MattieShoe Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I was pondering the standard SOS sequence:1♣ (P) P (X)P (P) XX And I was wondering, how would you interpret this?1♣ (X) P (P)XX (P) ? I'd assume East has long clubs when he passes the takeout dobule, so I was wondering if a redouble in this situation should be interpreted as sort of an inverse SOS... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I play both as rescue redoubles. Putting it another way, my meta-agreements of redoubles in these type of auctions are for rescue. If you have certain exceptions here and there you may get yourself into a pickle in an undiscussed auction because redoubles can crop up anywhere. And the blue card is certainly not a one to mess around with! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 I play both as SOS also and the second sequence is certainly needed, IMHO, when opener could have 3 lousy ♣. I think that on the 2nd sequence it is more important to be able to XX for rescue than to use it to show some kind of really good hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 some people think opener gets to ask for rescue, but responder cannot use the xx for that. Opener says, "If I wanted a random rescue, I would have asked for it." So #2 would be asking for help, and number one shouldn't happen if you play that agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 some people think opener gets to ask for rescue, but responder cannot use the xx for that. Opener says, "If I wanted a random rescue, I would have asked for it." So #2 would be asking for help, and number one shouldn't happen if you play that agreement. They should both be for rescue imo. On the first one opener could easily have 4333 or 4432 or 4324 and may think bidding on may risk the partnership in more danger and passes. When this is passed for penalties then responder can use his judgement. What I have learnt throughout the years is that when the opponents penalty passes against you at the ONE level, they are seriously not joking. So that gives the responder all the more reason to escape with a suitable hand. On the 2nd one, opener is most likely to be 4432 and wants to run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Both rescue. The 2nd is the classic SOS xx; the 1st less so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 some people think opener gets to ask for rescue, but responder cannot use the xx for that. Opener says, "If I wanted a random rescue, I would have asked for it." So #2 would be asking for help, and number one shouldn't happen if you play that agreement. Playing 1C P P X XX as "pre-rescue" in case LHO has a penalty pass seems misguided - responder could well have a 0-count with 4/5 clubs where there is no reason to run from 1♣. Standard is "strong balanced". So there is still a need for responder to rescue on the first auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattieShoe Posted October 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Thanks for the advice. I've never actually used an SOS redouble, but I imagine it'll happen sooner or later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts