dicklont Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 [hv=d=w&w=sakhkxxdakxcqxxxx&e=s10hqj10xdjxxxxcajx]266|100|Scoring: MP1♣ - p - 1♦ - 1♠2NT[/hv]South bids 1♠ and now West has rebid 2NT.Although these hands cannot give a problem - you'll end in 3NT anyway - they generated some discussion.The question is, should east look for a fit in hearts by bidding 3♣ or can he finish the bidding right away with 3NT. When the opposition is silent the 2NT rebid can be done on a hand with four spades and/or hearts.But does this 2NT rebid deny four hearts since west could have doubled to show them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdaming Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Do you play support doubles? That might be a situation when responder would have 4♥ and not double. I generally play them and thus would say no it does not deny 4♥. If you are not playing them then I would say it "generally" would deny but could have if you had 4 little and a hand that "lived" at 2NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Do you play support doubles? That might be a situation when responder would have 4♥ and not double. I generally play them and thus would say no it does not deny 4♥. If you are not playing them then I would say it "generally" would deny but could have if you had 4 little and a hand that "lived" at 2NT. Support doubles for implied possible suits? Weird, but kind of sexy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 The importance to show (good) ♠ stopper is greater than the importantance to show 4♥. So 2NT does not deny 4♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichMor Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Interesting question. If we assume that a double of the 1♠ overcall shows 4 Hearts, then it seems reasonable to play that a 2NT rebid by opener denies 4 hearts. But change the hand to:♠) AK ♥)Kxxx ♦)AKx ♣)Qxxxand opener might still rebid 2NT since it is a more descriptive call than a support double. This would be a good problem to submit to the MSC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichMor Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Do you play support doubles? That might be a situation when responder would have 4♥ and not double. I generally play them and thus would say no it does not deny 4♥. If you are not playing them then I would say it "generally" would deny but could have if you had 4 little and a hand that "lived" at 2NT. Support doubles for implied possible suits? Weird, but kind of sexy.Weird and sexy ? Could be. It is the standard BWS meaning for this sequence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Assuming a double would show four hearts, we don't play Walsh, and 2NT is non-forcing, I would take 2NT as denying four hearts. Even then, hosShot may very well be right, and it is certainly ok to bid 2NT with any hand that is willing to miss the hearts fit and play 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyDluxe Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Support doubles for implied possible suits? Weird, but kind of sexy.Weird and sexy ? Could be. It is the standard BWS meaning for this sequence. Standard meanings *are* weird for Ken.... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Do you play support doubles? That might be a situation when responder would have 4♥ and not double. I generally play them and thus would say no it does not deny 4♥. If you are not playing them then I would say it "generally" would deny but could have if you had 4 little and a hand that "lived" at 2NT. Support doubles for implied possible suits? Weird, but kind of sexy.Weird and sexy ? Could be. It is the standard BWS meaning for this sequence. I think the "sexy" part is that partner responded 1♦, not 1♥. I'm a simple soul, I don't make support doubles for suits until partner has bid them. To the original hand, sure look for a heart fit however your methods dictate (you can't just bid 3♥ on this auction?) Edit: WOW it seems like every post till now except Ken thinks partner responded 1♥. Looks to me like he responded 1♦ lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 [hv=d=w&w=sakhkxxdakxcqxxxx&e=s10hqj10xdjxxxxcajx]266|100|Scoring: MP1♣ - p - 1♦ - 1♠2NT[/hv]South bids 1♠ and now West has rebid 2NT.Although these hands cannot give a problem - you'll end in 3NT anyway - they generated some discussion.The question is, should east look for a fit in hearts by bidding 3♣ or can he finish the bidding right away with 3NT. When the opposition is silent the 2NT rebid can be done on a hand with four spades and/or hearts.But does this 2NT rebid deny four hearts since west could have doubled to show them? No, opener can have 4h. An argument to play Walsh style and respond 1h. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichMor Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 Do you play support doubles? That might be a situation when responder would have 4♥ and not double. I generally play them and thus would say no it does not deny 4♥. If you are not playing them then I would say it "generally" would deny but could have if you had 4 little and a hand that "lived" at 2NT. Support doubles for implied possible suits? Weird, but kind of sexy.Weird and sexy ? Could be. It is the standard BWS meaning for this sequence. I think the "sexy" part is that partner responded 1♦, not 1♥. I'm a simple soul, I don't make support doubles for suits until partner has bid them. To the original hand, sure look for a heart fit however your methods dictate (you can't just bid 3♥ on this auction?) Edit: WOW it seems like every post till now except Ken thinks partner responded 1♥. Looks to me like he responded 1♦ lol.Nope. 1♣ - (P) - 1♦ - (1♠)Xshows 4 Hearts in BWS. On the example hands, responder would bid 1♥ and not 1♦ if playing BWS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think the problem was calling it a support double. The double showing 4 hearts is not a "support double", that is the name of a specific convention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdaming Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I was merely catagorizing it as a support double as listed here (look in the additional situations the last one) http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys/Doubles...portDouble.html Either way I think depends on the style of the partnership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I was merely catagorizing it as a support double as listed here (look in the additional situations the last one) http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys/Doubles...portDouble.html Either way I think depends on the style of the partnership. The website calls the double on this auction showing 4 hearts a "negative double", which is also wrong, but they don't call it a support double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdaming Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? I think I see what you meant now, sorry. It's a later poster that misused the term. Anyway I'm fairly confident that double by opener there showing 4 hearts does not have a name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobowolf Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? The phrase "Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card heart suit" doesn't imply that those are the same thing, but rather that it's ambiguous whether it's 1) a Support Double (showing 3 diamonds); OR2) a Negative Double showing a 4-card heart suit. Having said that, as Josh pointed out, if the bid shows a 4-card heart suit, it's not a negative double, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naresh301 Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it?I take that to mean "Partnership agreement is necessary to determine if the double is a support double showing 3♦, or a negative(!) double showing 4♥". Are support doubles for minor suits common? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I think this concern with terminology is a bit misplaced. After all, partners can call it whatever they like between them, but when explaining to the opponents, it is illegal to just name it, whatever name you give it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? I think I see what you meant now, sorry. It's a later poster that misused the term. Anyway I'm fairly confident that double by opener there showing 4 hearts does not have a name. Takeout Double? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? I think I see what you meant now, sorry. It's a later poster that misused the term. Anyway I'm fairly confident that double by opener there showing 4 hearts does not have a name. Takeout Double? That's kind of like saying both of our names are "person". In other words it may well be a takeout double, but that is not the name and would in fact be a silly name since it wouldn't distinguish this specific convention from any other takeout double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I think it says: "This particular auction, whereby both Minor suits have been bid by the partnership, may also become ambiguous since it is not clear whether the double of the opening bidder signifies a Support Double or a Negative Double showing a 4-card Heart suit. Again, a solid partnership agreement is necessary, especially for this particular bidding sequence." Which is what I was saying. I think the terminology is close and generally interchanged but just so everyone knows what would you call it? I think I see what you meant now, sorry. It's a later poster that misused the term. Anyway I'm fairly confident that double by opener there showing 4 hearts does not have a name. Takeout Double? That's kind of like saying both of our names are "person". In other words it may well be a takeout double, but that is not the name and would in fact be a silly name since it wouldn't distinguish this specific convention from any other takeout double. Yeah maybe, person. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 If someone said they were playing the double as "support", I'd assume that it showed 3-card diamond support. If they said it was "takeout", I'd assume that 1345 or 1435 was typical. If the double simply shows any hand with four hearts, it's neither "support" nor "takeout". It seems to me that "negative" would be a good name for it, but in the absence of widely understood terminology I would simply describe it as "showing four hearts". I have, in fact, seen this double given a name in print - I think Flint and Sharpe called it "Opener's Sputnik" in their 1980 book Competitive Bidding. This term seems not to have gained much popularity - Google produced three hits for it, and a further three for the same phrase without an apostrophe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Well, one thing's for sure. Hopefully. I assume the double does not show three hearts. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASkolnick Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Many people would actual call this treatment "snapdragon" where the double after diamonds shows 4 hearts. The name is irrelevant, as long as you know what you are playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.