respond to double

[derq]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqh432dkj98cqjt84&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1cdp]133|200[/hv]

[jmcw]

A few choices come to mind.

1♦ your best suit, usually limited to about 8 or 9 points...with more strength you could jump to 2♦.

1NT usually about 8 to 10 points with a stop in ♣

Pass converting the Double.

 

I think it's a close call. 1♦ seems safest, but rather consevative, 1NT gets the hand mostly off your chest but the shape is not ideal. Pass has some appeal especially if the scoring is matchpoints which I will assume.

 

Pass = 10

1NT = 7

1♦ = 5

2♦ = 3

[MrAce]

Pass and don't forget to agree with your pd that when 1 minor is dbled and converted to penalty, trump lead makes miracles for defense :)

[Antrax]

Is your hand really good enough for a penalty pass? You have only one sure trump trick, and what's worse, you can't "draw trumps" since declarer can potentially stop drawing trumps twice with the A and K. Are you sure that opposite a minimum opening partner with club shortness, you will set 1♣?

(honest question)

[the hog]

I will make the slight underbid of 1D and am happy to bid 1NT over any Major bid by partner. I don't think a penalty pass is correct on this hand and would not contemplate it. I would be disappointed if any of my partners did contemplate passing.

[aguahombre]

I will make the slight underbid of 1D and am happy to bid 1NT over any Major bid by partner. I don't think a penalty pass is correct on this hand and would not contemplate it. I would be disappointed if any of my partners did contemplate passing.

the 1D slight underbid is acceptable, but if partner then bids a major we cannot rebid 1NT. If my partner doubles, then bids 1H, we are in game in hearts; she is too strong to overcall. If she doubles, then bids 1S/my 1D, we are in game in notrump.

[mgoetze]

Is your hand really good enough for a penalty pass? You have only one sure trump trick, and what's worse, you can't "draw trumps" since declarer can potentially stop drawing trumps twice with the A and K. Are you sure that opposite a minimum opening partner with club shortness, you will set 1♣?

 

A very good question. I am not sure at all, and though I might pass anyway at matchpoints, I think I will more often bid 1♦.

[mgoetze]

the 1D slight underbid is acceptable, but if partner then bids a major we cannot rebid 1NT. If my partner doubles, then bids 1H, we are in game in hearts; she is too strong to overcall. If she doubles, then bids 1S/my 1D, we are in game in notrump.

 

Sure, if your partnership has such a massive hatred of ELC (Equal Level Conversion), then good for you. Others may have a more flexible view of how much strength 1♥ or 1♠ shows here.

[655321]

I would always pass this double. If I was not allowed to pass I would bid 1NT, so all these 1♦ bids look a bit odd to me.

 

 

Is your hand really good enough for a penalty pass? You have only one sure trump trick, and what's worse, you can't "draw trumps" since declarer can potentially stop drawing trumps twice with the A and K. Are you sure that opposite a minimum opening partner with club shortness, you will set 1♣?

(honest question)

 

Yes, it is good enough. One sure trump trick maybe, but very often QJT84 will be 3 trump tricks, and if partner has the Ace or King we might have 4 trump tricks. We don't have an eight card major fit (partner would overcall 1♥ with 5), we expect to have at least half the pack and often more, and we have a stack in the opponent's suit. When the deal is a partscore, passing will often pick up 200 or 500, with some -140s. When we have a game (3NT) we will often collect more than 500.

 

The only problem with passing is that opener will often run - the opponents have an 8 or 9 card spade fit, and I won't defend 1♠X.

[gwnn]

Is your hand really good enough for a penalty pass?

{snip}

Are you sure that opposite a minimum opening partner with club shortness, you will set 1♣?

These two questions are not identical. There are hands where you make a penalty pass where you are not sure that you will set the doubled contract that you are volunteering to defend against. The point is that 200 and 500 are really nice results to take home, worth the occasional -140. -340 is just about impossible. We are trying to maximise our imp expectancy and in this case double seems to be that action. 1NT will make most of the time but that is only +90 or +120. These clubs will be happier to be trumps, they can be useless in our NT contract.

[mgoetze]

We are trying to maximise our imp expectancy

 

Well, except when we're not. -140 could be pretty horrible at matchpoints.

[Antrax]

So conceptually there's no chance for us missing game, or we expect the bonanza from defending 1♣ doubled will be worth it?

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding Lawrence or if people here just disagree with his view. As an aside, if it were W/W, would people be less inclined to pass?

[gwnn]

Well, except when we're not. -140 could be pretty horrible at matchpoints.

And +200 could be pretty sweet at matchpoints.

[aguahombre]

the 1D slight underbid is acceptable, but if partner then bids a major we cannot rebid 1NT. If my partner doubles, then bids 1H, we are in game in hearts; she is too strong to overcall. If she doubles, then bids 1S/my 1D, we are in game in notrump.

 

Sure, if your partnership has such a massive hatred of ELC (Equal Level Conversion), then good for you. Others may have a more flexible view of how much strength 1♥ or 1♠ shows here.

Actually, we just have different views of the double of 1C. Minimum opening strength hands sometimes pass 1club, and sometimes overcall. We use ELC when a major has been doubled and a club advance is converted to diamonds, and don't extend it to the one-level so that we can make off-shape doubles of 1m.

 

Notice I stated "if my partner doubles" and "we"...not presuming what you or your partner does or should do.

[jmcw]

Is your hand really good enough for a penalty pass? You have only one sure trump trick, and what's worse, you can't "draw trumps" since declarer can potentially stop drawing trumps twice with the A and K. Are you sure that opposite a minimum opening partner with club shortness, you will set 1♣?

(honest question)

What layout produces only 1 trump trick?. I can't think of one. Reasonably, I expect to take 3 trump tricks

 

 

I would always pass this double. If I was not allowed to pass I would bid 1NT, so all these 1♦ bids look a bit odd to me.

 

 

 

 

Yes, it is good enough. One sure trump trick maybe, but very often QJT84 will be 3 trump tricks, and if partner has the Ace or King we might have 4 trump tricks. We don't have an eight card major fit (partner would overcall 1♥ with 5), we expect to have at least half the pack and often more, and we have a stack in the opponent's suit. When the deal is a partscore, passing will often pick up 200 or 500, with some -140s. When we have a game (3NT) we will often collect more than 500.

 

The only problem with passing is that opener will often run - the opponents have an 8 or 9 card spade fit, and I won't defend 1♠X.

 

Why would opener "often" run. His partner passed the double, can he reasonably expect to improve matters. I do agree the ops may have a 4/4 ♠ fit, but will they find it? will it improve their chances to make?. If they run to 1♠, and partner DBL's I would leave it in and expect to beat it.

[Antrax]

What layout produces only 1 trump trick?. I can't think of one. Reasonably, I expect to take 3 trump tricks

If opener has ♣AK9xx(x) over your ♣QJT8x, he can finesse the 9, no? Especially true if your partner leads a trump (and he has a five-card suit).

[mgoetze]

If opener has ♣AK9xx(x) over your ♣QJT8x, he can finesse the 9, no? Especially true if your partner leads a trump (and he has a five-card suit).

 

Well, if you think this is the layout, you should insert the ten on the first round of the suit. Subsequently declarer will have to play trumps from hand and your QJ8 will all take tricks. The only exception is when dummy has a long running suit where declarer can threaten overruffs, but this is very rare in a 1-level contract.

[Antrax]

I don't follow. If you split, declarer wins and finesses again from the dummy, eventually the 9 has to win, no? It may get more interesting of clubs are 5-5-2-1 around the table, then you can split twice and he can't finesse a third time, and then it's harder to decide if you get one or two trump tricks.

[the hog]

the 1D slight underbid is acceptable, but if partner then bids a major we cannot rebid 1NT. If my partner doubles, then bids 1H, we are in game in hearts; she is too strong to overcall. If she doubles, then bids 1S/my 1D, we are in game in notrump.

 

Fair comment.

[gwnn]

Antrax, sorry, I am confused. how many clubs does dummy have? we have 5 and in your case declarer has 5 or 6 (AK9xx(x)) and you said that partner will lead a club, so presumably he has a club too?

[Antrax]

Either 2 or 3, as I wrote.

[gwnn]

Well all I can say is I think you are a pessimist. Declarer having 5, dummy needs to have 3-card support and 3 entries!! Jeez pard next time don't double on absolutely nothing?

 

We just found out in another thread that a standard 1♣ opener has, a priori, about a 50% chance of having 3 or 4 cards, don't you think the chances of that are much, much higher seeing as we have 5?

[mikeh]

I would pass at all forms of scoring. While this may turn out poorly, most of the time we are going to be very happy.

 

For those who fear AK9xx(x) behind us, with enough values between declarer and dummy that we do badly, let me suggest you start looking at glasses as sometimes at least half full rather than virtually empty.

 

If we are going to 'place cards' (which we shouldn't when the auction is so ill-defined), why not place them as follows:[hv=pc=n&s=sqh432dkj98cqjt84&w=skt86hkj9dt74cak6&n=saj92haqtdaq62c97&e=s7543h8765d53c532]399|300[/hv]

 

Obviously, I am not passing in the belief that the hands look anything like these, but when we are terrifying ourselves with unlikely and bad-for-us layouts, why not visualize something nice as a counter-balance?

[Antrax]

Do you expect west to sit for 1♣X in the layout above?

[mikeh]

Do you expect west to sit for 1♣X in the layout above?

 

Firstly, I don't 'expect' West to have that exact hand, nor partner to hold what he has in that diagram...I was merely trying to point out that negative thinking is a bad habit, and that one can counter that tendency (to which I often fall victim at the table) by thinking positively.

 

Secondly, look at the hand again and tell me where West is going that gets him to a better spot than you were getting by pulling the double. 1♠ doubled? You were going to get more than 800 by bidding, were you?

 

Note that I could have made things even worse for EW by giving West the same high cards but 3=3=3=4 shape with one of dummy's small clubs, and making dummy 4=4=3=2 and making N 5=3=3=2...he'd still double because he'd be too strong for 1♠. Now where is he going?

 

Anyway, your question suggests you missed the point. Cognitive dissonance appears frequently in these fora....people see points of view contrary to theirs, and even tho the points of view are explained by reasoning, people tend to ignore the reasoning and find any excuse to cling to their opinion rather than to acknowledge any validity in the contrary opinion. Thus you argue that we won't collect our 1400 against 1♣ because they may run to -800, and you proffer that as a reason to not pass 1♣. Odd.