Flame Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Doubles are one of the hardest thing to agree apon, maybe we should make a long thread considering sequences and agrements.Anyway i have a specific question which we had a misunderstanding about , today.1♣ - (1♦) D (P)2♣ - (2♦) P (P)DI thought its a penalty double since a major suit would have been bid already at the 1 level, but someone said its not showing diamonds but giving partner the aportunity to pass 2d double with diamonds since a double from him on 2d would be a takeout. maybe it should be something like the inverted doubles (i think you call them 2-3 double or garoozo doubles on the forum) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 I wouldnt think its not penalty since you are 'under' the bidder . I think dbl here shows something like: ♠Axx ♥KQx ♦ x ♣ AJxxxx. Ask yourself this: if pard doubles 2♦ is it penalty or takeout? Takeout of course; ergo yours is takeout as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Ditto with Phil. Under the bidder, clearly takeout oriented. Asking pard to help out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Posted December 31, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Nice, happy to be wrong here. ( i didnt feel good with the penalty) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 I wouldnt think its not penalty since you are 'under' the bidder . I think dbl here shows something like: ♠Axx ♥KQx ♦ x ♣ AJxxxx. Ask yourself this: if pard doubles 2♦ is it penalty or takeout? Takeout of course; ergo yours is takeout as well. I don't understand the point of a second take out double by responder. He has surely denied a 5 card major (else simply bid it over 1♦) and we have denied a 4 card major (else we wouldn't bid 2♣). And we will often have bid a good 3 card major instead of a 5 card club suit or a raggedy 6 card one. So what exactly is partner looking for? If partner has a second take out double, we are going to have some length in ♦, so something like 2236 is not unlikely, and we will have to go to 3♣. But if 3♣ is right, partner could have bid it himself (he knows we almost certainly have 6 of them). But partner may very well have a penalty double of 2♦ (eg a 4441 hand), and if we are minimum, we can't be expected to keep the bidding open on, say, a minimum 2326 hand just in case partner has that hand. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Playing on 4-3 often works at the 2 level Some people double with 5-4 in the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted December 31, 2004 Report Share Posted December 31, 2004 Playing on 4-3 often works at the 2 level Some people double with 5-4 in the majors. But wouldn't opener often bid a 3 card major at the one level if he wanted to play in the 4-3 fit? If they often work at the 2 level they will work even more frequently at the 1 level! And aren't 5-4 hands much more easily handled by bidding naturally? And if they are handled by a first round double then a second round take out double is just begging partner to pick the wrong one! Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts