalty double and gets shut out. But the problem is that partner will often hang you. And LHO who had to pass over 1NT with his balanced 18-count will be happy to double you once partner raises to 3NT...