1m - (1H) - X

[lorserker]

i think that everybody i know plays a)

i live in slovenia

[GrahamJson]

If those are your examples, you will find much less resistance to the idea of penalty doubles.

 

Most people today play

(1D) - X -(1S) - X

as penalties.

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

X

is also usually played as penalties.

 

1S - (P) -1NT - (2D)

X

 

Is more divided (not sure), but it makes much more sense to play as penalties than 1m-(1H)-x.

 

Hmm, I'm not so sure. On BBO most seem to play these as TO, but perhaps that happens to be on the tables that I kibitz. Another popular treatment seems to be to play them as whatever you want them to be, with a message to the table to let partner know.

[manudude03]

I did say "all" low level doubles. I prefer to play "most" low level doubles for take out, including the one you describe. However I think it makes sense for doubles to be for penalties whenever partner has implied values in the suit, such as by a TOD or bidding NT, or if you are in a forcing situation. So, for example , (1D) - X -(1S) - X should be for penalties, not TO, as should 1S - (P) -1NT - (2D) - X and 1S - (P) - 2C - (2D) - X.

 

While I agree with the general sentiment, this topic is about the auction 1m-(1H)-X which I was assuming you were talking about. I would personally play 1S-(P)-1NT-(2D) as takeout, and 1S-(P)-2C-(2D)-X as penalty or cards depending on whether I am playing 2/1 or not.

[Cyberyeti]

If those are your examples, you will find much less resistance to the idea of penalty doubles.

 

Most people today play

(1D) - X -(1S) - X

as penalties.

 

This is played as penalties mainly as a psyche exposer.

 

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

X

is also usually played as penalties.

 

 

We play this as exactly 4 hearts with 2♥ showing 5 which can be a useful distinction if next hand raises diamonds and you have 3 hearts and less than 3 spades opposite.

 

1S - (P) -1NT - (2D)

X

 

Is more divided (not sure), but it makes much more sense to play as penalties than 1m-(1H)-x.

 

This would be T/O for us, as our arrangements are along the lines of all low level X's are T/O except ...

[gwnn]

Hmm, I'm not so sure. On BBO most seem to play these as TO, but perhaps that happens to be on the tables that I kibitz. Another popular treatment seems to be to play them as whatever you want them to be, with a message to the table to let partner know.

On BBO most people play 4-keycard blackwood (and all 4NT's are always 4-keycard blackwood), 1M-p-4M="I have a weak NT with 3-card support but don't know what to bid", and so on. I meant people who actually have partnerships and have thought about bridge for more than 5 minutes.

[GrahamJson]

Yep. Agree with you 100% on that.

[oryctolagi]

(which the poster in questions has done plenty of times in the past -- check out his posts).

I've tried to do that, but I don't know how to, on this forum. Clicking on his profile, I can only bring up his last five posts, none of which upholds your assertion.

 

Anyway, isn't it the Moderators' job to sort that sort of thing out?

[gwnn]

I don't think everything is the moderators' job. Anyway I'm done with this long meta discussion about what proper and improper ways are regarding penalty vs negative doubles on the 1 level. thanks for the tips, I will keep them in mind.

[oryctolagi]

I agree with the above, in that I think we've exhausted the topic. I shall remember not to double one-level overcalls for penalties - and make use of the negative double convention. Others are a bit too complicated for me to remember! :unsure:

[PhantomSac]

 

The critical path is if advancer will next raise or jump-raise hearts.

I find the difference between 4 and 5 spades in responder's hand crucial for opener to compete in spades effectively and it is in spades where the money is.

With negative free bids holding less than 4 spades it is rare you can not move over 1♥.

When it happens you are almost always balanced not short in hearts.

 

 

Yeah it is definitely not a bad agreement. A lot of people I know who tried the X=4/5 spades experiment have switched back to X=4 spades for this reason (like Greco-Hampson). In standard I would definitely play X=4 spades, in a system with a nebulous club or nebulous diamond I think it's debatable (I currently play X=4/5 spades in precision but go back and fourth mentally on if it is correct).

[Vampyr]

Maybe you can read my second post which explains my first post pretty accurately. There is a difference between supporting an outdated, inferior method and supporting an outdated, inferior method while naming everyone who disagrees with you (i.e., pretty much everyone) various names (which the poster in questions has done plenty of times in the past -- check out his posts).

 

I think he is kidding much of the time. I remember a post in which he advocated passing after RHO opened and he had about 19 points and two good 5-card suits. It was pure comic genius.

[diana_eva]

I think he is kidding much of the time. I remember a post in which he advocated passing after RHO opened and he had about 19 points and two good 5-card suits. It was pure comic genius.

 

This post. Yes, was pretty entertaining. I wish he were kidding, but I doubt it.

[zillahandp]

Zelandakh, You seem to be insulting phil, y? he is entitled to his view, you say you are an intermediate, 203 hands to your name, if true hardly grounds fo laying the

la down, how would you feel if Phil wrote to you like that? Will we meet at the camrose? Let me know, should be fun.

[Zelandakh]

Zelandakh, You seem to be insulting phil, y? he is entitled to his view, you say you are an intermediate, 203 hands to your name, if true hardly grounds fo laying the

la down, how would you feel if Phil wrote to you like that? Will we meet at the camrose? Let me know, should be fun.

If I were playing at the Camrose I would mark my profile as Expert, as per the BBO guidelines. I self-rate as Intermediate for the same reason. I also do not get why you think I have played 203 hands - I have been a member here for a long time and while I am currently not playing very much, in the past I was around a lot more.

 

As has already been pointed out, Phil sometimes likes to post a little for effect. I have no problem with his doing this but think it is wise to warn other readers that are perhaps not as familiar not to take the posts too seriously. The times I post rubbish, it gets trashed too. :lol: As for people going out of their way to be rude, well I have been around on the internet for a long time and seen pretty much everything by now in one form or another. And if I were to stop enjoying coming here I would simply stop.

 

What certainly does not work is trying to "even the score" or the like. All that does is ostracise you from the community and spoil your time at the site. I would like to think that all of our intermediates who think they are experts and all of our trolls can become constructive members of the community and have certainly tried to help in that regard on occasion. Sadly, it is not always possible, usually either because someone feel too aggrieved or because they simply want to troll. The question remains open for some of our current posters too. Hopefully any of those that read this will think about it and decide for the constructive route. I can promise that it will be far more rewarding and far more enjoyable than the alternatives.

[eagles123]

I thought this Zilla guy was meant to be banned for stalking me aha

 

as far as clueless posters go, at least PhilG cracks me up sometimes

[eagles123]

This post. Yes, was pretty entertaining. I wish he were kidding, but I doubt it.

 

A personal favourite:

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/62345-crazy-or-not-part-2/

[Caitlynne]

The modern standard treatment is that the Double is for takeout (i.e., a negative or Sputnik double) showing exactly 4 spades. In this style, responder bid 1S (not Double) with 5+ spades.

 

Another approach (which I think is better) is to Double to show values and a desire to bid without exactly 4 card length in spades. (With 4 card length in spades, responder bids 1S.) Using this method, you can handle awkward hands without a stopper in the opponent's heart suit where you have too good a hand to pass (e.g., KQx, xx, Axxxx, xxx where, after partner's opening bid of 1C is overcalled with 1H, you would be stuck). So you double with fewer than 4 spades or 5+ spades. But this is not standard.

 

There are other approaches out there too, including transfers. In this style, Double is a transfer to spades, 1S is a transfer to clubs, and so on.

[Vampyr]

So you double with fewer than 4 spades or 5+ spades. But this is not standard.

 

Nor is it, as far as I can tell, playable.

[helene_t]

a) is certainly std in the USA. "Nearly always" is right. 1s will never show 5+ spades (then you would bid 1s), but on rare occasions it might be only 3 if you have a decent hand and no other bid. For example:

 

1c (1h) ??

 

AKx xxx Kxxx xxx

 

Here, X seems like the best of a bunch of bad choices.

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

[rhm]

a) is certainly std in the USA. "Nearly always" is right. 1s will never show 5+ spades (then you would bid 1s), but on rare occasions it might be only 3 if you have a decent hand and no other bid. For example:

 

1c (1h) ??

 

AKx xxx Kxxx xxx

 

Here, X seems like the best of a bunch of bad choices.

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after

1♣-(1♠)-?

 

I think DBL is asking for trouble. It is not the type of distribution where a 4-3 major suit fit will play well

Why the rush? What is really wrong with Pass? 4333 is by nature not an offensive distribution.

However, I admit I do not subscribe to the standard concept that a 1NT rebid by opener should show 18-19 HCP when both responder and advancer pass the 1M overcall.

Responder is almost never broke in this sequence.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after

1♣-(1♠)-?

 

I think DBL is asking for trouble. It is not the type of distribution where a 4-3 major suit fit will play well

Why the rush? What is really wrong with Pass? 4333 is by nature not an offensive distribution.

However, I admit I do not subscribe to the standard concept that a 1NT rebid by opener should show 18-19 HCP when both responder and advancer pass the 1M overcall.

Responder is almost never broke in this sequence.

 

Rainer Herrmann

Yes I agree that pass is reasonably safe.

 

As for your first question: No. I would never double spades without hearts. The difference is that here it could lead to a 3-3 fit. This won't happen if I double hearts: If partner bids 1♠, I think I can bid 2♣ without overstating my values too much.

[fromageGB]

Yes I agree with X being the best choice here even if it "promises" four. 2♣ would be normal in a 4-card major system, though. Playing 5-card majors, one could also consider 2♦ or pass. Hopefully not 1NT, though.

A couple of points :

 

In this game you do not have thousands of bids available to accurately describe various hands, so I am happy with the explanation (if asked) that double shows 4 spades (definitely standard) even if occasionally partner might not turn out to have 4, having made what she considers the best of possible alternative bids. I think the key thing is that opener raises, or makes his bid whatever it is, on the EXPECTATION that it is 4 spades.

 

1NT is not a bad choice, in my view. Opener may have some spades, they are probably not going to be taking 7 tricks in spades if opener passes, and it is a reasonable contract. My choice is similar - I double as a relay for opener to describe his hand, rebidding 1NT with 12-14 balanced, or rebidding long clubs.

[fromageGB]

The times I post rubbish, it gets trashed too.

You post rubbish? I missed that one - what was it?

[Zelandakh]

Would you also recommend DBL holding ♠xxx ♥AKx ♦Kxxx ♣xxx after

1♣-(1♠)-?

Not that it is particularly relevant but the corrolary to the method I played as a junior (1♣ - (1♥) - X showing diamonds) is that 1NT after this 1♠ overcall also showed diamonds without any thought at all towards a spade stopper. Not a popular way of playing perhaps but it does at least provide a solution to this type of hand.

 

 

You post rubbish? I missed that one - what was it?

Sadly all too frequently. I am sure if I looked back to the bridge posts I made 10 years ago I would be mortally embarassed...but luckily the really old ones are no longer available. B-)

[PhilKing]

Stolen bid doubles FTW.