Another question about a double...

[Hanoi5]

Bidding goes:

 

1♠ Pass Pass 2♥

2♠ X

 

How would you take this double?

 

Does it depend on you cards?

[mr1303]

You can agree (reasonably) to play this as take-out. However I very much prefer to play this as penalty. The reason for this is that the number of chances to take a penalty are diminishing by the day, such to the extent that it becomes almost perfectly safe to make bad bids at a low level without getting punished for it. This is one such situation where a penalty double is quite likely since:

 

1) Dummy will be broke

2) You had one chance already to make a take-out double

3) You may have been hoping for partner to make a take-out double (which you would pass) but he bid a suit instead

4) You are sitting over declarer's long suit. A holding like KJxx is worth at least 2 tricks over the length, but possibly nothing under the length.

[ArtK78]

This should be a penalty double. The only obvious reason for partner to double in this position is that he had a penalty double of 1♠ and was hoping that you would reopen with a double. When you reopened with a bid rather than a double, it appeared that the possibility of penalizing the opposition was lost. However, opener now bids 2♠. So your partner has the opportunity to double a level higher.

 

The alternative interpretation of this double - competitive - means that partner has minor suits and a hand inappropriate for an overcall on the first round and inappropriate for a takeout double on the first round. This is possible - suppose partner has a 3-2-4-4 14 count. But you can show this hand by bidding 2NT (which should not be natural here).

 

If partner has a good hand with cards in spades, such as AQxx, which he feels is not sufficient to double 2♠ for penalties, he can bid 3NT now that you have balanced. This would be a hand not quite strong enough for a 1NT overcall on the first round and also the wrong shape for a takeout double on the first round - for example, 4-2-3-4.

 

Others may disagree with the use of the double for penalties and the use of the 2NT bid for the minors. They might want to use the 2NT bid as natural and invitational. I think that is too small a target to aim for, and the use of the 2NT bid for the minors makes more sense.

[rogerclee]

Unilateral penalty. If you never pull this double in your entire life, you will be right 100% of the time.

[kenrexford]

Oops! Double.

 

(Oops for them)

[awm]

As with almost any call, depends on partnership agreement. The standard meaning is penalty. I much prefer takeout.

 

I'm not sure where this argument that "2NT should not be natural" comes from -- something like 12-14 balanced will be a very common holding in this auction and jumping to 3NT opposite a balancing 2♥ bid (or doubling for penalty with one stopper in spades) seems somewhat ridiculous here.

 

Double gives you a bid on many hand types where you don't have any sensible call otherwise (3244 no spade stopper? 22(45) minors not good enough for immediate overcall?) Of course it is possible to "lose" some penalties, but playing double as takeout partner will often balance with a double when you have a penalty double. I'm sure we all play 1♠-P-P-2♥-2♠-P-P-X as takeout right? Generally I prefer doubles to be symmetric; if a balancing double from partner is takeout and a double from me is penalty, then will I ever pass partner's balancing double? And what will we do when partner has the spade length and I have the spade shortage?

[han]

I believe we play this double also as a responsive double but I don't have strong feelings about it. It is as Adam says, either way is reasonable and since all others don't understand this I will argue against them.

 

The penalty doublers fail to make a strong case. Roger thinks that his way is the obvious way as usual and no arguments are needed. Art thinks it is penalty but his partner would rather jump to 3NT than double holding AQxx of spades. David gives 4 reasons of which only one is convincing (that dummy will be broke). The third and fourth reasons apply to many other auctions as well where I bet David would be playing takeout doubles. His second reason sounds reasonable but is not, of course we didn't make a takeout double before because we don't have hearts. What I like best is the sentimental:

 

The reason for this is that the number of chances to take a penalty are diminishing by the day, such to the extent that it becomes almost perfectly safe to make bad bids at a low level without getting punished for it.

 

Yes, everything was better in the old days when we were playing penalty doubles so people didn't dare to interfere. It is true thaty weak players bid 2S here far too often so that is a good reason for playing penalty doubles. However better players will have a good suit in this auction, not just a good hand, so it will be quite unlikely that you will be sitting there with a trump stack and much more likely that you have a 22(45) hand that wants to compete.

[pclayton]

Nice summary by Han. I play it as penalty as well, but I don't have strong feelings about it.

 

Perhaps this is one of those types of doubles that could be played as "look at your own hand and figure out what I'm doing".

 

Certainly, a double like this doesn't come up in a 20 minute discussion of a cc. Wouldn't we look at our own hand with an expert partner as the primary source of our interpretation? While we rate to get some silly results if we sit (or pull), we will get at least as many good results by just relying on common sense.

[rogerclee]

Roger thinks that his way is the obvious way as usual

This is not what I meant. I mean that in standard bidding, this is penalty, not that this is obviously the best way to play it. Also, in this standard approach, one should (basically) never remove this penalty double.

 

As for penalty vs takeout, I have no particularly strong feelings, but I do play this is penalty, and that 2NT shows a responsive-double type hand.

[P_Marlowe]

t/o.

 

Simple reason: We play all low level doubles

as t/o except we have discussed it before and

and reached an agreement that this is penalty.

 

We seldom come to the conclusion that penalty

is better, and having a simple hard fast rule is

helpful and worth giving up some slight

improvements.

 

And just because the X is t/o does not mean, we

cant go for blood.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Gerben42]

Take out because of meta-rules in my partnership. I voted "could be both depends on partnership". My guess would be that a pickup would play this as penalty.

 

Besides if I have a ♠ stack, maybe partner will reopen with a Dbl next. And if not, maybe it's for the best because he has a weak hand?