current theory

[shevek]

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget.

These days, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(no) - X ?

 

Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have

♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx

 

or something like

♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx

 

In the same vein, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(2♦) - X ?

 

Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

[rduran1216]

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget.

These days, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(no) - X ?

 

Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have

♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx

 

or something like

♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx

 

In the same vein, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(2♦) - X ?

 

Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

 

first is penalty, second is takeoout

[Phil]

Its a function of agreement, but I play doubler shows the 14 with good diamonds.

 

In the 2nd its a weak TO.

[the hog]

Its a function of agreement, but I play doubler shows the 14 with good diamonds.

 

In the 2nd its a weak TO.

 

Same.

[nigel_k]

It's possible to play it as either and partner has to work it out. If forced to choose I would prefer the penalty double.

[Lurpoa]

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget.

These days, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(no) - X ?

 

Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have

♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx

 

or something like

♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx

 

In the same vein, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(2♦) - X ?

 

Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

 

 

Those sequences certainly need partnership agreement.

I have no idea what is the best for the 1st sequence.

But for the second sequence, I think it is strong penalty oriented.

 

I cannot find any clues for it in BWS2001 or in SAYC.

[P_Marlowe]

T/O - both sequences

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[wickedbid1]

I find online pards will always bid after the first sequence, so if u have a di hand, make sure u can stand to declare in some major suit.

 

In the second sequence, it seems to be about 60 percent penalty-assumption by pard, perhaps influenced by how long the intervening opp takes to pass and pard's length in di.

 

Pards who are frequent matchpoint players are more likely than other sorts to assume it is takeout, as they like to follow the matchpoint rule about never (or rarely) letting yr opps out of the auction at the one level.

 

i believe the best assumption to make is that pard has di, but some interest in penalizing, when one hears either of these bids, unless one has agreed to play the direct two di cue as natural. Most assume michaels convention, even if it is not on yr card. If the direct cue is agreed natural, then both of these sequences would be best used for takeout with somewhat odd shapes or weakish values.

 

Of course 1di-pass-1nt-pass-pass-2di and the like should be taken as natural long suits by random pards.

[shevek]

Thanks all.

 

Modern players seem to miss out on windfall doubles bacause they are concerned that partner will be on a different wavelength.

I think (a) is even more useful for penalty these days, when they could be 11+5 HCP.

(b) for tko makes sense since partner is still there to protect.

On the other hand

 

(1♠) - no - (1NT*) - no

(2♠) - X

 

seems different because you court the 3-level on a non-fit auction if X is weak tko. Can't live with treating majors and minors differently so we tend to pass reluctantly.

[Lurpoa]

Thanks all.

 

Modern players seem to miss out on windfall doubles bacause they are concerned that partner will be on a different wavelength.

I think (a) is even more useful for penalty these days, when they could be 11+5 HCP.

(B) for tko makes sense since partner is still there to protect.

On the other hand

 

(1♠) - no - (1NT*) - no

(2♠) - X

 

seems different because you court the 3-level on a non-fit auction if X is weak tko. Can't live with treating majors and minors differently so we tend to pass reluctantly.

 

Interesting ideas !

[xxhong]

Both should be penalties. No point to play weak takeouts here because the nowadays' takeout is light enough against 1D. Most would double 1D with

Axxx KQxx xx Qxx and many would double 1D with Axxx KQxx xx Jxx too. Penalty doubles can be really juicy in such kind of sequences IMO.

[mike777]

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget.

These days, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(no) - X ?

 

Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have

♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx

 

or something like

♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx

 

In the same vein, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(2♦) - X ?

 

Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

 

 

fwiw I play modified Dont with example one not penalty.

so in this case I would have long clubs or both majors with a weakish type hand.

 

of course this means I am not playing lite t/o doubles in direct seat.

 

 

2)t/o

[Zelandakh]

In Case 1 the first question to ask is with which hands 4th seat would pass the 1NT bid. Assuming you play X here as takeout (not power) then could they still hold a balanced 14 count? If they could then you are now in the same situation as after 1D - p - p and it seems most logical for X to show the equivalent of a 4th seat 1NT bid, that is 11-14 and (semi-)balanced. For Case 2 I cannot see any reason not to play double as take-out; with a diamond stack partner must perforce have extreme shortage and will often protect.

[justin c]

(1m) - P - (1NT) - P - (P) - ??

 

Personally, I play:

 

X = penalty, stacked in their minor

2♣ = takeout of their minor

2♦ = majors

 

This is the same whichever minor they opened. (So, I bid 2♣ on your first hand).

 

After (1m) - P - (1NT) - P - (2m) - ??

 

I think double is takeout. (The 'penalty' interpretation seems misguided to me). The likes of 1♣-1NT-2♣ guarantees a fit for them, so the takeout meaning is a lot more sensible. Something like J10xx A98x K9xx x can't double on the first round, but can balance with X in this auction.

 

Jus

 

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget.

These days, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(no) - X ?

 

Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have

♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx

 

or something like

♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx

 

In the same vein, what is

 

(1♦) - no - (1N) - no

(2♦) - X ?

 

Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

[gwnn]

sorry, I hope nobody read this post. Edited March 3, 2011 by gwnn

[straube]

We play 1st is penalty.

 

2nd is takeout because of a presumed fit for the minor.

 

We play 1M P 1N P 2M dbl as penalty.

 

I'm pretty sure our source is Mike Lawrence.

[MrAce]

(1m) - P - (1NT) - P - (P) - ??

 

Personally, I play:

 

X = penalty, stacked in their minor

2♣ = takeout of their minor

2♦ = majors

 

This is the same whichever minor they opened. (So, I bid 2♣ on your first hand).

 

 

Thats also what i play

[whereagles]

Both penalties. The 2nd case can be explained as follows. If you want to make a take-out, you have other bids available(*). Example:

 

1♦ pass 1NT pass

2♦ 2♥

 

The 2♥ bid cannot show 5 hearts, so it must be hearts and another suit. It's likely that the other suit is clubs because 44/54 majors people tend to dbl or bid a michaels cue. Prototype hand:

 

xx

AQxx

Ax

QT9xx

 

If the 2nd round overcall had been 2♠, the 2nd suit would clearly be clubs.

 

(*) An argument of Terence Reese.