[sailoranch]

---

Unfavorable at IMPs. Double would be for takeout. Is it right to act?

Thanks for your replies.

[Phil]

Extras and short in their suit? Yes, I would double.

[gszes]

it is hugely unlikley rho has a spade stack and is
waiting to clobber us in 4s. If that is the case I
see little reason to not venture a 4s bid (a slight
overbid) with the hopes that we make it or rho takes
the bait and bids 5d where I would feel a lot more
comfortable with x. Lho having a spade stack is
possible but most wont have the nerve to x 4s and rho
might still bid 5d:))))))))))))))))))))

[SteveMoe]

Partner needs only 6 HCP and 5♠s to free-bid 1♠.

Yes, the opponents are preempting. The ♦A is a negative - they bid to 4♦ without it, so they hold something equivalent in the black suits. I like South's hand but I believe a double of 4♦ needs one more King. Give me Axx AKxx x QJxxx and 4♠ has better chances. I will pass the decision to partner.

[Yu18772]

Close, but I dont see a lot of extras. Bad suit, we are vul and A in their suit is not worth full value.....I understand the dbl, but would need a bit more (switch the colors/move the A♦ to ♠ or ♣ /add a Q♠). As is I would try to pass as smoothly as possible.
Yu

[mikeh]

Sorry, Phil, but I don't see the extras of which you speak.

xxx in spades is a negative whether we declare or defend.

Stiff A is one of the rare holdings on which an A should be downgrade....imagine this hand: Axx AKxx x QJ9xx. Now that is 'extras'.

Partner is a passed hand. We opened 1♣ in 3rd chair at unfavourable....which is not something one normally stretches to do since it is an anti-preempt.....it is easier for them to enter the auction after 1♣ than after pass.

Our source of tricks is QJ9xx.

Partner is still there: he can double to bring us back in, but the auction sure doesn't sound like spades are 5332 around the table.

I pass in tempo.

This may, of course, say more about my advanced age than my hand evaluation.

[rduran1216]

clear double. Pass puts WAY too much pressure on partner to act.

[Phil]

mikeh, on 2012-May-26, 15:37, said:

Sorry, Phil, but I don't see the extras of which you speak.

xxx in spades is a negative whether we declare or defend.

Stiff A is one of the rare holdings on which an A should be downgrade....imagine this hand: Axx AKxx x QJ9xx. Now that is 'extras'.

Partner is a passed hand. We opened 1♣ in 3rd chair at unfavourable....which is not something one normally stretches to do since it is an anti-preempt.....it is easier for them to enter the auction after 1♣ than after pass.

Our source of tricks is QJ9xx.

Partner is still there: he can double to bring us back in, but the auction sure doesn't sound like spades are 5332 around the table.

I pass in tempo.

This may, of course, say more about my advanced age than my hand evaluation.

I am partly buoyed by my opponents tendency to have 10 diamonds and maybe 11. Partner has no diamond wastage and will have five spades or four hearts with most hand patterns. We aren't getting creamed in 4 of a major, and there is a vulnerable game in the balance when partner cannot compete on a semi-balanced 8 count.

I'm not staying fixed on this one.

[phil_20686]

It does not seem right to double to me. The 4 level is quite high, and partner likely can guess that we hold diamond shortage. I would double at the 3 level i guess, but even that is close. Here partner is massively likely to be able to guess that I hold a stiff diamond, so I should not really count that as extras imo. I would expect himm to bid a lot of the time when he has 6 spades anyway, and if he has four hearts and five spades he will normally find a double himself.

[kayin801]

I would X, there's a lot of pretty bad hands for partner that have play for a vul game and I'd rather cooperate with shortness and appropriate lengths in non-diamond suits. Especially 1st seat red there's some hands with 6 spades that partner might not wanna preempt on (style dependent). Also they frequently bid 5♦ over us here, even before partner gets his/her turn, and 5♦X is likely to be a decent spot, certainly better than 4♦ undoubled.

[MrAce]

To be honest i am looking and looking again to this hand to see the extras Phil is talking about. I mean i dont even think this hand is a very good 14 hcp. Make it

Axx
AKxx
x
QJ9xx

then yea, we have an excuse, but with current hand i dont see an exceptional 14 hcp that would DBL at 4 level after already opened.

[han]

Good question and nice discussion so far. Obviously the shape is perfect, so the only question is whether this hand is strong enough. To me it is very close, but I am going to double. The main reason is that it is easy to imagine hands with which partner will pass but where game is quite good. Give him something simple like AQxxx xxx xxx Kx and I would like to be in 4S. Certainly if partner has such a hand playing in 4S is more appealing than defending 4D for 50 a trick.

I am not worried about partner playing me for a stronger hand, that is not an issue. Partner is a passed hand and won't be moving towards slam just because I make a takeout double... at least not my partner. The only question is whether bidding on (or defending 4DX) will be better than defending 4D undoubled (on the hands where partner passes out 4D if we pass, which will be the great majority).

The question of whether this hand has extras seems a little empty to me. This is a 14-count, that's three points more than an 11-count and most would open an 11-count with this shape. Even if you open only 12-counts with this shape, 14 is more than 12. On the other hand, we are certainly far removed from a maximum. So what is extras? I don't think such a discussion leads to anything useful.

If we double and partner passes I expect to do ok most of the time, usually scoring +100, sometimes +300 or minus a game. If partner pulls the double we will convert a plus into a hopeless minus some of the time, some of the time a minus into another minus, and some of the time we score up a gamebonus instead of +50 or +100. Whether doubling is good all depends on the likelyhoods of these possibilities, and they are too hard to estimate.

I like double but I think it is close. One reason I like double is that the top players I like to watch and learn from seem to double more aggressively in those spots than I was used to.

[han]

phil_20686, on 2012-May-27, 14:30, said:

Here partner is massively likely to be able to guess that I hold a stiff diamond, so I should not really count that as extras imo.

If partner has a doubleton diamond then he won't know. But even if it was likely that partner could see our singleton, why should we not evaluate it ourselves? We all have encountered situations in which we could see that partner had to be short, yet he didn't double. Didn't we conclude then that partner probably didn't have much? If I didn't double here, I wouldn't expect my partner to think that I had more than a minimal hand with perfect takeout double shape.

So I think that if we pass now, our passed hand partner won't move as often as you were suggesting in your post.

[han]

MrAce, on 2012-May-29, 01:43, said:

but with current hand i dont see an exceptional 14 hcp that would DBL at 4 level after already opened.

I don't think that it is an exceptional 14-count either, but I don't think our 14-count needs to be exceptional in order to double.

[han]

I am interested if anybody would double holding this hand:

Kxx
Axx
x
AQxxxx

[phil_20686]

han, on 2012-May-29, 05:15, said:

I am interested if anybody would double holding this hand:

Kxx
Axx
x
AQxxxx

I would double with this hand, I think it has more playing strength than the quoted hand. There is no danger of playing in a 43 heart fit, since partner must have 5 spades if he has 4 hearts.

[phil_20686]

han, on 2012-May-29, 05:10, said:

If partner has a doubleton diamond then he won't know. But even if it was likely that partner could see our singleton, why should we not evaluate it ourselves? We all have encountered situations in which we could see that partner had to be short, yet he didn't double. Didn't we conclude then that partner probably didn't have much? If I didn't double here, I wouldn't expect my partner to think that I had more than a minimal hand with perfect takeout double shape.

So I think that if we pass now, our passed hand partner won't move as often as you were suggesting in your post.

On the one hand, I dont particularly disagree. I do think that you will go off quite a lot in 4S opposite that class of hands that would pass 4d, but would bid over the double. KJ9xxx xxx xx xx is an example, and that could be a mountain on a bad day. Then again, what would partner do with AKxxx xxx xxx xx where you would quite like to be in game, even if it is hardly cast iron. But he doesnt need too much to act himself when he has 5 reasonable spades. Its not clear to me that the class of hands where he would pull over dble and game is good, will make up for when he pulls and you have turned a positive into a negative.

Just making the hand xxx AKxx x AQJxx would already be a clear double to me. When partner pulls I would be happy. Here i just dont konw, its easy for partner to lose control before he can set up a club trick etc.

What would you do after 4d pass with AKxxx Qxx xxx xx? would you double now?

[han]

Phil_20686, I agree that the 3316 hand has more playing strength, but it also has less defense. If partner passes (which he definitely will some of the time) then I'd rather have the AK-A plus hand.

For the rest I think our opinions don't differ so much, it is a close call and it is easy to see double work out both well or poorly. Your examples don't really speak for passing though. The 6322 4-count that you gave (I like playing 1C - 1D - 2S as a weak jump shift by the way) doesn't make 4S a good game but on a good day it might make. If it is not a good day then 4D might easily have made.

If partner has AKxxx xxx xxx xx then I think he'd pass if you pass, and I think he should perhaps also pass if you double. The doubler won't have 4 spades, so this hand likely has 2 defensive tricks. On a good day 4DX can go for 500 (yes, I'm expecting my white against red opponents to bid like maniacs, don't you?).

Should partner double holding AKxxx Qxx xxx xx? I think he should not, but then, I am not a believer in the "1C is an anti-preempt" line of reasoning.

[MrAce]

han, on 2012-May-29, 05:12, said:

I don't think that it is an exceptional 14-count either, but I don't think our 14-count needs to be exceptional in order to double.

FYI, i will pass almost all balanced hands if you DBL. The hand you gave AQxxx xxx xxx Kx can be exceptional and well picked. But i am not sure why you think this hand neccesarilly passes 4♦ even if opener passes. But i would bid 4♠ for sure if you doubled.

People seem to ignore that they do not only have 10 card ♦ fit but at least one of them likely has stiff in one of our suits. People just dont jump to 4 level with 5332 hands. Whether that would be clubs or spades, even with the picked hand i dont see anything good coming out of forcing pd to bid or playing 4♦ doubled and offering a game bonus to them with a little to gain even if they go down. And there are other hands too besides this.

I believe when i open this hand i already showed % 90 of my strength.
I believe my pd can figure i am short in diamonds most of the time, though i admit, not neccesarilly.


I am not trying to be a bean counter, as i said change dia A to spade and i would dbl. But in general, in forums, people talking as if pd always know when to pull and when to sit on these doubles, which seems not to be the case at the table. Of course pd will go wrong more often, if we double with this hand and we will also double with the same shape and 19 hcp. ( i am not saying we need 19 hcp to dbl this by any means )

I too, like you, think this is a good hand to discuss.

[han]

I don't understand the following paragraph:

MrAce, on 2012-May-29, 13:56, said:

FYI, i will pass almost all balanced hands if you DBL. The hand you gave AQxxx xxx xxx Kx can be exceptional and well picked. But i am not sure why you think this hand neccesarilly passes 4♦ even if opener passes. But i would bid 4♠ for sure if you doubled.

First you say that you will pass almost all balanced hands, then you give a balanced hand and you say you would bid 4S for sure.

Also, I didn't write that this hand necessarily passes 4D if I pass. Certainly when playing with a partner that opens minors very solidly in third seat (you?) it is more attractive to act than with a partner that frequently opens 1m light in third seat (me!).

Then there is this:

Quote

But in general, in forums, people talking as if pd always know when to pull and when to sit on these doubles, which seems not to be the case at the table. Of course pd will go wrong more often, if we double with this hand and we will also double with the same shape and 19 hcp.

I don't have the impression that your first sentence is aimed at my posts in this thread but rather a general comment. Fair enough then.

Regarding your second point, I am not convinced that doubling with this hand will make it so much harder for partner. He'll bid with offensive hands and pass with defensive hands. Some hands lie on the border and he might do either. What I like about our hand is that besides the fact that we have good shape for being dummy, we also have decent defense with our AK A. I think that double will often work out ok even when partner does not make the optimal decision.