Too strong to redouble?

[thebiker]

Imagine the following scenario:

You are non vul v vul opponents playing imps or total points

 

Partner Oppo 1 You Oppo 2

1C (say) X XX 1S (say)

 

You have something like AQT9,KQTx, AJTx,x

 

You lick your lips with anticipation at the juicy penalty from 1Sx that is about to come

when partner bids 2C to tell you he is sub-minimum for his opening bid!

So you miss the juicy penalty and merely get the game bonus

 

What went wrong?

 

Would it have been better not to redouble in third seat, and prevent your partner from bidding again on rubbish and just waiting until the oppo gave you the chance to make a 110% penalty double when the bidding came back to you?

 

My question is does anyone play this way ? ie not redoubling with huge hands to prevent partner from getting in the way?

 

thank you in advance for your answers/comments

 

Brian Keable

alias "thebiker"

[gnasher]

Yes, people do this. It doesn't have to be such a strong hand - a 4441 12-count will do. Another advantage over redouble is that the doubler may raise.

 

The only thing you lose is the ability to pass and then make a takeout double - in your example auction, with something like a 1552 2-count. But with that hand you might have bid on the first round, and having not done so you could bid 1NT for takeout.

 

Having worked out that with a defensive 4441 it's better to pass over the double, you're half-way to realising that you don't need the redouble for anything much, so you can start using it as something more useful, such as a transfer.

[aguahombre]

Having worked out that with a defensive 4441 it's better to pass over the double, you're half-way to realising that you don't need the redouble for anything much, so you can start using it as something more useful, such as a transfer.

 

Pass, then double (pure penalty) with the defensive 4-4-4-1 is a good thing.

 

If not playing xfers/1mX, the redouble can still be useful to show a hand strongly wishing to penalize or to play a NT game --but with 2 or three clubs. This allows you to find out if pard is weak/one-suited or if she wishes to cooperate in a penalty (by passing or doubling an advance).

 

Lacking either of those hand types, we can just respond to 1m as if the double had not happened. Those who use this approach should also agree that, responder's rebids which would have been forcing without the original double by RHO mean the same thing. e.g. NMF, FSF, 2d force after 2C rebid etc.

[whereagles]

Robson/Segal discuss the idea of, after

 

2M (dbl) ..?

 

Rdbl = strong, penalty in 2 suits, invites pard to dbl the 3rd suit

Pass + dbl = strong, trapping, pure penalty in all suits and exercising that dbl

 

One can extend this principle to 1 level bids, since it's hard to imagine a hand that would pass originally and then dbl for take out.

[Fluffy]

I use pass then double for conventional purposes (10-11 hands 4333). Use redouble for hands that strictly look for penalties (at least 2 suits with penalty intention) and bid my suit with strong ones that won't be able to penalice (when I have fit or when I have only 1 long suit). Partner will need a very good reason to bid 2♣ over my redouble.

[Lurpoa]

Imagine the following scenario:

You are non vul v vul opponents playing imps or total points

 

Partner Oppo 1 You Oppo 2

1C (say) X XX 1S (say)

 

You have something like AQT9,KQTx, AJTx,x

 

You lick your lips with anticipation at the juicy penalty from 1Sx that is about to come

when partner bids 2C to tell you he is sub-minimum for his opening bid!

So you miss the juicy penalty and merely get the game bonus

 

What went wrong?

 

Would it have been better not to redouble in third seat, and prevent your partner from bidding again on rubbish and just waiting until the oppo gave you the chance to make a 110% penalty double when the bidding came back to you?

 

My question is does anyone play this way ? ie not redoubling with huge hands to prevent partner from getting in the way?

 

thank you in advance for your answers/comments

 

Brian Keable

alias "thebiker"

 

 

 

As you describe it, it is good bridge. Doing it in another would be bad bridge.

And indeed, if opener hasn't a defensive hand (without speaking of a sub-minimum hand), he has to warn you. Your partner cannot know, you have that monster hand: as far as he know, you can have only 9+H.