[han]

Why is it that the penalty double advocates always come up with such terrible arguments?

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 05:49, said:

Partner hears our bids, he knows that we hold a weak NT with at most 4 spades, so he need not to sit for 2 Spade X with just 5 or 6 HCPS and no spades. Why should he?

So double is penalty if partner can bring 2 defensive tricks, and if not we run to our non-fit and hope they don't double us? Sounds great!

Quote

With your example hand: xx Kxx AQxx Axxx. I have no reason to compete with 2443 12-14 opposite a say 3424 with 8 HCPS...

You make it sound like Phil will double on any 2443 12-14 count but of course he won't. However you play the double, tyou won't often use it. I think we should only make a takeout double with a nice maximum with a small doubleton spade.

Besides, why would we not compete? We have (at least) half the deck, they have a spade fit and we have a fit somewhere, with sufficient room to find it.

Quote

And why should partner have fewer spades, given the bidding so far?

There is no reason why he should, but he might. Certainly if partner has 2 spades we would like to compete. And he might also have 4 good spades and pass with those spades behind the 2S bidder. Now that sounds like a good opportunity to play for penalties: us with the 14-count and partner with the strong spades behind overcaller!

Quote

After the given bidding, partner rates to hold around 3 spades- with around 20 HCPS and 9 spades, they will outbid you anyway.

This is the worst of your arguments. If we frequently drive them to 3S, that's very good for us, no?

I do not play this double as takeout, but I think that the arguments put forward by Phil are quite convincing. It is almost impossible for us to have a penalty double, but we can still have a hand with which we would like to make a takeout double.

[cherdano]

jillybean, on 2012-May-23, 20:03, said:

Yikes, I'm south here and trying fix to my "I don't double enough at MP" problem. I knew my double was aggressive but I didn't consider it insane.

S.th. you should always ask yourself before doubling is "Do I have a bad surprise for the opponents?" The opponents "know" they are missing AKQ of trumps, so that's not a bad surprise. The only mild surprise is that you have 4 trumps, but with not suit to develop and LHO having 6 trumps there is no future in a forcing defense.

If you had ♠QJT9 instead (with your AK somewhere else), you are making an unexpected trump trick, and double may be more reasonable. QJT9 xx AKxx QJx would be a much much better double.

[Codo]

han, on 2012-May-30, 06:11, said:

Why is it that the penalty double advocates always come up with such terrible arguments?

So double is penalty if partner can bring 2 defensive tricks, and if not we run to our non-fit and hope they don't double us? Sounds great!

He can have both? No defensive tricks and no fit? Sounds like a great double.

Quote

You make it sound like Phil will double on any 2443 12-14 count but of course he won't. However you play the double, tyou won't often use it. I think we should only make a takeout double with a nice maximum with a small doubleton spade.

Actually, I copied his statement and did not comment which hands a suitable for a double and which are not. Maybe you are reading between the lines and not what I wrote?

Quote

Besides, why would we not compete? We have (at least) half the deck, they have a spade fit and we have a fit somewhere, with sufficient room to find it.

They have a fit? Where exactly? In the given hand they do not have a fit- at least not in spades...And even if- it is not sure that two semibalanced hands with half the deck in a 4-4 fit will produce a good score at 3 in a minor- espacially not at this vul. You do not even need to believe in the Lott to know this.

Quote

is the worst of your arguments. If we frequently drive them to 3S, that's very good for us, no?

If we do drive them to 3 Spades this may be a winner- unless they do not punish us too often in 3 of our suit of course. Overcallers partner has no big fit so far but seems to have some points- why shouldn't he try for the occasional 500 out of nothing if this is right? We already gave him a road map to our hands, why should he choose 3 spade if this is bad instead of passing/doubling?

Quote

I do not play this double as takeout, but I think that the arguments put forward by Phil are quite convincing. It is almost impossible for us to have a penalty double, but we can still have a hand with which we would like to make a takeout double.

I do not play often enough with opponents like the west guy, so I agree that this double is a rare bird- oh wait, I said so before. But do you mind to show me hands where you bid this way in reality and had a take out double after the given start? I cannot remember this had ever happened at a table I played.

[cherdano]

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 06:51, said:

I do not play often enough with opponents like the west guy, so I agree that this double is a rare bird- oh wait, I said so before. But do you mind to show me hands where you bid this way in reality and had a take out double after the given start? I cannot remember this had ever happened at a table I played.

What do you rebid over 1D (1S) X (P) with 2=3=4=4 and two small spades? This is not a rhetorical question.
I would rebid 1N and be happy to reopen with a takeout double. Maybe you would bid 2♥ or 2♣?

[han]

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 06:51, said:

They have a fit? Where exactly? In the given hand they do not have a fit- at least not in spades...And even if- it is not sure that two semibalanced hands with half the deck in a 4-4 fit will produce a good score at 3 in a minor- espacially not at this vul. You do not even need to believe in the Lott to know this.

The current bridgebase forums does not keep all the quoted posts so it is easy to lose track of what is being discussed. You are reacting here to a piece I wrote about doubling with a 2-3-4-4 shape where partner is 3-4-2-4. In that case, the opponents have 8 spades.

[phil_20686]

For the record I would dble with almost any t/o hand with xx spades, and probably some maximums with Ax spades.

Just to stir up the pot: codo, how would you analyse this same auction if the 1NT rebid was 15-17. Your argument seems to boil down to: I would never make a t/o double, so its pen by default.

If the 1NT bid showed 15-17, you really could have a penalty double in your own hand, but t/o if anything seems even more clearly indicated.

[ArtK78]

South should pass out 2♠. Against rational opponents, there is no reason why South should believe that 2♠ is going down.

Many years ago, I believe it was Sheinwold who wrote about doubles like these (if I am wrong about who to attribute this to, please feel free to correct me). Essentially, Sheinwold said that the best doubles of trump contracts are those that contain surprise defensive tricks. The AKQ of spades are not surprise defensive tricks - the 2♠ bidder knew he was missing them when he bid 2♠. If you held JT9x of spades you have a surprise defensive trick against an 8 or 9 card fit.

In any case, I would be happy to defend 2♠ undoubled, and I would not be surprised if it made. Besides, since the opps are nonvul, you are doubling for a 2 trick set (changing +50 to +100 should not matter much). A two trick set is highly unlikely, but making is not out of the question.

Edit: I did not see the second page of posts before I posted this. I see that cherdano made the same point that I made.

[Codo]

@ Arend,, I would rebid 2 clubs if this does not promise extras- 2 Heart otherwise. (I would like to play a style where 1 NT does not promise a stopper, but I cannot convince my partners to do this....)

@ Phil: Default is: All doubles are for take out. Even after opening 1 NT, you usually reopen with a double with a 2344. But after we bid NT over oponents suit bid, we do play penalty doubles. This may not be the best solution, but it is at least an easy one.
I would like to double 2 Spade with AQxx,xxx,AKxxx,x or similar hands- at least at mps. I guess that these hands are not as unlikely as the given one in the OP (on which I had not doubled at all, see side one). I believe (and that is why I would like to double for penalty) that with these hands a set is likely enough to justify the risk, while a possible gain when competing with 2344 may be eaten by the occasional desasters. Of course nearly anybody else believes that it is the other way round.

What to do while playing a weak NT? I have no idea. I do not even know what 1♦ (1♠) x (pass) 1 NT shows. Is this always the strong NT? Or could it be something around AQxx,xxx,AKxxx,x?
If 1 NT already showed the strong NT, what did partners pass show? Had he doubled with f.e. the hand from the op? I cannot answer your question without knowing what our last two bids showed.

And one more question for you: If you play your style, what would
1 ♦ (1♠) X (pass)
1 NT (2♠) pass (pass)
3 ♣

show?

[han]

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 08:49, said:

@ Arend,, I would rebid 2 clubs if this does not promise extras- 2 Heart otherwise. (I would like to play a style where 1 NT does not promise a stopper, but I cannot convince my partners to do this....)

I don't see how it is playable to play a style where 1NT promises a stopper.. what do your partners want to rebid with a 3-3-4-3 shape and 3 small spades?

[han]

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 08:49, said:

If you play your style, what would
1 ♦ (1♠) X (pass)
1 NT (2♠) pass (pass)
3 ♣

show?

Schizophrenia.

[Codo]

han, on 2012-May-30, 09:07, said:

I don't see how it is playable to play a style where 1NT promises a stopper.. what do your partners want to rebid with a 3-3-4-3 shape and 3 small spades?

Oh, we always double for penalty to avoid this problem. These lousy newbies who double for take out will have the same problem after any take out double, so take out doubles are surely not playable. There will be no solution for this amazing problem. Thank you for your valuable input. And "stoppers are for losers" is so common since the days of Culbertson that I am the only one to face this problem...
Any idea what you will do after 1♦ (2♠) X (pass) with 3343? If you find a solution for this problem, you may find one for the other one too.