what should this double show?

[dickiegera]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa6haq84dajt74c52&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n2hdp]133|200|2 hearts is Cappalletti showing Hearts and a minor.[/hv]

 

 

 

What should double mean?

 

and

 

 

what should South bid?

[mikeh]

There is no 'should' in these situations. There are two questions:

 

1. what have we agreed it means, and

 

2. what is the optimal use

 

Of course, for casual partners there is the 3rd question: in the absence of agreement, what is standard? The answer to which may vary from country to country, and with the level of knowledge of partner.

 

 

One can of course play the double as penalty, which was the traditional meaning for decades, and is still the one some players use.

 

Most good players and many not-so-good but interested players use negative doubles here. It is a very sensible method, but it is important that the doubler promise some values, and not merely a desire to compete. Nor should doubler be void in their suit.

 

Opener is entitled to convert, which is why it makes sense that doubler have enough values that the partnership knows that, at least in principle, it 'owns the hand'. This need not be game-force: just don't do it with a bad 5 count B-)

 

If one has had no discussion, and partner is not very experienced, and as far as you know doesn't play often with experienced players, it should be penalty. However, one has a clue here. More accurately, two clues.

 

One is that we hare looking at a heart suit that makes it improbable that partner has as much as Hxx, without which he shouldn't be making a penalty double. However, some opps think it is winning bridge to bid on Jxxxx, and the fact that they play capp over our 1N says that they are probably not very good (capp is a terrible method compared to more modern approaches).

 

The second clue is that RHO passed. Surely RHO has either long spades or at least 3-3 in the minors, if partner has a double of hearts?

 

So I would guess that partner has a takeout double.

 

That doesn't end the question. Passing is a big position. I'd like to have chunkier hearts, and shorter diamonds and a club card. I'd also like to be 4 inches taller, 30 years younger, and with more hair. Oh well.

 

I am going to bid 3D. We can still get to 3N when right to do so.

[pescetom]

(capp is a terrible method compared to more modern approaches).

 

Cappelletti (sic, OP) certainly gets the first two bids the wrong way round, but otherwise is it so terrible?

What would you advocate as a more modern approach - Suction, if allowed?

[helene_t]

If you play strong NT, I prefer double to be take-out:

- Opps are under no pressure to bid so they will only bid on reasonable suits/distribution

- Opps are not in constructive mode so we are. We need the negative double as part of our constructive toolkit.

- Opener can usually find a reopening double if responder really wants to penalize

 

If you play weak NT, I prefer penalty, for the same reason as why you play penalty double after a preempt:

- Opps are under pressure to bid when they have values, even if their suit/distribution is not quite good enough.

- Opener should (almost) never reopen after a weak NT

 

Transfer doubles ("Stolen bid"), here showing 5+ spades, is thrown upon by teachers and advanced players, but actually I don't think it's that bad. It's easy and versatile, and it is more important to rightside the contract after an intervention than without intervention. Obviously you shouldn't play this if you play weak NT as you will never be able to penalize opps.

[Cyberyeti]

Over a strong NT I consider that X should be not dissimilar to 1(short)m-2♥-X, a 2 level take out double, usually 4 spades, no particular guarantees about the minors.

[dsLawsd]

2/1 Max Hardy style uses the call to show a raise and denies the ability to use Lebensohl.

[gordontd]

I'd expect it to be takeout, and I'd take it out to 3D.

[Tramticket]

I would have opened 1♦, whatever NT range I was playing. The hand is semi-balanced and I'm not against opening 1NT with this shape if the hand is suitable, but I have most of my values in my suits and my values look very playable in a suit contract. I would not be ashamed if forced to rebid 2♦.

 

Turning to the question asked: I play a weak NT and for us, a double in this situation would be take-out, promising invitational values (say 11-12). There are times that I wish I were playing penalty doubles (particularly at MPs. It is often in a club setting against weaker opponents that I find that they have over-called on a nine-count in a broken five-card suit headed by the jack - this is when I wish that I was playing penalty doubles! Also:

 

If you play weak NT, I prefer penalty, for the same reason as why you play penalty double after a preempt:

- Opps are under pressure to bid when they have values, even if their suit/distribution is not quite good enough.

- Opener should (almost) never reopen after a weak NT

 

Helene_T makes some good points here.

 

But on balance, against good quality opponents, I find a take-out double to be more useful.

 

Maybe a hesitation followed by the double should have a different meaning to a fast confident double ... it seems to work for orther people.

[ahydra]

I play this as takeout (unless using LEB when it's penalty). I would bid 3D. Pass is too much of a position at matchpoints as you need 2 off to beat 110 in 3D which seems unlikely, and at IMPs it's insane.

 

FWIW I would not have opened 1NT, the hand is too suit-oriented with three aces and I have no qualms about rebidding AJ10xx. (I feel like the strong NT is very much abused these days, people open it on pretty much anything that has 13-17 points with no 7-card suit, and partner just bids something and hopes to make it)

 

ahydra

[pescetom]

Maybe a hesitation followed by the double should have a different meaning to a fast confident double ... it seems to work for orther people.

 

My opponent last night simply folded his cards and made a stern face before doubling, his partner duly passed.

[maartenxq]

This is 1 ♦ and not 1 NT. You have 2 or 3 flaws: wrong distribution, minimum count and trump oriented hand. At least 1 flaw too much. Imo this dbl should be business. I can see however that p thinks differently. As no vulnerability is given I pass and hope for the best. I can stand any lead from p and do not have a good bid available. 3 NT could have no play at all when p stops clubs only once.

 

Maarten Baltussen

[kenberg]

Since I totally agree with mikeh maybe this is a wasted response. We should have discussed it beforehand but if we have not then we have to make our best guess. Looking at these hearts, I assume partner intended it as take-out. For now I bid 3D, later I discuss it. I think a lot of people play that after 1NT - (2C) a double is Stayman and the rest of the system is on, after 1NT - (2D) double is for take-out with emphasis on the majors, and after 1NT - (2M) a double is for penalties. I am not prepared to argue for or against this, but I think it is common.

 

As to opening this 1D or 1NT, i probably go with the 1NT. I'm not delighted, but the hand is, imo, not strong enough for a sequence such as 1D-1S-2H so I will just go with 1NT and hope for the best. I would not have a fit a partner, holding this hand, started this with 1D and then rebid 1NT after a 1S response by me but obviously the hand is a bit heavy for this so we might well miss a game that way. I open 1NT.

 

As to the slow versus fast double: Long ago a newer player was asking about the meaning of a card by third hand on the opening lead. I explained that if the card is played quickly it shows attitude, if slowly it is count, and if very slowly it is suit preference. An experienced player overheard this and strongly reprimanded me with the observation that the person who had asked m might not understand I was joking.

[msjennifer]

Sir, I shall open this hand 1D and not 1NT for obvious reasons.Without a previous agreement the double in the given sequence is considered a penalty double.(LHO may psych 2H holding a long club suit.) That apart quite a few players play it as a sort of transfer to spades.Frankly ,I have never come across anyone playing it as a NEGATIVE double yet with an unknown partner. As some of the other comments reflect one should have already discussed such an intervention earlier.I feel nobody uses this double as a Directional Asking Bid.Lastly,I am not ashamed of bidding 2D if partner responds 1S over my 1D.

[gordontd]

This is 1 ♦ and not 1 NT. You have 2 or 3 flaws: wrong distribution, minimum count and trump oriented hand. At least 1 flaw too much. Imo this dbl should be business. I can see however that p thinks differently. As no vulnerability is given I pass and hope for the best. I can stand any lead from p and do not have a good bid available. 3 NT could have no play at all when p stops clubs only once.

 

Maarten Baltussen

What will you rebid if partner responds 1S?

[Tramticket]

What will you rebid if partner responds 1S?

 

(In an Acol context), I would open 1D and rebid 2D over a 1S response, pass 1NT and rebid 2NT over 2C.

 

I would like to have a six-card suit for the diamond rebid, but a five-card suit headed by three honours is a reasonable second best.

[mikeh]

Opening 1N with this shape and cards is, to my mind, clearly correct.

 

2=4=5=2 and 2=4=2=5 are for me the only permissible 54 shapes for 1N, and I will open 1N with 4=5 reds more often than 4=5 rounded.

 

There are several reasons for this approach.

 

Firstly, having to rebid 2C on 5 is not uncommon. For example, with 1=4=3=5 and partner responding 1S, then unless one permits a 1N rebid with a stiff (which has merit, but which we don't do in my partnerships) one is forced to rebid 2C on normal opening values.

 

So 1C then 2C on 2=4=2=5 is not a distortion. I would open 1N on that only with Hx in both doubletons and the right hcp range.

 

4=5 reds is more difficult, because in my partnerships we find it useful to be able to show 6 diamonds for the 2D rebid. We find it increases our accuracy, while also making it safer for partner to pass 2D with a misfit.

 

I might open 1D with, say, 2=4=5=2 and no semblance of a stopper in either black.

 

Otherwise, 1N seems normal.

 

Bear in mind that one of the attributes of a good bidding system is to allow opener, in particular, to define his or her hand as soon as possible, not merely in shape but also in hcp.

 

Having one open 1D and then rebid 2D on hands ranging from 5-7 diamonds and with as much as 16 hcp when with a 5 card suit, is counter to that approach. 1N, while imperfect on shape, because I can never show the diamond suit as a 5 card holding, is the least distortion while providing the clearest, most precise information about all other aspects of the hand.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa6haq84dajt74c52&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n2h(Cappalletti !H and m)dp]100|200|

dickiegera'asks 'What should double mean? and what should South bid?'

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

IMO double by the 1N opener and the 1N responder should both be competitive

-- roughly T/O -- with penalty tolerance..

(usually at least a doubleton ♥ unless you are 4144).

Now, I rank

1, Pass = PEN

2. 2N = NAT

3. 3D = NAT.

[/hv]

[msjennifer]

This is 1 ♦ and not 1 NT. You have 2 or 3 flaws: wrong distribution, minimum count and trump oriented hand. At least 1 flaw too much. Imo this dbl should be business. I can see however that p thinks differently. As no vulnerability is given I pass and hope for the best. I can stand any lead from p and do not have a good bid available. 3 NT could have no play at all when p stops clubs only once.

 

Maarten Baltussen

Sir,by no means this hand is a minimum hand.5/4 with two very decent suits ,6 controls,15 HCP(much more than a flimsy 11 pointer) and last BUT NOT THE LEAST just 6 losers as played in either of the two fitting suits.Take away the SA and put SQ there and one would still open the hand.