This can't be right

[straube]

So our auction went...

 

P P 1S dbl

rdbl 2H P P

dbl

 

Pd had x QTx Axxx Kxxxx

 

So I'm like "Hey, you can't double hearts here. Did you do so because you thought we were in a force?" and he said "Yeah, I thought I created one". He felt endplayed into doubling 2H. My hand btw was QJxxx xx Kxx AJx. Where was I going?

 

So do most people play that a redouble here by a passed hand creates a force? I would argue it shouldn't. It should just show a misfit and maximum pass. Otherwise, I think partner has to commit to bidding 2N here (or even 2S) which ought to show the same misfit and max, but an inability to double hearts. But maybe I'm wrong and maybe there's more value in having a passed hand responder be able to create a force. I suppose you could occasionally catch opponents and it allows opener to make a forcing pass.

 

In any case, this hand is much too weak to be putting us in a force if such a thing is even possible. I think I'd bid 1N with it (or pass if we are playing transfers here)

 

We also had a discussion about "I've Got A Secret" which is basically a pass followed by a double claims the hand and shows a balanced hand with tolerance for partner's suit. IGAS doesn't quite fit here either.

 

What's your agreement?

[Zelandakh]

A strong redouble from an unpassed hand generally creates a force. Given that you open light and limited, it is probably not right for it to create a force for you by a passed hand. In fact I cannot see much point in your playing (of) a strong redouble by a passed hand at all.

 

Also, I thought it was standard for pass then double to be takeout.

[rhm]

It is my impression, that you generally seem to believe that all problems in bidding can be solved by good agreements.

Though good agreements help and I give my preferred agreements below in this scenario, these problems are in my opinion more a matter of good judgment than a matter of agreements.

 

If the RDBL does not put the partnership into a force, then opener can not pass with more than a minimum opener and leave the decision to partner.

Once opener did pass (forcing) I would not have doubled 2♥, but bid 2NT, which is not natural but scrambling for the minors.

(By the way not a bad description of the actual hand. You might well make a high level minor suit contract opposite an opener with short hearts)

In a low level competitive sequence, if I do not know what to do, my default action will not be DBL if defined as penalty.

A penalty DBL should be a confident action that the contract will go down two or more, not a close affair for going down one.

(There are a few exceptions at match points, where you need to double to protect your plus score)

My default action in competitive sequences is often 2NT (if available), which is defined as never natural under those circumstances.

The default meaning for 2NT in competition (with few exceptions like after weak two) is scrambling.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Codo]

I don't like to have too many different agreements, so my XX from a passed hand is basically the same as from an unpassed hand. I bet that other alternatives are superior, but I would not switch.

 

Partners hand is a very very easy 1 NT rebid. IF he bids XX, he brings himself into the ugly situation that he need to find a bid over

P P 1S dbl

rdbl 2H P P

 

and he had not been happier if someone bids a minor... He simply has never a penalty double over a third hand opener.

 

So, if I would be your partner, I would not try to learn more rules and exceptions, but how to think ahead over the next round of bidding. And if you do, you would never XX with the given hand.

[cherdano]

We could have 17 or 18 hcp on this sequence. How can we be in a force?

[jogs]

I don't XX ever with a misfit.

P P 1S dbl

p 2H P P(3h?)

?

 

XX warns opponents not to overreach.

[Cyberyeti]

Our methods are that once partner redoubles, pass by opener shows a better hand than bidding so you're at home for partner to double for blood or you can pass and pull the X with a good hand. That said, we wouldn't have your hand, as with a 5332 without a huge suit, we open 1N or pass, never 1M.

[straube]

A strong redouble from an unpassed hand generally creates a force. Given that you open light and limited, it is probably not right for it to create a force for you by a passed hand. In fact I cannot see much point in your playing (of) a strong redouble by a passed hand at all.

 

Also, I thought it was standard for pass then double to be takeout.

 

It is standard. "I've Got a Secret" is a convention by (I think) Mansfield which solves the dilemma of what to do when you have values and no direction. You pass and then double and partner has a much better idea. This way, if you redouble, you announce interest in hammering at least two (and usually exactly two) places to play. If advancer's bid is passed around, then responder can double if this is one of those places or takeout the bid, announcing two other suits.

 

Like say partner was an UPH and had better...

 

x Qx Kxxxx AQxxx.

 

So the bidding goes 1S dbl rdbl 2H P P and now 2N showing minors.

 

Or say pd had

 

xx Qxx Kxxx AQxx

 

the bidding would go 1S dbl P 2H P P dbl showing no clear direction.

 

Btw, this wasn't with foobar. This was with a 2/1 casual partnership and we hadn't discussed this.

[Phil]

A passed hand cannot create a force.

[SteveMoe]

Agreeing with above posters - no force.

However I would expect a balanced 10-11, not the hand shown. Ugly.

[rhm]

A passed hand cannot create a force.

This is true but irrelevant to the issue here.

The question is whether opener, who has not really limited himself, has created a force on passed partner, who redoubled, not whether the RDBL of passed hand created a force on opener.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[straube]

This is true but irrelevant to the issue here.

The question is whether opener, who has not really limited himself, has created a force on passed partner, who redoubled, not whether the RDBL of passed hand created a force on opener.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

How can I create a force by passing? This makes no sense to me. If I want to pass because I have nothing to say and partner has declared a misfit, then pass by me can only continue a force which was created by partner...if our agreement is that a passed hand can create a force at all. Personally, I see merit both ways, but a lot more merit in a passed hand not being able to create a force...at least in a misfit situation which is what we are discussing.

[rhm]

How can I create a force by passing? This makes no sense to me. If I want to pass because I have nothing to say and partner has declared a misfit, then pass by me can only continue a force which was created by partner...if our agreement is that a passed hand can create a force at all. Personally, I see merit both ways, but a lot more merit in a passed hand not being able to create a force...at least in a misfit situation which is what we are discussing.

The RDBL traditionally declares that we have the balance of points. Of course if you open extremely light this might not be the case when partner is a passed hand.

If you play Pass by opener as non-forcing there is no way a good hand with few hearts can pass the decision to partner who may be waiting with a real penalty double.

I like to preempt my opponents not my partner.

Traditionally opener's pass when partner redoubles does not show a hand unsuitable for defense nor a minimum opening bid, it shows a hand, which can not double himself.

In fact if opener bids in front of partner it shows a minimum distributional hand unsuitable for defense but with a clear direction.

I see little wrong with this logic.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[straube]

The RDBL traditionally declares that we have the balance of points. Of course if you open extremely light this might not be the case when partner is a passed hand.

If you play Pass by opener as non-forcing there is no way a good hand with few hearts can pass the decision to partner who may be waiting with a real penalty double.

I like to preempt my opponents not my partner.

Traditionally opener's pass when partner redoubles does not show a hand unsuitable for defense nor a minimum opening bid, it shows a hand, which can not double himself.

In fact if opener bids in front of partner it shows a minimum distributional hand unsuitable for defense but with a clear direction.

I see little wrong with this logic.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

It's with your prior post that I have disagreement. It is responder who creates the force (if your agreement is that a passed hand can do so) and not opener. When opener passes 2H, he is saying merely that he doesn't have a minimum distributional hand and so cannot escape the force that responder has created. With my balanced minimum hand, I had nothing to say over 2H. If partner believed he had created a force via his redouble, he clearly has to rebid either 2S or 2N. Whatever he does, he cannot double.

 

Maybe for us this is a semantic difference, but I definitely would describe responder's double as having created the forcing situation.

[MrAce]

The RDBL traditionally declares that we have the balance of points. Of course if you open extremely light this might not be the case when partner is a passed hand.

 

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

[Zelandakh]

Fantunes?

[gordontd]

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

Those who open light in 1st & 2nd have little need to do so in 3rd.

[rhm]

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

Of course, but it does not follow that

 

a) opener must be light

b) it will be a disaster if playing opener's pass at the two level below his suit as forcing after passed hand redoubled. The benefits of this are obvious.

 

I still wait for an explanation why 2NT scrambling by passed hand is such a terrible bid with 1♠=3♥=4♦=5♣.

With 2 cards in spades you can always bid 2♠ and opener should know when to correct to 2NT or a minor.

Just don't make close penalty doubles with insufficient trumps.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[sfi]

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

 

Anyone with a 10-12 NT range in 1/2 is unlikely to do so. Or many pairs who have light initial actions.

[gnasher]

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

I don't.

[PhilKing]

I don't.

 

What about your partners (excluding Sheehan)?

[helene_t]

Fantunes?

Their 2-openings can be light in 3rd seat. Their 1-level openings can't AFAIK.

[gnasher]

What about your partners (excluding Sheehan)?

No, they don't either, so far as I know.

 

Maybe this depends on what is meant by "very light". I routinely open 4333 11-counts in third seat, but I do that in first seat too. I can't remember the last time I opened a 4333 10-count in 3rd seat, or had one opened by my partner. With a weakish unbalanced hand, I'll often open at the two- or three-level in third seat, including some hands that I'd open at the one-level in first.

[Zelandakh]

I much prefer to open balanced 0-3 counts than 8-10 counts in third; but perhaps that is something I should not admit with so many TDs about...

[aguahombre]

Is there any pair in the world who doesnt open very light in 3rd seat ?

OOH, OOH....raising my hand in the air.