Act?

[xcurt]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sk62h76dak76c9853]133|100|Scoring: XIMP

1♠-P-P-2♥

2♠-?[/hv]

[xcurt]

For those doubling is it 100% this is takeout (or negative or whatever you want to call it) (if it is, of course, this isn't a problem, but this is BBO XIMPs where having any agreements seems out of fashion).

[Free]

Dbl

[mcphee]

dble for me, values and 2 places to play.

[Phil]

Double isn't an option for me since its penalty, but 2N doesn't seem too far off the mark.

[CSGibson]

Double isn't an option for me since its penalty, but 2N doesn't seem too far off the mark.

Why should this double be penalty rather than negative or cooperative? You couldn't make a take-out double of spades previously because partner might bid hearts. Your hand, and other minor suit hands with some values, but no heart fit, is surely a more common hand type than any hand with a penalty pass of 1 spade.

[kfay]

You answered your own question.

 

Why should this double be penalty?

 

 

You couldn't make a take-out double of spades previously...

[CSGibson]

You answered your own question.

 

Why should this double be penalty?

 

 

You couldn't make a take-out double of spades previously...

Not true. This situation is different, as partner is not going to play me for hearts when I double, which is different than a take-out double in my first chance to act.

[JLOL]

Takeout is the modern approach I think. I play this as penalty still. I would just pass.

[Codo]

Playing take out doubles here makes it a no brainer X. I do play them. Playing penalty doubles, this is a heavy pass. Just a little bid more (the jack of spades) and I bid 2 NT.

[jdeegan]

:P Pass

2♥ is limited to a good opening hand at best and 9 HCP and a decent suit at worst, so I think finding a plus or the smallest minus should be our objective. A pass sets this up better than the other calls. My initial pass might have been just short of a one NT overcall, so it makes sense for the double to be for penalty. In any case, an "action" double says:

(1) it is our hand - which this one may not be, and

(2) i am under the bidder, so I haven't trapped

[miguelm]

Will we ever hold a "natural" hand with which we would bid 2NT here...? Hardly ever (unless you play the 2H balance as the "real thing").

And how frequent are the hands we feel we should compete with but have no clear option....?

 

I like have the Double available as penalty here and 2NT as "a sort" of take out double for the minors.

[whereagles]

For those doubling is it 100% this is takeout

then WTP? :)

[whereagles]

Will we ever hold a "natural" hand with which we would bid 2NT here...? Hardly ever (...)

There is a possible natural interpretation of 2NT here: a balanced 13-14 hand with a couple cards in the opening suit. Not that unlikely. At all.

 

Sure, you can play dbl as pen and 2NT as take out here, but you'll be out of bid with a balanced 13-14.

[kfay]

Will we ever hold a "natural" hand with which we would bid 2NT here...? Hardly ever (...)

There is a possible natural interpretation of 2NT here: a balanced 13-14 hand with a couple cards in the opening suit. Not that unlikely. At all.

 

Sure, you can play dbl as pen and 2NT as take out here, but you'll be out of bid with a balanced 13-14.

His point is that with the hand you propose... guess what... DOUBLE!!!

[miguelm]

Will we ever hold a "natural" hand with which we would bid 2NT here...? Hardly ever (...)

There is a possible natural interpretation of 2NT here: a balanced 13-14 hand with a couple cards in the opening suit. Not that unlikely. At all.

 

Sure, you can play dbl as pen and 2NT as take out here, but you'll be out of bid with a balanced 13-14.

His point is that with the hand you propose... guess what... DOUBLE!!!

Sorry, maybe I express it badly... when I wrote "here" was intended as "in this position", not what I would do in this situation.

 

If playing what I've suggested, clear 2NT for me. If not, then Double.

[miguelm]

There is a possible natural interpretation of 2NT here: a balanced 13-14 hand with a couple cards in the opening suit. Not that unlikely. At all.

hummm... do you think so....? Well, I am not so sure you will get those 13-14 hands more often than the hand type we are discussing....

[whereagles]

There is a possible natural interpretation of 2NT here: a balanced 13-14 hand with a couple cards in the opening suit. Not that unlikely. At all.

hummm... do you think so....? Well, I am not so sure you will get those 13-14 hands more often than the hand type we are discussing....

I'm not sure which is more common: minors or bal 13-14. One could run a simulation, but maybe that's not needed: if you play

 

dbl = minors

2NT = 13-14

pass = weak or penalty double of spades (pard dbls with short spades)

 

you get to bid all the hand types, whereas with

 

dbl = penalty

2NT = minors

pass = weak

 

you'll be out of bid with the bal 13-14 hand.

[dake50]

What's wrong with 3H? Partner should have a hefty 5xH or 6xH. I add SK onside + DAK.

Partner knows I'm often boxed in with 10 points. This is a raise only short a 3rd H. Suppose S-Kxx H-Qx D-AJxx C-xxxx raise again.

X as 'our hand, what to do?' is too much. Besides this is a good X if 3S.

[bid_em_up]

you get to bid all the hand types, whereas with

 

dbl = penalty

2NT = minors

pass = weak

 

you'll be out of bid with the bal 13-14 hand.

I think with 13-14 balanced, I can quite easily find either:

 

1) a raise of partners suit or

2) a penalty double.

 

I do not understand how you can possibly believe you will be "out of bid" on this holding.

 

I agree with Miguel, 2N should suggest both minors.

 

pass = weak or penalty double of spades (pard dbls with short spades)

And this part of your methodology makes no sense at all. If partner had short spades, he would/should have reopened with double initially.

[mikeh]

The double here has traditionally been used as penalty, and I think that that is still the better method.

 

This is a hand on which takeout would be better, provided that we have a place to play... which is not assured. But one hand proves little, if anything.

 

Q10xx xx AJxx Kxx... now we'd like to make them pay, and we'd be lamenting that we had no penalty double available.

 

 

As it is, I pass.. on a good day, partner can reopen, but I'm not going to be holding my breath.

 

No method caters to all hand types.

[jdonn]

It is definitely one of those situations where whatever you choose, you largely have to give up showing something else. I play penalty because it's standard and it's relatively common and I have never been bothered to change. But in the cold light of day I think card showing and takeout oriented is a better treatment, and that by passing our penalty doubles we will still get a fair amount of the penalties when partner reopens.

[Mbodell]

Yeah, X can be penalty, cooperative, or takeout/minors. 2nt can be minors or natural. I think natural 2nt and cooperative X are often similar sorts of hands. I think cooperative and takeout/minors are both more common than penalty. Therefore I like X as cooperative and 2nt as minors.

[whereagles]

If partner had short spades, he would/should have reopened with double initially.

Pard bid 2♥. That doesn't deny short spades. If I have a penalty double, he's actually bound to have short spades, no?

 

Ok, maybe he's not strong enough to double 2nd round, but you can't have it all.

[whereagles]

The double here has traditionally been used as penalty, and I think that that is still the better method.

Robson/Segal have it defined as take out.

 

There's a rule about delayed doubles somewhere in chapter 5. Actually, the interpretation of the rule in this case is a bit muddy, but you can check from their examples they do play it as take out.

 

Sorry to keep mentioning this 15 year-old book, but it's by far the best thing I've read on the subject of competitive bidding :)