Redouble after a Negative Double

[vodkagirl]

The other day I had a hand where RHO opened 1♣ I overcalled 1♥ and passed LHO doubled and passed Partner redoubled!

 

General question: what does the redouble of a negative double mean?

 

There is very little about this online and I have never come across this bidding sequence before so I am very much interested in your replies.

 

Many thanks as always.

[MrAce]

The other day I had a hand where RHO opened 1♣ I overcalled 1♥ and passed LHO doubled and passed Partner redoubled!.

 

I did not quite get that http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif

 

You bid 1♥ and then passed it to LHO...he doubled and then passed it to your pd

 

Are you guys passing a joint to each other after each bid or what? http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif

 

 

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I did not quite get that http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif

 

You bid 1♥ and then passed it to LHO...he doubled and then passed it to your pd

 

Are you guys passing a joint to each other after each bid or what? http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif

I think there were 2 passes and then RHO opened 1C .

[blackshoe]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1c1hdr]133|100[/hv]

 

One possibility is Rosenkranz, showing at least 3 card heart support headed by the ace or king. If you haven't agreed a meaning, then it means "partner, I think you can make 1♥". B-)

[steve2005]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1c1hdr]133|100[/hv]

 

One possibility is Rosenkranz, showing at least 3 card heart support headed by the ace or king. If you haven't agreed a meaning, then it means "partner, I think you can make 1♥". B-)

Rosenkranz makes the most sense, but I thought it was AK or Q

.

 

Other meaning would be responsive double, takeout for the two unbid suts

 

 

 

[PhilKing]

Last time I had this situation (it was quite recently in an on-line match against "experts"), I played in 1M redoubled up three - responder interpretted the pass of the redouble as a 1435 hand with good hearts.

 

The moral is that a jump to 4♥ would be premature. B-)

 

FWIW, I think it is best to play the redouble as a general good hand.

[wodahs]

That's an excellent position to build a transfer ladder, in which case

 

XX =spades

1S = clubs = cue-raise

1NT = natural

2C = diamonds

2D = constructive heart raise

2H = junk raise

[aguahombre]

For the Redouble only two things make sense to me.

 

1) Doubleton support and competitive values.

2) A modification of Rosencranz to show Ace or King doubleton. Including the Queen could result in an unsuccessful underlead by CHO.

 

With 3+ support for the overcall suit, we really like raising the suit.

[straube]

That's an excellent position to build a transfer ladder, in which case

 

XX =spades

1S = clubs = cue-raise

1NT = natural

2C = diamonds

2D = constructive heart raise

2H = junk raise

 

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

[wodahs]

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

 

I'd prefer to keep the low-level good raise (the cue-raise), but I see your point. When responder passes, I'd love to play Rubens Advances, but partner keeps missing them, sooooooooo ...

 

I suppose you could include both constructive and limit in the 2H raise, with an increased risk of getting too high.

[wodahs]

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

 

I'd prefer to keep the low-level good raise (the cue-raise), but I see your point. When responder passes, I'd love to play Rubens Advances, but partner keeps missing them, sooooooooo ...

 

I suppose you could include both constructive and limit in the 2H raise, with an increased risk of getting too high.

[wodahs]

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

 

I'd prefer to keep the low-level good raise (the cue-raise), but I see your point. When responder passes, I'd love to play Rubens Advances, but partner keeps missing them, sooooooooo ...

 

I suppose you could include both constructive and limit in the 2H raise, with an increased risk of getting too high.

[wodahs]

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

 

I'd prefer to keep the low-level good raise (the cue-raise), but I see your point. When responder passes, I'd love to play Rubens Advances, but partner keeps missing them, sooooooooo ...

 

I suppose you could include both constructive and limit in the 2H raise, with an increased risk of getting too high.

[ahydra]

I just play this as showing values (no fit). Make sure it's a reasonable quantity of values (say 10+) though - otherwise, as once happened to my poor partner, you go for 1000.

 

ahydra

[fromageGB]

You want partner to be able to pass the redouble...so it should promise tolerance and values. I would start transfers at 2C, same as I would over a pass.

The redouble is never going to reach him. I don't play it, but redouble=spades seems good to me; while RHO probably has them too, it may enable partner to bid NT.

[Zelandakh]

Interesting that this thread is identical to the other one and developed in a completely different way!

[Bbradley62]

The difference might be that the other thread specifies playing SAYC with a random partner, so that thread more likely asks the question "what should I expect this to mean under those circumstances?" whereas this thread might be asking "how should my regular partner and I play this?"

[vodkagirl]

Interesting that this thread is identical to the other one and developed in a completely different way!

 

 

The difference might be that the other thread specifies playing SAYC with a random partner, so that thread more likely asks the question "what should I expect this to mean under those circumstances?" whereas this thread might be asking "how should my regular partner and I play this?"

 

Nothing so clever. My browser was playing up and I thought my initial post hadn't taken. So I reposted with different wording. It took me two days to figure out that there were two threads!

 

But no denying they have developed differently.

 

Thank you all for your contributions.

[aguahombre]

Nothing so clever. My browser was playing up and I thought my initial post hadn't taken. So I reposted with different wording. It took me two days to figure out that there were two threads!

 

But no denying they have developed differently.

 

Thank you all for your contributions.

When we attribute something clever to you, don't blow it :rolleyes: by ratting yourself out. Let us continue to believe how clever you were.

[vodkagirl]

When we attribute something clever to you, don't blow it :rolleyes: by ratting yourself out. Let us continue to believe how clever you were.

 

Thank you for your kindness. I laughed out loud. I really did.