Negative Doubles

[jetkro]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sq4hqt96d54ca8632&w=st8hkdaq72ckqjt97&e=saj953h7543dt93c4&s=sk762haj82dkj86c5]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1D - 2C - P - P

DBL - P - P - P

 

Declarer didnt have too much difficulty making his contract.

We could probably make 3H and we lost about 3 and a 1/2 IMP playing on OK bridge.

 

I toyed with a negative double over 2C, but was worried about being endplayed by a 2S response.

 

After the reopening double was the penalty conversion correct or was this now the moment to introduce the heart suit?

[sceptic]

your first mistake was playing in OK bridge and not here, I am not sure what you should have bid though :lol:

[EricK]

You shouldn't leave low level take out doubles in for penalties unless you are sure it is right.

 

Here you ♣ are not strong enough (only one of AKQJT9 is not a good 5 card suit), and you have a good support for one of partners implied suits.

 

IMO 2♥ is the correct bid.

 

Note also that the hand is bound to play well for you. You will be able to ruff ♣ in dummy without the danger of being over-ruffed.

[pclayton]

The club spots should be a big clue that RHO has a real good suit. Even if pard has a 4351 pattern, hearts rates to play real well, since the short hand is taking the ruffs.

 

Pulling the double to only 2♥ is an underbid. With pard short in clubs, your Q♠, heart length and A♣ are all pulling their weight. Even the dub ♦ is nice. I think I like 3♥, which pard will pass.

 

Negative double at your first turn is out of the question since you cant handle a 2♠ response.

 

(OKB is a disease! - come into the light! Just kidding :lol: )

[jtfanclub]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sq4hqt96d54ca8632&w=st8hkdaq72ckqjt97&e=saj953h7543dt93c4&s=sk762haj82dkj86c5]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

If you had one fewer heart, I'd be darn tempted to pass.

 

I would have guessed parter was stronger, so I'd bid 3!H too.

[the hog]

Your initial pass was fine. Your C pips are far too poor to even think about passing the reopening X, and you should simply bid 2H. There is no reason whatsoever to expect opener to have a better hand either, as the reopening X simply shows shortage in their suit. It says nothing about extra strength, nor does it guarantee 4 cards in H. Your pd could easily have a 4351 shape or similar.

 

All your partner's X is doing is protecting you against having a penalty X of C. Playing sputnik Xs you have no choice but to play this style. So the next question is "What is a penalty X?" ATxxx or AQTx would both qualify. A8xxx does not come close.

[cphastrup]

So the next question is "What is a penalty X?" ATxxx or AQTx would both qualify.

 

A8xxx does not come close.

 

Well, quite close - you need just exhange the 8 with the 10.

Doesn't come much closer :lol:

[han]

So the next question is "What is a penalty X?" ATxxx or AQTx would both qualify.

 

A8xxx does not come close.

 

Well, quite close - you need just exhange the 8 with the 10.

Doesn't come much closer :)

I agree, saying that ATxxx is a penalty pass and A8xxx doesn't come close makes me think that Ron needs new glasses. B)

[pclayton]

So the next question is "What is a penalty X?" ATxxx or AQTx would both qualify.

 

A8xxx does not come close.

 

Well, quite close - you need just exhange the 8 with the 10.

Doesn't come much closer :)

I agree, saying that ATxxx is a penalty pass and A8xxx doesn't come close makes me think that Ron needs new glasses. B)

Not really. There is a huge difference between ATxxx and A8xxx. With the former, we have two entries and will probably be successful with a tap. Not nearly as likely with A8xxx.

[jtfanclub]

Not really. There is a huge difference between ATxxx and A8xxx. With the former, we have two entries and will probably be successful with a tap. Not nearly as likely with A8xxx.

Take a look at the actual hand, for an example. Heart ace, heart tap, club king to the ace, heart tap. AT and A8 turn out exactly the same.

 

What I think people are forgetting is that 2mX is not game. If you're forced to pick from two bad choices, -180 (or even -280) is better than -300.

 

In this case, you don't have two bad choices. You have a good choice in two hearts.

 

If you had:

xxx

xxx

Ax

A8xxx

 

Now you've got a tough choice. Anything you say may get you into doubled trouble, and you have some nice defense.

 

Of course, I think the idea that you should X with no extra points is goofy. Maybe in Australia. In the rest of the world, that's a good way to go for a hefty negative.

[the hog]

"Of course, I think the idea that you should X with no extra points is goofy. Maybe in Australia. In the rest of the world, that's a good way to go for a hefty negative. "

 

JT before you try to get insulting I suggest you learn how to bid, because up to now nothing you have written gives any indication that you posess this skill.

 

As a good friend of mine says to pusillanimous upstarts, "Coom back in a couple of years."

[jtfanclub]

"Of course, I think the idea that you should X with no extra points is goofy. Maybe in Australia. In the rest of the world, that's a good way to go for a hefty negative. "

 

JT before you try to get insulting I suggest you learn how to bid, because up to now nothing you have written gives any indication that you posess this skill.

If you say so. You're the master of 'anybody doing this is stupid', when most of the people in the world do it.

 

What you say makes no sense whatsoever. You feel you have to bid because your partner might have a penalty double...and then you X because you have close to the worst possible hand you could have if he did have a penalty X.

 

I've never heard anybody claim that pass was forcing before. Should I see if more than one person on the board thinks so? Should I put it to a vote? Do you alert it? Do you actually teach beginners that pass is forcing?

 

This is one case where I can feel very safe about being insulting about it.

[the hog]

Can't bid can't read. I did say X with a shortage in the overcalled suit. Sure put it to a poll if you like, not that that proves anything.

[jtfanclub]

All your partner's X is doing is protecting you against having a penalty X of C.

 

Can't bid can't read. I did say X with a shortage in the overcalled suit.

 

Think about what you're saying.

 

If all your partner's X is doing is protecting you from having a penalty X of clubs, then the X has only one possible meaning..."if you have a penalty X of clubs, leave in my double". Any other bid includes the meaning "I don't want to play in 2♣ doubled".

 

This isn't a matter of opinion. It's just the laws of Bridge.

 

And of course polls matter in this. The question is, what should partner of the Xer expect, not what The Hog plays with his partner, or even what experts tend to play. And just to make myself completely clear here, I'm not debating about whether it shows extras or not. That's immaterial. Or even whether you should X with that hand.

 

The point is using an X there to protect partner in case you have a penalty double.

Especially if you're a beginner.

[inquiry]

Never fearing to step into an ongong debate. The reopening double here DOES NOT PROMISE extras, it just shows club shortness. If you don't play this way, please give up negative doubles and go directly to penatly doubles, because to play the reopening promises extras will get your lunch money stolen.

 

The bidding here might very well be...

 

1D-2C-P-P

X--P-2H-All pass

 

Ben

[the hog]

JT Playing negative xs -

Axxx

Kxxx

Axxx

x

 

You open this 1D, next hand bids 2C P (P)

You MUST reopen with a X. You have an 11 count, true but playing -ve Xs this is compulsory - read Ben's post above.

[pclayton]

Nope JT youre off on this one too - sorry. Double is compulsory with any hand short in the opponents suit regardless of strength. Of course, you don't have to play negative doubles and this doesn't become a problem then.

 

The only reason NOT to reopen is that you either have some length in their suits; thus minimizing the chances that partner has a stack, or you have some sort of rebid problem where you can't handle pard's response to your double. I'd be nervous about reopening on: x, AKxx, AQxxxx, xx for instance, but have no qualms about reopening if the hearts and spades are reversed.

[Stephen Tu]

Maybe over 2♣ reopening is mandatory with appropriately shaped minima, since there are 3 possible landing spots at 2 level, probably safe and you'll probably do better in long run pushing them up, but as the level increases beyond that, you have to become more circumspect, and not play mandatory reopening with shortness regardless of strength. Otherwise you would too often force your side into a bad penalty, or double a making contract into game, or have partner pull plus to minus since he was afraid of doubling them into game. A lot of time partner wasn't looking for penalty, he just wasn't strong enough to do anything & it's the opponents hand. Also if your high level reopening double is wide ranging it makes it harder to bid if you do have extras since your partner can't count on it.

 

Just because you play neg-x doesn't mean someone has a gun to your head and will pull the trigger if you don't reopen with shortness. Sometimes in long run you can judge that your net percentage MP/IMP score will improve by not reopening, even if that means missing the occasional chance to collect a big number. On the other side of the table if you have option between 3nt & trying for potentially juicier penalty, sometimes you should just bid 3nt so partner won't be pressured to reopen on a minimum. Playing this way, yes you sometimes let the opponents off the hook. But you also avoid some no-win situations & losing decisions, and bridge is about what does better in the long run.

[pclayton]

Maybe over 2♣ reopening is mandatory with appropriately shaped minima, since there are 3 possible landing spots at 2 level, probably safe and you'll probably do better in long run pushing them up, but as the level increases beyond that, you have to become more circumspect, and not play mandatory reopening with shortness regardless of strength. Otherwise you would too often force your side into a bad penalty, or double a making contract into game, or have partner pull plus to minus since he was afraid of doubling them into game. A lot of time partner wasn't looking for penalty, he just wasn't strong enough to do anything & it's the opponents hand. Also if your high level reopening double is wide ranging it makes it harder to bid if you do have extras since your partner can't count on it.

 

Just because you play neg-x doesn't mean someone has a gun to your head and will pull the trigger if you don't reopen with shortness. Sometimes in long run you can judge that your net percentage MP/IMP score will improve by not reopening, even if that means missing the occasional chance to collect a big number. On the other side of the table if you have option between 3nt & trying for potentially juicier penalty, sometimes you should just bid 3nt so partner won't be pressured to reopen on a minimum. Playing this way, yes you sometimes let the opponents off the hook. But you also avoid some no-win situations & losing decisions, and bridge is about what does better in the long run.

Partner knows this too, and is not apt to trap even though you may forego a juicy penalty at a higher contract.

 

I'd be hesitant to trap with: Axx, KQx, xxx, KQ9x after 1♦ - (3♣) for instance, opting instead for the practical 3N at most vulnerabilties.

[PriorKnowledge]

Just because you play neg-x doesn't mean someone has a gun to your head and will pull the trigger if you don't reopen with shortness. Sometimes in long run you can judge that your net percentage MP/IMP score will improve by not reopening, even if that means missing the occasional chance to collect a big number. On the other side of the table if you have option between 3nt & trying for potentially juicier penalty, sometimes you should just bid 3nt so partner won't be pressured to reopen on a minimum. Playing this way, yes you sometimes let the opponents off the hook. But you also avoid some no-win situations & losing decisions, and bridge is about what does better in the long run.

Missing the point. If you are short in opps suit, you MUST reopen. Usually with a dbl, but you must reopen. Matter of partnership trust. That is the convention of negative dbls.

 

Do you pass out 4N blackwood because you can't see the slam and opened with a sub-minimum? How about passing opener's reverse or jump-shift? Do you refuse a transfer (unless playing puppet where that is allowed)? How about passing a takeout dbl because you are too weak?

 

There are some situations that you use your best judgement. Others, you quickly look at your hand and make the indicated bid.

 

If you don't like playing a partnership game like bridge, take up chess.

[the hog]

Well, are you going to admit you were totally incorrect JT?

[Stephen Tu]

Missing the point. If you are short in opps suit, you MUST reopen. Usually with a dbl, but you must reopen. Matter of partnership trust. That is the convention of negative dbls

 

So you are taking the position that if you are short, you must reopen regardless of strength, level of the overcall (within your neg-x range), and vulnerability?

 

To me that is losing bridge. My partners trust me to take the action I think will maximize our score expectation. That doesn't include giving him the choice between -730 & -800 when LHO overcalls 3H just because I happen to be short in the suit.

 

Do you pass out 4N blackwood because you can't see the slam and opened with a sub-minimum? How about passing opener's reverse or jump-shift? Do you refuse a transfer (unless playing puppet where that is allowed)? How about passing a takeout dbl because you are too weak?

 

I can't see myself doing these specific things, since I can't see how these things would help our score. (I would pass a takeout double if long in the opponent's suit, even expecting them to make it, if I felt that bidding would lead to a worse score most of the time).

 

But in general in my partnerships, we are free to violate agreements if we think that is going to score best on average. Now we do this very rarely, probably much more rarely than average players, because in general violating partnership agreements isn't going to score well. But that doesn't mean we aren't allowed to do it if we think it's the winning action. We play to win the game, not to honor partnership agreements.

 

Playing neg-x, you should try to reopen, in case partner has a penalty pass. Bu t a lot of the time, he just doesn't, he was just too weak. So at high levels, you need extras to survive in case he doesn't & pulls, or has nowhere to go & can pass hoping your extras are enough to beat the contract. That's what the agreement ought to be. Mandatory reopening is somewhat of a suicide pact sometimes.

 

It's a partnership game, you do have to follow your agreements 99% the time in order to do well. But that doesn't mean always. Very few things in bridge are always

[HeartA]

I am on Stephen's side.

[hrothgar]

We play to win the game, not to honor partnership agreements.

Silly me, I design partnership agreements to win the game...

 

From my perspective, if you're too weak to re-open with shortness in the opponents suit, then you're too weak to open to begin with...

[the hog]

Stephen I think you should give up negative doubles at the 2 level and play penalty doubles.