Jinksy Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 1H P 1N P /2H P P X Is the X clearly penalties, clearly takeout, partnership agreement, or something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Doubler either: 1) Forgot to make a T/O double of 1H last time (yes X would be a t/o of hearts even after the NT response).2) Didn't have enough strength to do (1) above, and is now coming into their misfit auction.3) Has the nuts and wants to penalize 2H even underneath the opener's suit. #1 and #2 are bad ideas. #3 won't happen very often, for sure; but if I trust partner, that's what she has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunemPard Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 To answer the question asked...all bids are 100% partnership agreement. But...why can't partner be balancing? Opener was unlimited until the 2H bid. I don't understand the usefulness of any sort of penalty X here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted March 2, 2014 Report Share Posted March 2, 2014 Partnership agreement. "Polish" (i.e. partner can see in his hand what it is) is a possible agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Partnership agreement. "Polish" (i.e. partner can see in his hand what it is) is a possible agreement. I would call this kind of double "two way double".As far as Polish goes I would be shocked if it's penalty for anyone in Poland and people do play a lot of penalty doubles here!Also penalty is terrible here. You rarely have a trump stack worth doubling with having long hearts on your left. On the other hand it may happen partner has one and is happy to sit once you show some points. 2) Didn't have enough strength to do (1) above, and is now coming into their misfit auction. #1 and #2 are bad ideas. #3 won't happen very often, for sure; but if I trust partner, that's what she has. Why is #2 a bad idea ?You have AJxx x KQxx xxxx or something. Not doubling is huge blunder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted March 3, 2014 Report Share Posted March 3, 2014 Why is #2 a bad idea ?You have AJxx x KQxx xxxx or something. Not doubling is huge blunder.Not doubling the first time was the decision. Doubling the 2nd time is not Law protected when there is no opponent fit established. Not getting in early and then trying to make up later just doesn't seem to work out well for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted March 4, 2014 Report Share Posted March 4, 2014 Pdship agreement overrules everything but to me this is take out w/o 4 spades. Balancing. He may hold a very weak hand and guessing pd's strength due to auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Pdship agreement overrules everything but to me this is take out w/o 4 spades. Balancing. He may hold a very weak hand and guessing pd's strength due to auction.opp have anywhere from 18 to 24 pts., so guessing would be the correct wordtakeout w/o 4♠. So like 5-4 in minors (EDIT and not good enough to make a 2-level overcall) (any better and you may be able to bid 2N at some point) and your willing to play at 3-level with no guarantee of a fit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I am surprised. There are two threads going at the same time where people actually advocate balancing into a misfit auction after failing to take some action the previous round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 I am surprised. There are two threads going at the same time where people actually advocate balancing into a misfit auction after failing to take some action the previous round. There are a few sequences like this where I like to play double as penalties - not because I think it will ever happen, but merely to stop partner from acting on horse manure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 There are a few sequences like this where I like to play double as penalties - not because I think it will ever happen, but merely to stop partner from acting on horse manure. I still think you guys are blundering by passing hands like the one I gave or even Kxx xx AJxx KTxx there.It's a pity we don't have a way o prove things in bridge and we can just exchange views/intuitions/experience. Imo it's really big one, like ~1.5imp mistake to pass there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 I still think you guys are blundering by passing hands like the one I gave or even Kxx xx AJxx KTxx there.It's a pity we don't have a way o prove things in bridge and we can just exchange views/intuitions/experience. Imo it's really big one, like ~1.5imp mistake to pass there.I can't prove the opposite of what you are saying, either..of course. But, if you are correct about the long-run prognosis of -1.5 IMPs per occasion, then based on past experience we are due to lose about 2,000 IMPS to the opponents who come into our dead misfit auctions over the next several years. That would probably balance the numbers out from our past successes when they did it. Exaggeration to be sure, but not hyperbole. And, since we decided very early on not to do it ourselves, we have no estimates from that angle...only from when we blundered by not stepping in but our counterparts took the plunge and broke even or lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 You have AJxx x KQxx xxxx or something. Not doubling is huge blunder.Not doubling 1NT with that is a blunder. or even Kxx xx AJxx KTxxNot doubling 1NT with that is just rather passive, but I don't see how the same player could pass 1NT and then want to double 2♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 we play the X as T/O.Simple rule: all low level doubles of a suit are for T/O,unless T/O makes no sense at all.In the given seq. we have 3 unbid suits, so T/O. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.