defense to 1nt defenses

[slyq]

best defense to 1nt defenses there seems very little litreture in general the merits of t/o xs vs penalties of natural overcalls and passing then balancing over artifical bids and what direct xs then show does anyone have a scheme they believe in personaly t/o xs of natural overcalls seem lose there normal effacy in this situation what do people think

[slyq]

never been a good speller my daughter says efficacy is correct spelling

[bill1157]

a scheme that looked promising to me when partner opens 1N is: pass of 2m/1N is forcing X penalty. Pass of 2M/1N is not forcing X is take out.

 

Bill

[dake50]

As bill1157, Find our M-fit is primary.

So 1N <2M> X for other M;

but 1N <2m> P intends penalty by auto-reopening X;

leaving 1N <2m> immediate X as M-seek, esp. stolen xfer.

[Cascade]

pass of 2m/1N is forcing X penalty

Obviously this agreement is very dependent on range.

[Cascade]

I strongly believe that takeout doubles are superior to penalty doubles of natural interference including 2♥ = hearts and a minor and similar.

 

Over artificial bids e.g. 2♣ Landy or Cappelletti, we play double is simply values around the equivalent of slightly less than an invite or better so establishing ownership of the hand (majority of the strength). After which we play takeout doubles by either partner and new suits by responder are forcing - a simply competitive suit could have been bid on the previous round.

 

Opener needs to be careful after 1NT (Bid) X (PASS) since depending on the meaning of the bid the overcall might have that suit and PASS. Therefore opener is allowed to bid a four-card suit or 2NT if unwilling to PASS for penalties.

[gwnn]

first x points

second x takeout

third x penalty

later doubles penalty

[Siegmund]

The only book I'm aware of that spends much time on the subject is Kleinman's Notrump Zone. In particular he has some sensible advice as to which responding hands should bid immediately vs. which should wait for the 2nd round when the overcall is artificial, as well as a suggestion for "something better than systems on" over 1NT-2C.

 

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

[Jlall]

Takeout Xs are much more common by experts now at all levels, but you still see both at the 2 level.

 

At the very least you must play t/o Xs at the 3 level since otherwise you're screwed, at the 2 level you can get by a lot of the time playing penalty Xs if you play leb or something like that so you have some way to check for 4 of the other major etc.

[nigel_k]

Takeout doubles of their first natural bid are just better, both in theory and practice.

 

If double is penalty, all the sequences following the double become unusable and this is quite a large percentage of all the sequences available. Since the hand will often belong to your side in a partscore you don't have much bidding space to find out and can't afford to waste any by using penalty doubles.

 

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

1) Overcaller doesn't have the suit they bid (e.g. 2♣ = majors)

2) They may have the suit they bid (e.g. 2♣ = ♥ and another)

 

In scenario 1, you can just double with values and if the next player passes showing clubs, opener has to bid unless they have a penalty pass (i.e good clubs.

 

In scenario 2, I think it is better for the doubler to promise 3+ cards in the suit the opponent bid. This allows opener to pass much more often. Otherwise opener is under their possible long suit and with no guarantee of any trumps opposite so opener will need to almost always bid something or run the risk of letting opponents easily make the doubled contract.

[Mbodell]

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

This. When playing weak and/or mini-nt penalty doubles are great. I think the gains to losses are at least 2:1 if not 3:1. I play some form of leb so one suiters or game forcing hands are covered without needing the TO X.

 

Occasionally I wish I had a TO X on equal point hands, but I usually either pass or sometimes bid 2S on a good 4 card suit.

[gnasher]

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

 

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

[aguahombre]

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

This. When playing weak and/or mini-nt penalty doubles are great. I think the gains to losses are at least 2:1 if not 3:1. I play some form of leb so one suiters or game forcing hands are covered without needing the TO X.

 

Occasionally I wish I had a TO X on equal point hands, but I usually either pass or sometimes bid 2S on a good 4 card suit.

You must be old, like me. Double of 2C, if natural or undisclosed 1-suit=stayman, otherwise cards and penalty oriented.

 

Equally old, and just fine with me is that reopening double by the NT bidder underneath a natural overcall and P P is takeout --but behind the bidder is penalty.

 

We won't get much support on these fora for that, but oh, well...at least one other person agrees with you.

[jdonn]

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

If opener can be expected to reopen with shortness when his hand is decent you get back many penalties. And though you lose some when responder would have doubled but opener can't reopen, they are made up for with others when responder makes a takeout double and opener can pass. Really playing takeout doubles doesn't get you very many fewer penalties and lets you compete a whole lot more often. It's a no brainer to me.

[bluecalm]

Where I live penalty doubles after 1NT - 2X are long forgotten. I didn't think any reasonable partnership still plays them.

Not being able to make negative double with say : KJxx xx KJxx xxx when it goes:

1NT - 2♥ - ?

 

Is enough form e to forget about penalty one.

[Gerben42]

If opener can be expected to reopen with shortness when his hand is decent you get back many penalties. And though you lose some when responder would have doubled but opener can't reopen, they are made up for with others when responder makes a takeout double and opener can pass. Really playing takeout doubles doesn't get you very many fewer penalties and lets you compete a whole lot more often. It's a no brainer to me.

 

To me too. Every time a partner insists on penalty Dbl an "I told you so" hand seems to come up, though, so there are less and less of such partners :(

[slyq]

what do people think of a cancape defense style similar to the old super precision over 1nt where x of 2d natural an 2h natural is a trans to 4+cd major

[cherdanno]

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

 

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

Others play that a double of 2♣ shows interest in penalizing a major.Which isn't all that different, if you assume that the "takeout doubles" of an artificial 2♣ are sufficiently flexible B)

[dburn]

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

 

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

Advantage number 1: you do not have to worry what the opponents' bidding means. If double of, say, 2♦ is defined as "takeout of diamonds" however 2♦ itself is defined, then [a] partner knows at once what you have and the vast majority of opponents have no idea what to do. "You do realise" said some patronising twit only the other day "that my partner doesn't have to have diamonds?" Informed that we neither knew nor cared whether his partner had diamonds, he spent the next three minutes trying to work out what it would mean if he passed over the double, and the three after that watching his partner go down five in 2♦ doubled on a 3-2 fit.

 

If you want to play double as one thing over Multi, another thing over Woolsey, a third thing over Astro, a fourth thing over... well, the best of luck to your partner. You don't deserve any.

 

Advantage number 2: later actions in murky sequences become much easier to interpret. An example that occurred rather longer ago than the one above was this sequence: 1NT-2♥ (both majors)-Pass-2♠-Pass-Pass-3♥. I don't know what your partner would think you had for that auction, but mine knew that I had five hearts, short spades, and a good hand. So he raised to 4♥, which made despite what turned out to be only a 4-1 break, but I could have coped with 5-0. At the other table the auction started 1NT-2♣ (both majors), but the opponents did not have a way to play in hearts after this start, and no other game had a chance.

 

Advantage number 3: it works even when the opponents do not have what they are supposed to have for their bidding. Sometimes they forget their methods; sometimes they have a liberal interpretation of what constitutes a "two-suiter" (4-3 or even 3-3 are becoming popular with the cool school); sometimes they just psyche. We don't care - if we have doubled (say) hearts for takeout, then bids of hearts by us are cue bids and doubles of everything else are penalty.

 

Advantage number 4: even I can't forget the system.

[jdonn]

If you want to play double as one thing over Multi, another thing over Woolsey, a third thing over Astro, a fourth thing over... well, the best of luck to your partner. You don't deserve any.

Well that's a bit harsh. Also a bit exagerated. If the overcall shows the suit being bid (with or without any others) double is takeout, if it shows any other suit(s) then double is penalty interest of the suit(s) shown. I find a way to get by even when the meaning of my double is dependent on receiving a correct explanation of the overcall.

[straube]

If the opponents make an artificial bid (like 2C showing the majors), the partership can use a convention called "I've got a secret". Responder passes and then doubles later to show point majority and a balanced hand. Opener knows then that the double is not pure penalty and can bid his own suit or convert to 2N if he's afraid that the contract will be successful.

 

If instead, responder doubles the 2C bid, it shows a desire to penalize one or both suits.

 

This approach has the disadvantage of losing serendipity doubles...i.e. responder has a weaker hand and they just happen to land in a suit for which responder has great defense.

[dake50]

Try X xfer to lowest suit, next 3 suit bids xfers also.

I get my hand described immediately or next if it's an invite.

Partner may super accept. Fit found.

 

xfers into their suit/suits show stops/controls by next bid.

 

X or XX xfer has DT to set next level up if it gets converted. May be general strong, not just xfer suit.

[awm]

In my part of the world, the vast majority of players use 2♣ and 2♦ overcalls as artificial. The most common scheme is probably Capp (2♣ = one suit, 2♦ = majors) with most of the better players using Woolsey (2♣ = majors, 2♦ = one major). The best defense against these seems to be using double to show general values and create a force (you can easily play takeout doubles or penalty doubles after this as you like, the point being that opener is encouraged to act after 1NT-artificial bid-double-bid).

 

Typically the 2M bids show five or more cards in the suit named along with a side minor (there is some minority including me who play 2M as natural). I'm not convinced there's much advantage to playing either takeout or penalty doubles in direct seat over this. My observation has been that while the takeout double can be a big winner on competitive hands, it also gives you the occasional disaster when you end up at the three-level in a moysian or a bad-breaking eight card fit. The disasters are more frequent if you expect opener to make a balancing double often after 1N-2M-Pass-Pass, because sometimes responder just doesn't have much and you have no place to run (and these tend to correspond to when the opponents have enough to double you). If you play takeout doubles and don't expect opener to balance often, then you do miss out on a lot of penalties (and opponents are pretty frisky over 1NT these days); note that you generally need less to in their suit to penalize when the trump length is "over" the overcaller so you don't get a very high percentage of these back by allowing opener to convert takeout doubles. I expect that over a natural 2♣ or 2♦ bid, balancing becomes much less dangerous and takeout doubles are substantially superior to penalty doubles, but like I said around here most people don't play natural 2m bids over 1NT. Note that the game-going hands which might want to make a takeout double can be handled fairly easily via lebensohl or rubensohl anyway, so it's really just the marginal (points but less than game values) takeout hands where playing double as penalty can lose.

 

One observation is that if you do play takeout doubles after two-level interference, it's very important to play 2NT as a scrambling call (two places to play) and sometimes to use this even with a bit of a length discrepancy between the two options. Since opener is balanced, it will quite often be the case that after 1NT-2M-X-Pass (especially when the major is spades) he has two available four-card suits to play in, and reaching the 4-4 fit rather than the 4-3 fit is essential. Occasionally you should also pass this 2NT bid, but I don't think it should be a strong suggestion to play (many of the hands that want to play 2NT would be happier defending 2MX so a true "to play" usage rarely comes up).

[dburn]

If you want to play double as one thing over Multi, another thing over Woolsey, a third thing over Astro, a fourth thing over... well, the best of luck to your partner. You don't deserve any.

Well that's a bit harsh. Also a bit exagerated. If the overcall shows the suit being bid (with or without any others) double is takeout, if it shows any other suit(s) then double is penalty interest of the suit(s) shown. I find a way to get by even when the meaning of my double is dependent on receiving a correct explanation of the overcall.

Oh, everything I say is harsh, for I am a miserable sod, and exaggerated, for to get one's point across it is often necessary to belabour the obvious beyond recognizable limits.

 

In truth, though, you and I will often be doing the same thing for the same reason: if I double 2♣ to show a takeout double of clubs, chances are I have at least one of the majors and the same hand as you would have to double 2♣ showing a desire to double two of a major for penalty.

 

Where I find my method helpful, and where I am not sure what you would do, is when the opponents overcall (say) 2♣ to show one (unspecified) suit. My double is still takeout of clubs (in fact, my double is defined as Stayman, though opener will pass it only with clubs and bid 2♦ only with diamonds). What is yours?

[Jlall]

Advantage number 1: you do not have to worry what the opponents' bidding means.

 

Advantage number 2: later actions in murky sequences become much easier to interpret.

 

Advantage number 3: it works even when the opponents do not have what they are supposed to have for their bidding.

 

Advantage number 4: even I can't forget the system.

These "advantages" are all true if you play the same system against a natural 1C and a strong club, or against any 2D opener whether it is flannery/multi/weak majors/natural/strong/precision.

 

In fact these "advantages" are true in any situation where different pairs have different meanings for a bid in an auction.

 

Hopefully this helps you see where gnasher was coming from with his post, and why playing this way might not be great despite these FOUR amazing "advantages"