Issue with support doubles

[Bende]

I have a question about support doubles. In situations where support doubles are on, like

 

a. 1♦ - (pass) - 1♥ - (1♠)

b. 1♦ - (pass) - 1♠ - (2♥)

 

How do I show

 

1. 18-19 balanced (provided I play 15-17 NT) with a stopper

2. 18-19 balanced without a stopper

3. Four card support and 18-19 balanced

4. Support and an unbalanced hand with good playing strength but without a lot of points

 

In auction a., if 1NT is played as 18-19 balanced with spade stop (is this common?), then perhaps 2NT could be used to show a good hand with support and 2♠ could show a strong hand without clear direction (including 18-19 balanced without a stopper). A jump to 4♥ would show an unbalanced hand with good playing strength.

 

In auction b. this doesn't work since there is not enough room. I suppose it is possible to play 4♠ as either 18-19 balanced with four card spade support or as an unbalanced hand with good playing strength, but is that really a good idea?

 

Searching for articles about support doubles, I haven't found any description on how good players handle these hands.

[gnasher]

I know of no really good solution to this problem.

 

In both sequences, I think it's important to be able to distinguish different strengths with four-card support. I want to be able to raise to the three-level on a 5431 11-count, and on a 4333 18-count.

 

Without much discussion I'd assume:

- Cue-bid is 4-card support and a good hand

- 2NT is 18-19 balanced

- Double is 3-card support, or 18-19 balanced without a stopper

 

I think your suggestion of using 1NT as 18-19 is a good one (unless it's nobody vul at pairs), but nobody seems to do it.

 

Some other solutions to part or all of the problem:

- In (b) rebid 3NT with 18-19 balanced, use 2NT to show support, and use a cue-bid to ask for a stopper (either balanced or not).

- In (b), play transfers from 2NT upwards, with 3♦ covering all 18-19 balanced. Responder can complete the transfer to deny a stopper.

- Play a 2♦ opening as 18-19 balanced, so that you can use 2NT as 4-card support and a cue-bid as a stop-ask in an unbalanced hand.

- Open 1♣ on all 18-19 balanced, then in (a) play takeout doubles and support reverses. The takeout double can include the hands without a stopper.

- Don't play support doubles.

Edited July 23, 2010 by gnasher

[Bende]

When giving this question on a Swedish bidding forum a lot of voices where raised saying support doubles simply don't belong in a natural bidding system, because of issues like this. Is that the general opinion?

[awm]

I will try to give the "standard" answers.

 

1. With 18-19 balanced and a stopper, bid 2NT in both auctions.

2. With 18-19 balanced and no stopper (and only two-card support for partner), cuebid the opponents suit in both auctions. This shows a strong hand with no clear direction.

3. With 4-card support and 18-19 balanced, bid three or four of partner's major depending somewhat on style and the quality of your hand.

4. With 4-card support and an unbalanced hand, bid two or three of partner's major. The two-level raise is a bit "stronger" than without competition due to promising four-card support (i.e. partner should push a bit more over it especially with five trumps).

 

There is a slight issue that the range of a jump raise is large (including shapely hands with very mild extras and also balanced 18s which are very flat). However, this problem exists without competition also. The alternatives are basically: (1) Accept it, figuring that the "loser count" of the two hand types for 3M is similar and maybe this is enough (2) Push to 4M with 18-19 balanced, even though this may be too high on occasion especially if you respond light (3) Rebid 2M on many of the shapely hands, possibly missing an occasional light fitting game but also gaining when partner has a lousy hand and you get to play 2M instead of 3M.

[gnasher]

When giving this question on a Swedish bidding forum a lot of voices where raised saying support doubles simply don't belong in a natural bidding system, because of issues like this. Is that the general opinion?

It's certainly not a widely held opinion on this forum.

 

It seems a rather extreme reaction anyway. Support doubles, used sensibly, gain frequently by making it easier to judge how high to compete. If you don't play them, you gain the ability to double on strong hands that don't have three-card support and don't have a stop, but such hands are comparatively rare.

[Cascade]

When giving this question on a Swedish bidding forum a lot of voices where raised saying support doubles simply don't belong in a natural bidding system, because of issues like this. Is that the general opinion?

It's certainly not a widely held opinion on this forum.

 

It seems a rather extreme reaction anyway. Support doubles, used sensibly, gain frequently by making it easier to judge how high to compete. If you don't play them, you gain the ability to double on strong hands that don't have three-card support and don't have a stop, but such hands are comparatively rare.

Clearly that is not the only gain.

[gnasher]

Clearly that is not the only gain.

Would you mind making it even clearer?

[peachy]

When giving this question on a Swedish bidding forum a lot of voices where raised saying support doubles simply don't belong in a natural bidding system, because of issues like this. Is that the general opinion?

That opinion is probably in clear minority here, but of course that is just my gut feeling. I find support doubles very good, and as far as I can see, they fit fine in a natural system. Why not?

[Cascade]

Clearly that is not the only gain.

Would you mind making it even clearer?

Well I imagine for most people the choice is not between

 

1. Support doubles

 

2. Doubles to show strong hands without a stopper

 

The second option being only one of several hand types that will be put into the double. The exact hand types will vary from partnership to partnership.

 

We don't play support doubles. Our double is takeout. It caters to some minimum hands that you might make a support double with, some similar hands but with only two cards in openers suit and many stronger hands. Since double is the most flexible option we can usually later determine more precisely the hand type and by removing a wide range of hands from other actions our alternative actions become more precise.

 

Most of the time this is in a weak no trump structure with a specialized bid for for 18-19 balanced. The considerations will be different but similar in other styles.

[gnasher]

Since the original poster was asking how to cope with

1. 18-19 balanced (provided I play 15-17 NT) with a stopper

2. 18-19 balanced without a stopper

3. Four card support and 18-19 balanced

it seems unlikely that he's gong to care much what you do

in a weak no trump structure with a specialized bid for for 18-19 balanced

especially if you believe that

The considerations will be different but similar in other styles.

[bluecalm]

From what I understand Italians don't play support doubles. I think it's no coincidence as well as that inventor of those plays limited openers. In my opinion support doubles and 11-22 openers just don't mix.

[Cascade]

Since the original poster was asking how to cope with

1. 18-19 balanced (provided I play 15-17 NT) with a stopper

2. 18-19 balanced without a stopper

3. Four card support and 18-19 balanced

it seems unlikely that he's gong to care much what you do

in a weak no trump structure with a specialized bid for for 18-19 balanced

especially if you believe that

The considerations will be different but similar in other styles.

Similarly my initial post did not rely on the structure that I happen to play. In fact we do play a 15-17 in 4th seat and even in that situation have not been tempted to play support doubles.

 

My contention is simply that a well designed system that uses double as something other than support is not going to be based on the double (the most economical call) showing something as specific as 18-19 balanced with no stopper. That is there must be other gains from using double for other hand types.

[gnasher]

My contention is simply that a well designed system that uses double as something other than support is not going to be based on the double (the most economical call) showing something as specific as 18-19 balanced with no stopper. That is there must be other gains from using double for other hand types.

I didn't say that double should show "18-19 balanced with no stopper". What I said was

If you don't play [support doubles], you gain the ability to double on strong hands that don't have three-card support and don't have a stop

With either method, a 3154 15-count can double. Support doubles add the ability to double on a hand with 3-card support which isn't suitable for a takeout double. Takeout doubles add the ability to double on a hand that doesn't have three-card support, is strong enough to make a takeout double even without 3-card support, and isn't suitable for any other action (such as bidding notrumps).

[Cascade]

And I said that doubling with 18-19 balanced was clearly not the only gain.

 

You have listed some here.

[gnasher]

And I said that doubling with 18-19 balanced was clearly not the only gain.

In reply to my post that didn't say that doubling with 18-19 balanced was the only gain.

[jdonn]

1. a. 2NT

1. b. 3NT

2. cuebid

(for all of those answers you can and usually should double first with 3 card support, planning to take the above action on the next round)

3. cuebid as well, planning to show your support next

4. jump raise

 

While not perfect I don't see most of these auctions as problems. I understand that the point of this thread is to suggest the double could be used to relieve the pressure on these hand types but I love support doubles and think bidding suffers greatly without them most of the time. It gives you a very inexpensive action to describe a very important feature that is quite common and occurs in a wide range of hands.

[Cascade]

And I said that doubling with 18-19 balanced was clearly not the only gain.

In reply to my post that didn't say that doubling with 18-19 balanced was the only gain.

What you did is say that support doubles gain frequently compared with this hand type which was rare. Sorry if I misunderstood but this certainly seems to me to give the impression that the alternative use of double rarely gained. I was just trying to draw attention to the fact that there are other gains.

 

Support doubles, used sensibly, gain frequently by making it easier to judge how high to compete. If you don't play them, you gain the ability to double on strong hands that don't have three-card support and don't have a stop, but such hands are comparatively rare.

 

The emphases are mine.

[bluecalm]

I like support doubles too but I think gains from them are a bit overrated. By not playing them you are making life difficult for opponents too as they are now facing possibility of you being on only 7 trumps in your part score after a simple raise in which case competing to 3level may be disastrous for them.

[ggwhiz]

I don't like what support doubles have morphed into.

 

They were invented by Meckwell to avoid getting to too many 3-3 trump fits!

[aguahombre]

but I love support doubles and think bidding suffers greatly without them most of the time. It gives you a very inexpensive action to describe a very important feature that is quite common and occurs in a wide range of hands.

This, of course, is exactly why so many others like support doubles. Certainly valid.

 

On the other side, support doubles give the opponents very inexpensive tools (redouble, raise, new suit, and cue) which are also important, common, and occurring in a wide range of hands. This doesn't mean the "support double" people are wrong. But I don't think the ones who don't use them come out on the losing end of the competitive situations as often as the ones who use them say.

 

Was that last sentence a triple negative, or just a double negative followed by a negative?

[tgoodwinsr]

Doesn't anyone remember when 1H-P; 1S-2C; Dbl. meant fourth hand had walked into your second suit?

[peachy]

I don't like what support doubles have morphed into.

 

They were invented by Meckwell to avoid getting to too many 3-3 trump fits!

Eric Rodwell invented them.

I don't know if you were joking about the 3-3 fits, but I suppose you were.

[aguahombre]

Doesn't anyone remember when 1H-P; 1S-2C; Dbl. meant fourth hand had walked into your second suit?

Yes. We used to call it an Informative Double: extra values, short in pard's response, length in the overcalled suit. Informing partner that they might have made a mistake, but not an absolute demand to play it there.

 

Now, we get laughed at for using such antiquated methods. And in EBU, we would have to alert it.

 

By the way, welcome to the fora.

[ggwhiz]

Eric Rodwell invented them.

I don't know if you were joking about the 3-3 fits, but I suppose you were.

 

I can't remember the exact article but it's no joke.

 

After say a 1♦ opener, I believe they respond 1M on 3 cards, with a side singleton for example instead of 1nt. Opener also raised freely on 3.

[Cascade]

but I love support doubles and think bidding suffers greatly without them most of the time. It gives you a very inexpensive action to describe a very important feature that is quite common and occurs in a wide range of hands.

This, of course, is exactly why so many others like support doubles. Certainly valid.

 

On the other side, support doubles give the opponents very inexpensive tools (redouble, raise, new suit, and cue) which are also important, common, and occurring in a wide range of hands. This doesn't mean the "support double" people are wrong. But I don't think the ones who don't use them come out on the losing end of the competitive situations as often as the ones who use them say.

 

Was that last sentence a triple negative, or just a double negative followed by a negative?

Indeed when you actually have a 5+=3 fit which is reasonably often you have given the opponent's additional bidding space. It seems then that you would much rather have been able to raise partner's suit immediately. Obviously you can't do that always but some of the time raising with three would seem to make life more difficult for the opponents.