Simply respond to a takeout double

[paulg]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=saxxhaxdqtxxc98xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Pass - (1♠) - Dbl - (Pass)

?

 

1♠ shows 4+ spades in a weak notrump system[/hv]

Any strong feelings on the best call?

[Gerben42]

I would bid 1NT. You're sometimes allowed to have a maximum.

[whereagles]

indeed

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

1 NT.

 

2C, 2D are out, since they show nothing,

the only alternative is 2NT.

Depending on your t/o style, partner may

be allowed to stretch in case he faces a passed

partner, i.e. you may not have full values

oppossite.

If you will always face full values, go ahead and

bid 2NT, but I think 1NT is enough.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[655321]

We can't bid 3m, because we could be in a 4-2 fit. 2NT is silly, with Axx opposite a takeout double. 2♦ is possible, but partner won't know about our values.

 

So the choices are between 1NT and 2♠.

2♠ depends on your agreements about a cuebid here, if it is not suitable, 1NT looks like your only choice.

[Guest Jlall]

feel strongly about 1N, I do not think this is a maximum (it is a medium?) and I think everything else is silly. Takeout Xs are not always 1444 13 counts, especially when your RHO passes.

[benlessard]

wtp 1nt

[gnasher]

I do not think this is a maximum (it is a medium?)

What would a maximum look like?

[Apollo81]

I don't think this is such a great hand for notrump, but there really is no other good call available than 1NT, particularly if partner is the type to double on 24(25) hands.

[pclayton]

1N. Seems kind of obvious to me.

[paulg]

I posted this problem to see whether this was an obvious 1NT or if a 2NT response was a consideration. Seems like the answer is obvious but, unlike Justin, I think this is a maximum for 1NT.

 

Partner held a xx/Kxx/AKxxx/Axx and there were nine top tricks. Only one pair (of sixteen) bid 3NT on the board in the MBC and they had no opposition bidding.

 

Paul

[pclayton]

I posted this problem to see whether this was an obvious 1NT or if a 2NT response was a consideration. Seems like the answer is obvious but, unlike Justin, I think this is a maximum for 1NT.

 

Partner held a xx/Kxx/AKxxx/Axx and there were nine top tricks. Only one pair (of sixteen) bid 3NT on the board in the MBC and they had no opposition bidding.

 

Paul

Unless your takeout doubles promise an opening bid, I think 8-11 for 1N and 12-13 for 2N is necessary.

 

Like Justin, this isn't a maximum 1N for me, especially with a single stop.

 

I might invite with your partner's hand, I'm not sure.

[Guest Jlall]

I do not think this is a maximum (it is a medium?)

What would a maximum look like?

I would bid 1N routinely with 11s. So you can add a jack anywhere to this hand and I'd bid 1N.

[Guest Jlall]

I posted this problem to see whether this was an obvious 1NT or if a 2NT response was a consideration. Seems like the answer is obvious but, unlike Justin, I think this is a maximum for 1NT.

 

Partner held a xx/Kxx/AKxxx/Axx and there were nine top tricks. Only one pair (of sixteen) bid 3NT on the board in the MBC and they had no opposition bidding.

 

Paul

The other hand has a normal 2N bid IMO.

[Cascade]

I posted this problem to see whether this was an obvious 1NT or if a 2NT response was a consideration. Seems like the answer is obvious but, unlike Justin, I think this is a maximum for 1NT.

 

Partner held a xx/Kxx/AKxxx/Axx and there were nine top tricks. Only one pair (of sixteen) bid 3NT on the board in the MBC and they had no opposition bidding.

 

Paul

The other hand has a normal 2N bid IMO.

... and you would go on with your "medium"?

[skjaeran]

1NT seem absolutely auto here.

[han]

Ditto.

[Apollo81]

If pard had ♣KJ instead of ♣A then youd have been happier to be in 1N.

[Guest Jlall]

I posted this problem to see whether this was an obvious 1NT or if a 2NT response was a consideration. Seems like the answer is obvious but, unlike Justin, I think this is a maximum for 1NT.

 

Partner held a xx/Kxx/AKxxx/Axx and there were nine top tricks. Only one pair (of sixteen) bid 3NT on the board in the MBC and they had no opposition bidding.

 

Paul

The other hand has a normal 2N bid IMO.

... and you would go on with your "medium"?

What do you think "Wayne"?!

[han]

I bet "Justin" would pass, he always seems to pass invites. :P

[gnasher]

If 1NT shows 8-11, I assume that you'd bid two of a minor with any of these:

 

  Axx Jx QTxx 98xx

  Axx Jxx QTxx 98x

  Axx Jxx QTx 98xx

  QJx Qxx xxx Jxxx

  QJxx xxx xxx Q9x

  KJ8x xxx xxx 10xx

 

(The last three are adapted from examples in one of Mike Lawrence's books.)

 

In this thread:

 

  opps open, what is your call?

 

we learned that for many people it's OK to make a takeout double with a small doubleton in an unbid minor, planning to pass an advance in that minor. Comments included "willing to live with the consequences", and "the worst case scenario doesn't always happen and when it does you're usually in a 5-2 fit anyways".

 

It seems to me that these two styles don't fit very comfortably together. If your style of takeout doubles discourages the bidding of four card minors, surely you shouldn't have such tight constraints on advancer's 1NT?

[helene_t]

8-11 is not a tight constraint. A wider range is (close to) unplayable.

 

But yes, bidding 2m with the 6-7 counts with a stopper elevates the risk of playing in a 4-2 fit. I would not worry too much about it. The 8-11 range allows for light doubles when the shape is perfect, and I think that is a big winner. You don't have to double with a doubleton in an unbid minor but passing may be more dangerous.

[han]

Both off-shape takeout doubles and constructive 1NT follow ups to doubles are treatments that allow the non-opening side to find games. As such it makes perfect sense to play both in today's aggressive game.

 

It is true that you risk getting to a silly spot every once in a while. But for that to happen doubler must have had an off-shape double, advancer must have one of those awkward balanced hands and responder must pass. Usually these three factors don't all happen on the same hand and if they do then it still might not be a disaster.

[gnasher]

8-11 is not a tight constraint. A wider range is (close to) unplayable.

 

But yes, bidding 2m with the 6-7 counts with a stopper elevates the risk of playing in a 4-2 fit. I would not worry too much about it. The 8-11 range allows for light doubles when the shape is perfect, and I think that is a big winner. You don't have to double with a doubleton in an unbid minor but passing may be more dangerous.

8-11 is a much narrower range than for a non-forcing 1NT response to an opening bid, which these days is about 5-10.

 

I don't see how the 8-11 range "allows" for light doubles any better than a 7-11 or 6-11 range would. A wider range costs when partner is strong, not when he is weak.

[helene_t]

8-11 is a much narrower range than for a non-forcing 1NT response to an opening bid, which these days is about 5-10.

Nobody plays responses to t/o doubles as 5-10.

 

While an opening in a suit denies a balanced 15-17, a t/o double does not. So responder has to cater for that range. A balanced 15-16 is stuck opposite a 5-10 1NT response.