Greater of Evils

[davesayc]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj63ht9dqt72caq2&n=st9752hakq3d3cj95&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1cd1d4hppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Result down 4

 

Which was the greater evil:

 

My partner's dbl

My leap to game

My failure to bid Spades

[smerriman]

South has the simplest pass in the world, so what happens after that is completely moot.

 

(Though I wouldn't have bid either hearts *or* spades as North for that matter, preferring 2♣).

[DavidKok]

Rather than assessing the blame, both North and South should look for ways to improve. None of their actions were indicated, perhaps even including the first pass.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=skj63ht9dqt72caq2&n=st9752hakq3d3cj95&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1cd1d4hppp]266|200|

davesayc 'Result down 4. Which was the greater evil:

My partner's dbl

My leap to game

My failure to bid Spades

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

Agree with SMerriman and DavidKok. North should bid ♠ before ♥; or even better offer a choice with 2♣/2♦. South's double was even worse[/hv]

[sfi]

Rather than assessing the blame, both North and South should look for ways to improve. None of their actions were indicated, perhaps even including the first pass.

To be fair, the last pass looks like the best N-S call.

[Winstonm]

I have to rate the poor choices in this order:

 

1) the double

2) the failure to bid spades (proper bid is 2c)

[mikeh]

1. The double is silly beyond belief. Minimal hcp, a passed hand partner, and utterly unprepared for the most likely response, being some number of hearts. Double is a sign of a beginner at work.

 

 

Never, ever make minimum takeout doubles of a minor when short in a major. This should be an inviolate rule.

 

Contrary to what a lot of bad players seem to believe, there is no rule in bridge that says one cannot pass with opening values once the opponents start bidding.

 

2. 4H is obscene. There was a saying popular when I began playing many years ago: length before strength.

 

It’s as valid now as it was then. BID YOUR LONG SUIT FIRST if you’re going to bid a suit.

 

As it happens, I wouldn’t bid either major. With a maximum pass and length in both majors I make what I consider to be the obvious bid: 2C. A cuebid is a one round force, typically promising about 11+ hcp. My side stiff, my AKQx in hearts, my fifth spade and my being a passed hand make the cuebid the standout choice.

 

Note that we might end up in a 4-4 heart fit and miss a 5-4 spade fit. However, sometimes that won’t matter. On other layouts the 4=4 may play better than the 5=4. Most important, any bid of any number is spades is just wrong.

 

1S shows 0-8 hcp (if 8, then a soft hand). 2S shows 8 to 10 hcp. This is not a 10 point hand given that we are almost always going to have a fit in one or both majors. The only exceptions would be a very strong hand with long diamonds or a notrump hand worth 19+ hcp (shown by doubling and then bidding notrump).

 

3S is either semi-preemptive (my preferred style) or very invitational with interest only in spades. We have interest in both majors.

 

This is a great hand opposite an actual takeout double. Picture AQxx Jxxx Axxx x, which is a minimum double of 1C. On a great day you make 12 tricks, but obviously you’re not bidding slam, and you’re usually not making it anyway.

 

Bid 2C then raise partner’s major…I’d raise spades to game but 2H only to 3H, highly invitational.

 

Both players need to read a basic book on bidding, especially on takeout doubles and how to respond to them.

 

Knowing when to double and, to an even greater extent, how to respond to a double are two important signs that the player has progressed beyond the novice stage

 

Don’t despair: the best players in the world were beginners once. The key is to learn from ones mistakes. Posting here, provided you learn who knows what he or she is talking about, is an excellent step.

[AL78]

1. The double is silly beyond belief. Minimal hcp, a passed hand partner, and utterly unprepared for the most likely response, being some number of hearts. Double is a sign of a beginner at work.

 

I have met plenty of club players who are not beginners and TOX just to show an opening hand, so it is more widespread than you think.

[eagles123]

I have met plenty of club players who are not beginners and TOX just to show an opening hand, so it is more widespread than you think.

 

a TOX double on this hand is a beginner level bid, even if someone has been playing 50 years, if they double with this, either they've missorted their hand or their bidding is still at a beginner's level.

[nullve]

It’s as valid now as it was then. BID YOUR LONG SUIT FIRST if you’re going to bid a suit.

?

[mikeh]

?

What don’t you understand?

 

Obviously context matters, but I wasn’t discussing auctions such as 1H (p) ? Where responder has, say, KJxx xx Qxxxxx x….where the bid up your long suit first is overridden by the requirement that one have a certain level of hcp in order to bid 2/1.

 

I was discussing responding to (1m) x (p) with 5=4 majors.

 

Of course, if you read my post, you’d know that I suggest a cuebid, rather than bidding either major

[nullve]

What don’t you understand?

 

Obviously context matters, but I wasn’t discussing auctions such as 1H (p) ? Where responder has, say, KJxx xx Qxxxxx x….where the bid up your long suit first is overridden by the requirement that one have a certain level of hcp in order to bid 2/1.

 

I was discussing responding to (1m) x (p) with 5=4 majors.

Ok, np.

[steve2005]

I have met plenty of club players who are not beginners and TOX just to show an opening hand, so it is more widespread than you think.

And they are all wrong!

 

Anyone who doubles on this type of hand needs to check off the box "minimum off-shape take-out doubles" on their ACBL cc but of course none of them do.

Someone has taught them to double on all 13 pt hands.

This is just wrong you also have to have 3-card support for all unbid suits unless you are very strong!

[steve2005]

1. The double is silly beyond belief. Minimal hcp, a passed hand partner, and utterly unprepared for the most likely response, being some number of hearts. Double is a sign of a beginner at work.

Double is an off-shape minimum take-out double. This is something that ethically needs to be disclosed which NOBODY does!

 

A potentional alternative to passing is 1♠.

This hand meets the requirements for a 4-card major overcall from Mike Lawrence's book "Overcalls"

[johnu]

1. The double is silly beyond belief. Minimal hcp, a passed hand partner, and utterly unprepared for the most likely response, being some number of hearts. Double is a sign of a beginner at work.

In defense of beginners, the many times world champion Blue Team used offshape HCP based takeout doubles for years. They were "smart" enough to stop using them when screens started to be required.

[mikeh]

Double is an off-shape minimum take-out double. This is something that ethically needs to be disclosed which NOBODY does!

 

A potentional alternative to passing is 1♠.

This hand meets the requirements for a 4-card major overcall from Mike Lawrence's book "Overcalls"

It’s unplayable absent illegal communication. Oh, one may get away with it many times, but there are two downsides to it, one pretty well universally understood and th3 other usually overlooked.

 

The first is that advancer may make an awkward response…see this thread for an example.

 

The second is that partner, if aware of the use of such doubles, may be far too conservative on hands where, in fact, they have a great fit.

 

Say (1S) x (4S)….you hold long clubs, a weak but shapely hand. If partner can be counted on to hold 3+ clubs, you have an easy 5C save but if he could be, say, 2=4=5=2, 5C could be ugly. Which way do you want to have your bad board? Pass when declarer will rightly play your partner for most of the high cards or save and take a phantom or go for a number?

 

The only qualification is for those playing ELC, in which a double of 1M may be based on the other major (almost always 4 cards) and longer diamonds….they ‘correct’ a club advance by partner to diamonds without implying extra values.

 

Personally, while ELC can look wonderful when the right hands/auctions come up, I think the idea is very seriously flawed, especially for imp players.

 

As Johnu notes, the Blue Team stopped playing their strange doubles after the introduction of screens…the inference to be drawn is glaringly obvious.

[Winstonm]

In defense of beginners, the many times world champion Blue Team used offshape HCP based takeout doubles for years. They were "smart" enough to stop using them when screens started to be required.

I actually played this for awhile where double was any 12-count and responses were exclusion bids. This led to some odd auctions: 1D-X-P-2C

P-2D-P-P

P

[nullve]

I actually played this for awhile where double was any 12-count and responses were exclusion bids.

Exclusion advances to double of one-of-a-suit were also part of Roman Club at some point.

[AL78]

And they are all wrong!

 

Anyone who doubles on this type of hand needs to check off the box "minimum off-shape take-out doubles" on their ACBL cc but of course none of them do.

Someone has taught them to double on all 13 pt hands.

This is just wrong you also have to have 3-card support for all unbid suits unless you are very strong!

 

I completely agree, and it is something that is drummed into the beginners at my club. Some people just can't stand passing with values even when it is right, so they play this TOX shows an opening hand. You can see them fidgeting awkwardly when their partner responds in their doubleton or singleton.

[mycroft]

and when playing with a partner who has insisted they pass these hands, see them fidgeting awkwardly when they have it and really want to double...

[barmar]

And they are all wrong!

 

Anyone who doubles on this type of hand needs to check off the box "minimum off-shape take-out doubles" on their ACBL cc but of course none of them do.

Note that ACBL made this non-alertable many years ago.

 

The problem is that most of the people who make these doubles don't even realize that they're off-shape. They've either forgotten or were never taught that T/O doubles imply certain shapes, not just opening values.

 

This style seems to be increasingly popular, maybe as a necessary defense to light openings. For some reason, they don't result in disasters like this one often enough for players to learn not to do it.

[DavidKok]

To the best of my knowledge these light offshape doubles are strong against Precision-type systems, but fare worse against natural bidding systems. Personally I attribute their popularity more to ease of memory ("if you have an opening hand, double" is very satisfying and easy to remember when just learning the game) than to effectiveness.

[Winstonm]

Exclusion advances to double of one-of-a-suit were also part of Roman Club at some point.

 

This was in Oklahoma City, and we had a older kibitzer - Chuck - who was enraptured by the Roman System so to humor him we let him tell us how he thought it should go and adopted the double and exclusion part just for fun. It was remarkably effective. But then we only played it in about 3 sessions at the local club before the director asked us not to play it anymore so long term we have no data on how good or bad it really wood be.

[pescetom]

To the best of my knowledge these light offshape doubles are strong against Precision-type systems, but fare worse against natural bidding systems. Personally I attribute their popularity more to ease of memory ("if you have an opening hand, double" is very satisfying and easy to remember when just learning the game) than to effectiveness.

 

Around here they were near universal until a few years ago, and yet most bidding systems here are basically natural. Any convention played reasonably well will work, even if out of its context (I imagine that strength-based doubles originated playing Rubber for money, where they make more sense than at MP).

[blackshoe]

Someone has taught them to double on all 13 pt hands.

More likely someone taught them that they need an opening hand to make a takeout double, and they misunderstood what they were taught.