Hampson RDBL

[benlessard]

one of us opens a preempt and it goes x, rdbl by partner asks the preemptor to dbl with shortness.

 

First time ive heard of this, IMO your going to lose some good penalty but it allow responder to XX with game try and support, if opener double to show shortness responder is better placed to return to preemptor suit or to raise. However I think its inferior to normal methods if the opening is at the 3 level.

[jjbrr]

First time ive heard of this, IMO your going to lose some good penalty but it allow responder to XX with game try and support, if partner double to show shortness you are better placed to retunr to preemptor suit or to raise. However I think its inferior to normal methods if the opening is at the 3 level.

 

Chobani

[han]

why on earth would =you lose a penalty?!

[benlessard]

Lets suppose 2H--(X)--xx--(2S)

 

Assuming that 2 with no extras isnt shortness and that 2 with extras is enough for preemptor to double in standard (not the same middle point but its easy to change later) Also ive kept the voids wich is many wont agree but we can removed them.

 

they have 7 trumps

 

preemptor---responder.

 

0------------6

1------------5

2------------4 (bad 4 cards)

2------------4 (good 4 cards or extras)

2 xtras------4

3------------3

 

in standard method (you get BDEF) vs Hampson you get ABCDE, in standard you dont get A because the preemptor will pull the penalty X with a void.

 

They have 8 trumps

 

0------------5

1------------4 bad 4 card

1------------4 good 4 card

2------------3

2 xtras------3

3------------2

 

In standard you get

 

C*E ----- AC

 

They have 9 trumps

 

0------------4*

1------------3

2------------2

2X-----------2

 

no double------A if the 4 card suit has spots.

 

Indeed it look like the difference is small. I repeat that I assume that 2 with no extras isnt considered shortness (so its not a symmetric comparaison) so they wont get 3-3 or 2x-3 wich is not a a big loss at the 2 level, but they will get the 2-4(bad suit) that standard wont get.

 

However im wondering if they may fall in some bad spots.

 

EX 1633 vs 4144 in standard you would defend 2S undoubled if the 4 carder is poor and 2S double is the 4 card is good. But if he cant stand the double they are forced to scramble in 3m but these hand look pretty rare. Going to take a break and think it over more later.

[MickyB]

Wow...never heard of this before. Love it.

[JLOGIC]

Yeah I like to play this, dunno how common it is but I think it's a good agreement.

[MickyB]

Takeout doubles FTW

[MrAce]

in standard method (you get BDEF) vs Hampson you get ABCDE, in standard you dont get A because the preemptor will pull the penalty X with a void.

 

 

This is a very easy to solve issue. All it needs is a pdship agreement.

 

After the first incident where preemptor pulled your double because he had void, just remain calm at the table. And then wait for the restroom break your pd will take (some of them take tobacco break) and leave the room with him. From here i will skip the part what happens in the restroom or designated smoke area. Basically you need to convince your pd that there are much worse things that can happen to a man, than letting opponents make a doubled partscore.

 

After this, one of two good things can happen;

 

1- Pdship is in agreement now, and can double opponents with 6 card trump stack without the fear that pd may pull it.

2-Pd ( who btw pulled a double after opening a preempt ) decides not to play with you again.

 

Win win situation :P

[benlessard]

I think pulling with a void at the 2 level is normal, I would probably also pull 3Cx to 3D with a 6340 too. I prefer that my partner can X agressively with some 4 carder and that I need a stiff to be able to pass vs then the double is unilateral. If im in the penalty seat with 6 ill have to pass (never happened). In both case this aint a big deal since preempting with void are rare anyway (in my style its a drawback but not a dealbreaker).

 

 

Returning to Hampson redouble and to simplify im going to assume that the preemptor never has 4 cards or a void. If we use the same delimitation point with 2 or 3 you double in standard and with 1 you pass, vs the otherway around the difference is that 2-3,3-2 & 3-3 in standard is going to be doubled or pulled, while in Hampson its going to be doubled or passed this seems to be an edge for Hampson.

 

However when its 1-4 or 1-5 its doubled or passed in standard while its doubled or pull in Hampson, and of course you get the same game try XX available.

 

In the rare 2-2 case its going to be pulled in standard and pulled or passed in Hampson. Hampson style seem to allow for light redouble with a fit at cost of defending when you shouldnt when its 0-4 on some hands.

 

 

Kranyak did give an explicatino but im not really sure about what hes saying.

it applies when a preemptor opens at the two or three level (i guess should be applied to 4 level as well) and it goes dbl rdbl and then a bid. the main advantage in my mind is that when you preempt it's unlikely to have a kjx,kqx on the side (or a four card suit that they bid for that matter), so it let's partner know whether or not he should play for penalties, bid at game level, or bid at slam level. i would even play it at 2s - (x) - xx - (4h).

Does he think that X by preemptor show at least KJx in standard ?