Jump to content

Should I double with that?


Recommended Posts

1 - pass - 1 - 2 - now it is my turn ...

 

Not using support X/XX, should I double this sequence with my hand: [hv=s=skxxhkqjxdqtxxxcx]133|100|[/hv]

 

I do not know if this double should always show extra values or can be made by even a minimum hand with the shape ...

my choice would be 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3451 is indeed a great shape for a t/o double.

 

However I think 2 here is a better description - we show partner a minimum hand with support. It's not like we miss our heart fit when game is on - partner can still bid them himself and we'll raise. Yes me may miss our 44 heart fit, but if that's the case then partner has 5 spades anyways (he'd have responded 1 with 44 in the majors) and we're probably in as a good spot.

 

One fringe benefit of this is that if we were to bid

 

1 (p) 1 (2)

X (p) 2 (p)

2

 

we've now shown partner a non minimum with 3 card support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 - pass - 1 - 2 - now it is my turn ...

 

Not using support X/XX, should I double this sequence with my hand:

Dealer: ?????
Vul: ????
Scoring: Unknown
Kxx
KQJx
QTxxx
x
 

 

I do not know if this double should always show extra values or can be made by even a minimum hand with the shape ...

I vaguely remember that in old-fashioned bridge, X is penalty. I do think take-out is superior, but you ought to make sure partner plays the same way. You may also want to define it as showing extra value, since that is an important message to convey, in the meanwhile many take-out shape hands with minimum value can find a natural bid. I don't think this hand falls into the "extra value" camp, so 2 would be my choice. Of course partner doesn't know whether I have 3 or 4-card support, which is the reason why Rodwell invented support X.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I am not retro enough not to play support doubles.

 

Lauria Versace don't play support doubles. I think other Italian pairs don't play them either (not 100% sure though). It's not that retro. In fact I think it makes a lot of sense if you play wide range openings. Having extras you are often stuck for good bid.

Obviously in systems like polish club or precision this double is not of much use without support hence someone who play such systems invented support double :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I vaguely remember that in old-fashioned bridge, X is penalty.

 

That's what I'd expect X to be, opposite any partner who said he didn't want to play support doubles (provided partner's name isn't Lauria or Versace.) Even on THIS forum I thought penalty would get more votes than takeout for second place after support X.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...