Strong club interference agreements after GF...

[foobar]

What do folks play in case of strong ♣ interference after a GF has been established?

 

In one partnership, we play the following (expressed from opener's POV following RHO action; 1♣ = 16+ any and responder's bids shows 5+ in suit and GF unless noted):

 

1) If we haven't agreed on a suit, XX is to play (example: 1♣* - 2♠ (any 4441, GF) - (X) - XX)

 

2) A direct double is almost never purely for penalty and is generally takeout oriented. The general rule is that Pass requests a X, direct bid tends to show a single suited hand and pull after the X is either two places to play or support with slam interest.

 

Specifically:

• If responder has shown a suit and they have bid past the cheapest level in that suit, X is an optional raise (1♣* - 1♥ - (4♠) - X)
  
• Raise following an initial pass is slam interest if they bid past the cheapest game level (direct raise is fit with no interest in defending: 1♣* - 1♥ - (4♠) - P - X - 5♥* (expressing slam interest))
  
• If they are one below the cheapest game level for the suit, X=good raise of the suit (1♣* - 1♥ - (3♠) - X)
  

 

For example, an interesting application of the above might be when opener holds 5-5 in the blacks and the bidding goes:

 

1♣ - 1♥ (5+ GF) - (3♦)

 

Now, opener can pass and pull 3♦ to show the 5-5 black hand (contrast this with having to bid 3♠ with both with a single suited hand or the hand with the blacks). Naturally, vulnerability considerations may influence whether opener bids 3♠ anyway, but it's an option.

 

Thoughts?

[Free]

Looks quite ok, but I'm a bit lost. Dbl is generally takeout oriented, but passing and correct the double shows 2 places. Isn't that quite the same, or do you consider the Dbl to be more balanced?

 

I'm also wondering when partner won't Dbl after a pass. If he always doubles, you still have the opportunity to penalize opps, but if you allow him to bid on his own you might miss some juicy penalties. On the other hand, if he always has to Dbl, you might limit partner's options too much.

[foobar]

Looks quite ok, but I'm a bit lost. Dbl is generally takeout oriented, but passing and correct the double shows 2 places. Isn't that quite the same, or do you consider the Dbl to be more balanced?

 

I'm also wondering when partner won't Dbl after a pass. If he always doubles, you still have the opportunity to penalize opps, but if you allow him to bid on his own you might miss some juicy penalties. On the other hand, if he always has to Dbl, you might limit partner's options too much.

 

The X for takeout is usually fairly balanced and the hands that pull following the pass are more shapely. Responder will usually X unless holding a shapely hand that's unsuitable.

[straube]

I think Pass Double Inversion is so-named because it is (or it was) standard for double to be penalty in a game forcing auction.

 

1S-2D (2H) dbl is penalty. I think it is standard as penalty even when 2D only promises invitational strength.

 

With the general trend toward takeout doubles, I'm not sure if or how many folks have moved toward...

 

1C*-1S (2D) dbl as takeout (1C being strong and 1S natural gf) but I still like it as penalty because opener has many ways to take the bid.

He can show his own suits, raise, or pass and bid later.

 

In the last auction, suit information has been exchanged (the natural 1S bid), so if I were playing something like Moscito

 

1C*-1D* (2D) where 1D* started a GF with almost any shape, then I'd rather play double as takeout.

 

I've usually read about PDI starting at higher levels, usually interference of 3S, perhaps 4C. At higher levels you have less room to (for example) bid your own two suits. At the level of 3H interference you have enough room to show the other major.

 

Found this post...

 

PDI replaces forcing passes to create more possibilities to describe one's hand. We use Berkowitz-Cohen's scheme described by Sabine Auken in her book: I Love This Game (pgs. 161 - 164).

 

PDI would apply in the following auction: 1♣ (p) any bid except 1♦ if playing all responses GF by responder (3♠ or higher by opponent: Now bids by the opener are complicated and depend how high the opponents have bid.

 

Example: 1♣ (p) 1♠ = natural & GF (4♥) ?

 

Pass = Asks partner to double (implies no fit)

Raise = Minimum support - Added: 9:07 pm EDT

Double = Good raise of partners suit (non-minimum)

New suit = 1-suited hand

4NT = RKCB for responders suit

Cuebid = Exclusion RKCB for responders suit

Pass = asks partner to double, now a suit by opener after the X = 2-places to play

[Shugart23]

Pass by the Opener is Control asking for us......eg 1C - P - 1H( game force showing 5+ Spades) - interference - PASS (Control Asking)......On other hand, if Opener likes the suit Partner has suggested (Spades in this case), Opener has option to bid Spades which sets the trump suit and is asking about Honor holding in Spades and then relay next to do Control Asking..... Our third option is a Double by Opener which would be Penalty

[benlessard]

its better to play X Fpass inversion the following way

 

X= medium interest in penatlies

pass = penalties or pass and pull.

 

pass and pull should be 2 places to play or slammish depending on circumstance.

 

1- Its harder for LHO to XX sos.

2- the most likely penalties are medium interest vs medium interest. Not strong interest one way.

[Trick13]

Sabine Auken ... after they have bid at 3S or higher

 

A) If partner has bid a suit

1) Opponents bid to level BELOW our game

Pass = Asks for double, and then

New suit bids = Multi-playable (2 places to play)

Raise = Decent 2-card fit

Pass = penalty

Cue = void

Double = Good raise

Raise = Weaker raise

New suit = one suited

4NT = RCKB

Cue = Exclusion

2) Opponents bid ABOVE our game

Pass = Asks for double, and then same as above except that raise = slam try with 3+ trumps.

Double= Flexible raise - can defend.

New suits= One suited.

Raises=weakest

B) Partner hasn't bid a suit

Pass forces double (for penalties, or if followed by a pull=2-suited). If partner is distributional and would not sit a penalty double then he may make a bid other than double.

Direct bids=one-suited

Double = take-out. Partner should bid his longest suit, 4NT is a scramble.

[awm]

Double as takeout is better because it creates more sequences. Since a penalty double almost always ends the auction, you do not have any sequences that start with "double, then bid...."; however if you use double as takeout and pass is requesting a double (unless partner would remove a penalty double) you have sequences starting with both "double, then bid..." and "pass, then bid..."

 

The simple way to use these is something like:

 

1. Direct bid = real suit in an unbalanced hand, usually one-suited (maybe a two suiter including the lowest suit if partner's call did not show a suit)

2. Pass, then bid = some length in the opposing suit (but not enough to penalize and not suited to bid NT next), often a balanced hand bidding a 4-5 card suit

3. Double, then bid = flexible hand, two-suited with the higher unbid suits or something like a 5134 bidding its five-card suit

[benlessard]

I agree about your explanation of why direct penalty is a poor method however...

 

Pass, then bid = some length in the opposing suit (but not enough to penalize and not suited to bid NT next), often a balanced hand bidding a 4-5 card suit

3. Double, then bid = flexible hand, two-suited with the higher unbid suits or something like a 5134 bidding its five-card suit

It should be the other way around, the lenght in opps suit should be under the double not under the pass since it maximize the odds of converting the double.

 

Also a pass as shortness or trap pass is easier to read than a pass as medium lenght or trap pass.

 

1C--(P)---1S(Gf)--2C

P---(3C)--??

 

if the pass is a trap pass or takeout ill probably be able to guess. If the pass is some lenght or trap pass its not always clear.

[straube]

Double as takeout is better because it creates more sequences. Since a penalty double almost always ends the auction, you do not have any sequences that start with "double, then bid...."; however if you use double as takeout and pass is requesting a double (unless partner would remove a penalty double) you have sequences starting with both "double, then bid..." and "pass, then bid..."

 

The simple way to use these is something like:

 

1. Direct bid = real suit in an unbalanced hand, usually one-suited (maybe a two suiter including the lowest suit if partner's call did not show a suit)

2. Pass, then bid = some length in the opposing suit (but not enough to penalize and not suited to bid NT next), often a balanced hand bidding a 4-5 card suit

3. Double, then bid = flexible hand, two-suited with the higher unbid suits or something like a 5134 bidding its five-card suit

 

Would the meanings of pass and pull change at any point of interference (say 3S which is pretty common for PDI)? Or only in a gradual sense? For example, foobar gives the example of a 5/5 black hand at the 3D interference level passing and pulling, but what if the interference were 2D?

 

At what levels would you play that double shows support for partner's suit...or pass and pull shows tolerance...or a slam invitation or whatever?