Negative X after nt interference at which level(s)?

[jillybean]

I'm interested to see who is playing what here.

[MrAce]

Both are negative for me, in fact the one at 3 level being negative is mandatory imo, because if one insists on playing penalty doubles at 2 level , he can cover some of the hands by lebensohl, which is not the case at 3 level besides the fact that pd opened NT and RHO has 7-8 cards suit makes us highly unlikely to have a penalty double.

[WellSpyder]

I haven't voted in the poll because I can't choose more than one option! The answer is that it depends entirely on who I'm playing with. I still play both penalties in one partnership and both negative in another, and I've played negative at the 2-level and penalties at the 3-level, and the reverse in the past. Like Mr Ace, if I had to choose one for penalties and one for negative, I would go for negative at the 3-level.

[Cyberyeti]

1N-2x-X pens

1N-3x-X neg

2N-3x-X neg

 

As stated earlier, we use lebensohl to cover a lot of the negative double hands.

[32519]

There is a lot you haven’t told us here. Is the overcall on level-2 natural or conventional? Also, what is the vulnerability? The answer to those questions changes the meaning of the X.

 

On the 2-level:

If the overcall is natural and the vulnerability equal, then X = “Stolen Bid” for both Stayman and Jacoby Transfer Bids (could even be 4-way transfer bids as well if the overcall was 2♠).

If the overcall is natural and the opponents are red v white, then X = penalty orientated.

If the overcall is conventional, then the X shows interest in penalising at least one of the suits shown by the opponents e.g. Multi Landy or DONT

 

On the 3-level:

With the opponents red v white, then X = penalty orientated.

With the opponents white v red, then X = negative.

At equal vulnerability, then X = negative.

[Quantumcat]

When you say "negative" you mean takeout, right?

 

I play: over natural interference of 1NT, it is takeout. Over two-suited interference, it is takeout of the bid suit, if it shows two suits not the bid suit, it is takeout of the higher one. If it shows a known suit (not the bid suit) and an unknown suit, it is takeout of the known suit. If it shows a mystery suit, X shows a not unbalanced hand and near-gameforce (to facillitate penalising them). To show suits I play rubensohl. For penalty, I hope partner can make a takeout double.

 

Over 3-level interference, it is takeout, and suit bids are natural and forcing to game (rubensohl only if 2NT trf to clubs is available).

[phil_20686]

Doesnt pretty much everyone play t/o doubles now?

[jillybean]

Doesnt pretty much everyone play t/o doubles now?

Only bbf'ers, not your average club player.

[jillybean]

I didn't get into opponents 2-suited overcalls, known suits, unknown suits etc , you need detailed agreements with your

partner about these.

 

This was intended just as a simple poll about negative (takeout) doubles over simple 2 and 3 level interference after we open 1nt,

but of course nothing can be simple on BBF :)

[Siegmund]

Doesnt pretty much everyone play t/o doubles now?

 

Ha!

 

The live novices switched from Penalty to Stolen Bid about five years back, after the polluting influence of the internet got to them. A substantial minority of them have decided on their own that 1NT-(3H)-X must show 5 spades just like 1NT-(2H)-X.

 

Takeout at the 2-level is still very rare among the good players in my area. They have at least heard of it, but only the handful of weak notrumpers ever play it. Only when our opponents get good enough to quit overcalling on garbage that gives up huge penalties will we be willing to give up our penalty doubles against them.

[Phil]

Negative doubles at the 3 level only are carryovers from the original version of Lebensohl where you bid 2♠ over 2♥ with four pieces.

 

Whoever espoused this apparently hated giving up their precious penalty doubles.

 

Please play them at the 2 and 3 level. They should be on at the four level too IMO.

[helene_t]

Takeout at the 2-level is still very rare among the good players in my area. They have at least heard of it, but only the handful of weak notrumpers ever play it.

Interesting, I would say that penalty doubles have more merrit if you play a weak NT. But maybe I have it backwards.

[barmar]

I haven't voted in the poll because I can't choose more than one option! The answer is that it depends entirely on who I'm playing with.

That's probably true for most players, so perhaps the poll should be interpreted as what your preference is, not what you actually play.

[awm]

I feel like it's somewhat mandatory to play negative at the three-level; otherwise there are too many hands where you can't get to the right contract.

 

At the two-level I play penalty in one partnership and takeout in another. I don't have a really strong preference; the "takeout" hands are more common but the "penalty" hands are more lucrative.

[bluecalm]

but the "penalty" hands are more lucrative.

 

Meh, usually partner reopens anyway and negative double allows you to double them when the trump stuck is in the opener's hand.

[ggwhiz]

All these doubles are t/o in my partnership showing appropriate values for the level and can be passed in a flash when opener has the wrong shape for offence.

 

What you really need to make this style work is the 1nt opener who has no fear of re-opening with double on the right shape.

[CSGibson]

Meh, usually partner reopens anyway and negative double allows you to double them when the trump stuck is in the opener's hand.

 

Actually, the benefit of penalty doubles, in my opinion, is that you don't feel the pressure to reopen as much with shortness in their suit, forcing partner to find a call on their 3-4-3-3 1 count.

 

I still prefer to play negative doubles at the 2 or 3 level, but I am slowly moving back towards indifference on the subject.

[lalldonn]

I am strongly in favor of negative doubles at both levels here.

 

Of course doubling a 2♣ overcall, depending on it's meaning, can easily be played as stayman since you can play your entire system.

[awm]

Some situations where penalty wins:

 

1. Opponents stepped into a 5-1 or 6-0 fit. If our trumps divide 4-3 takeout leaves us unable to penalize. Further, if responder trap passes with game values, we may defend undoubled! Of course, if responder never trap passes with game values we will miss many penalties.

 

2. Responder has a generally big hand (say 13-14 opposite 15-17) with just three trumps. Here penalizing can often pick up a bigger number than game, but partner will neither balance if we pass nor convert a takeout.

 

3. Responder has utter trash with length in their suit. Playing takeout double, opener will often protect and we may find ourselves doubled at the three level, giving a number instead of defending a quiet partial.

 

Obviously takeout has wins too... and I do play it in some partnerships.

[lalldonn]

I would say it's hard to count your 2 or 3 as wins since they have equivalent losses that offset (on 2 the double may work worse than bidding game instead of working better, and on 3 there are the cases where responder has takeout shape without the values to act if playing penalty doubles and opener also has takeout shape, they just play 2 when we wanted to be competing).

 

Really your case 1 is the one gain for penalty doubles that I see, and it's true. Against that, at least if you can't double them you still penalize them undoubled, often 200 or 300 if they are vul, which is not so bad. Does that make up for the times a takeout double is lucratively passed by opener for penalties, plus the times we simply get to compete when we wouldn't have otherwise? When combined with the relative frequencies (partner has 2+ of the suit and they have usually 6+ for a single-suited overcall, so I'm sure responder is short in the suit more than he is long) and to me it's a no brainer.

 

I have seen this play out at the table too. My experience with takeout doubles has been good and my experience with penalty doubles has not. Sometimes they would make, and sometimes responder would be 4144 or even 4234 or something, and have to guess to bid his four card major and pray or just pass. Also I can't remember your case 2 ever coming up either for or against me, it sounds ok in theory but I just don't see it happening. Honestly, penalty doubles here are one of the conventions I'm really glad to see my opponents playing against me.

[Vampyr]

Interesting, I would say that penalty doubles have more merrit if you play a weak NT. But maybe I have it backwards.

I don't think you have it backwards, but I think that a significant factor here is that people will not interfere over a weak NT with the kind of garbage they might interfere over a strong NT with. So the increased chance of 3^rd hand having more values is offset by the certainty that 2^nd hand has more (has a higher minumum, anyway).

 

 

EDIT: Some people do prefer penalty doubles always, and this "Stolen Bid", whatever that means; so these should be added as options.

[barmar]

I think the expert concensus is that "Stolen Bid" is one of the worst ideas around, so anyone who would select it in the poll is not worth considering.

 

Unfortunately, my regular partner insists on playing it, and I've never been able to convince him otherwise. He's under the impression that all methods of dealing with interference are flawed, and this is the least evil (or maybe just the simplest).

[aguahombre]

Congrats, JD. With Posts 18 and 20, your forum rep is now official.

[Vampyr]

I think the expert concensus is that "Stolen Bid" is one of the worst ideas around, so anyone who would select it in the poll is not worth considering.

 

You may well be correct here, but "never" as a poll answer would cover penalty doublers.

[32519]

I think the expert concensus is that "Stolen Bid" is one of the worst ideas around,

 

I find this post of yours quite intriguing. I would love to hear more on the reasoning behind it, why “the expert consensus is that "Stolen Bid" is one of the worst ideas around.”

 

Partner opens the bidding with 1NT (15-17 HCP). RHO is holding a hand with which he is willing to compete. So his overcall is either natural or conventional. However as responder you also want to compete. Unfortunately by the time the bidding gets to you the HCP still available are starting to run out. So you wanting to enter the auction as well will probably with a distributional hand of your own.

1. A natural overcall by the opponents has “stolen the bid” which you would have used for Jacoby Transfers e.g. 2♥. Without the “stolen bid double” responder has to bid 2♠ directly now and the weaker hand becomes declarer.

2. A conventional overcall e.g. 2♣ promising both majors; doubling the bid as your real suit gives opener some more information on the hand layout enabling him to make a better decision as to what level to compete the auction.