[jillybean]

---

[bill1157]

100% to south. south should be pleased to pass out 2♠

[wyman]

I would have sat for 2S as south. I don't understand why north pulled the X (unless NS explicitly play this as t/o, but I don't really think they should assume this without discussion, since south has ostensibly shown spades), since he has J10x trumps and an ace; he could definitely have less. And I don't understand how south can sit for 3C when he at least has a known 7-card fit in hearts.

Blame all 'round the table on this one.

[HeartA]

bill1157, on 2012-May-23, 16:34, said:

100% to south. south should be pleased to pass out 2♠

90% to North. North's double already showed ♣ and ♥. He doesn't have extra length/strength to bid ♣.
South's 1NT and double showed good ♠, North should be happy to pass.

[aguahombre]

The neg double did not show both hearts and clubs; it showed hearts.

South's double of 2S would only be takeout for the "every double is takeout" crowd, so he/she gets blame if she knew her partner was one of those. Otherwise, the double is merely greedy.

North apparently fits into the crowd mentioned above. And if North is also in the minority group which believes he/she already showed hearts and clubs, then pulling the double to show the same thing again is worse yet.

[the hog]

South's double is aggressive, but North's pull says he does not want to play with South anymore. Trust your partner.

[655321]

aguahombre, on 2012-May-23, 17:32, said:

Otherwise, the double is merely greedy.

the hog, on 2012-May-23, 17:56, said:

South's double is aggressive

South has 3 tricks in defence, if North, who wasn't strong enough to bid over 2♠, also has 3 defensive tricks then 2♠ will be one down.
The double is not greedy or aggressive, it is truly insane.

[MrAce]

655321, on 2012-May-23, 18:04, said:

South has 3 tricks in defence, if North, who wasn't strong enough to bid over 2♠, also has 3 defensive tricks then 2♠ will be one down.
The double is not greedy or aggressive, it is truly insane.

This !

[Yu18772]

655321, on 2012-May-23, 18:04, said:

South has 3 tricks in defence, if North, who wasn't strong enough to bid over 2♠, also has 3 defensive tricks then 2♠ will be one down.
The double is not greedy or aggressive, it is truly insane.

Ditto

There is not enough blame to give both north and south what they deserve....
Yu

[SteveMoe]

South's doubl is poorly judged for reasons mentioned above. However I do not think North should pull. Discipline here means if South wanted to play 3♣ they would have bid it instead of doubling. Full breakdown shared by both partners.

[jillybean]

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.

[neilkaz]

Bad X at IMPs..poor risk/reward ratio. Quite pushy at MPs as it is quite conceivable that the can make it if N doesn't have his ♠ holding.

North has a trivially easy pass. You bid NT showing stop(s)..he has JTx in their suit. Your side has at least half the deck in high cards. You passed up two chances to bid ♣ after his negX. Simply awful to not pass and N should envision that the opps may be on a 6-0 split.

[Codo]

You bid 1 NT then X. This is never a take out, so north should gladly accept the nice score.

But even if you did not double enough, here you doubled too much. To call it insane is an overbid, but a small one.

[ahydra]

The X is very tempting holding AKQx in spades , but you've got no source of tricks. You can't even force declarer productively unless North shows up with something like AKxxx in diamonds. So they'll probably make 2S, just losing a couple of side suit tricks and your three top spades. (If anyone is insane, it's West bidding 2S on six cards to the 9. What's wrong with a double of 1NT?)

Anyway, I'm blaming North for pulling a penalty X for no reason.

ahydra

[Cyberyeti]

Is it really fanciful for pard to have xxx, xxxx, Ax, Axxx and for you to be taking 2 diamonds, a club, diamond ruff, club ruff and 3 more trumps, hell ♠Jxx you even get another one ?

I think if the X is pens, then N must pass, if it isn't then S can't make the call.

[phil_20686]

I think double from south should be t/o on this auction. It just seems implausible to me that south can have enough defence to warrant a penalty double opposite a 1 level negative double. North has only shown a seven count or so and south is under the bidder.

On the other hand, a hand like xx Kxx AQxx Axxx seems like it might want to compete. For me 1N only shows a balanced 12-14, I do not worry too much about stops in this position, so it seems plausible that I might want to compete to the three level when the opps have not even made an invitation to game.

Further, it seems clear that north needs a t/o double, what else would you want to do with a 1435 shape and a decent hand? Playing a pen x opposite a t/o double seems wrong.

PS: wests 2S bid is absurd.

PPS: To answer the OP, this seems like more of a misunderstanding than an ATB. North clearly thought south made a t/o dble. South clearly thought this was penalties. I am in the t/o camp, but appreciate that if I was playing with an `old school' player this would be penalties.

[gszes]

with a 3c bid available there is no reason the
s hand cannot x 2s for penalty. Is this the
right hand for it?? hmmm you have 3 tricks and
you are expecting your p to also take 3 tricks
when they could not take any action over 2s. This
does not compute. This hand you are lucky and can
set 2s but just imagine e hand with the club A vs
the totally uselss KJ hearts. 2s rolls. This is
a game of % so the penalty x really need to show
a hand worth 4 defensive tricks to be reasonable.

AKQx xx Axxx xxx is a much more reasonable penalty x
that has little chance of going wrong (that means
sometimes they will make). Think about the bidding and
you will realize a penalty x here is a poor % plan
better saved for a hand where you need a top to win
an event---even then you better be sure you need it.

[Codo]

phil_20686, on 2012-May-25, 12:00, said:

I think double from south should be t/o on this auction. It just seems implausible to me that south can have enough defence to warrant a penalty double opposite a 1 level negative double. North has only shown a seven count or so and south is under the bidder.

On the other hand, a hand like xx Kxx AQxx Axxx seems like it might want to compete. For me 1N only shows a balanced 12-14, I do not worry too much about stops in this position, so it seems plausible that I might want to compete to the three level when the opps have not even made an invitation to game.

Further, it seems clear that north needs a t/o double, what else would you want to do with a 1435 shape and a decent hand? Playing a pen x opposite a t/o double seems wrong.

PS: wests 2S bid is absurd.

PPS: To answer the OP, this seems like more of a misunderstanding than an ATB. North clearly thought south made a t/o dble. South clearly thought this was penalties. I am in the t/o camp, but appreciate that if I was playing with an `old school' player this would be penalties.

But why do you need a take out over a weak take out from partner? If he promised both suits, you may simply bid one of them. if he promised just hearts, why do you want to look for a 3 level contract with no secured fit and red on white? This double is always a very rare bird and I doubt that I have met it at the table very often- did you? But the reasons for a take out are not more convincing as the reasons for a penalty.

[phil_20686]

Codo, on 2012-May-30, 05:03, said:

why do you want to look for a 3 level contract with no secured fit and red on white? But the reasons for a take out are not more convincing as the reasons for a penalty.

The argument you are making against a t/o double is the same argument against a penalty double. We are agreed 100% that partner needs a t/o double, so when you are making your pen x, you presumably have 4 good spades, so it is extremely likely that partner passed with 0-2 spades, in which case he didnt have the 8-9 HCP he needs for a t/o double. Making a pen x at the two level when you are not known to have a the balance, and in fact may have considerably less, does not seem sensible.

Moreover, if you play a penalty double here, then you leave partner with no way to make a penalty double, as his dble is t/o, and if he has a penalty pass you cannot have a pen x. Further, partner has already expressed some tolerance for playing at the 3 level, as he must have been prepared to play there if east had raised to two spades over the double.

I tend to think that you should dble two spades for t/o with any hand that would dble after 2s p p, which is pretty much any opening hand with two spades. Here you have almost identical information - partner must have some values, rho does not have a good fit or a good hand.

Why do you think this auction should be different from 1c (2s) p p, for example, when you are likely to be happy to make a t/o double with some 2(443).

[Codo]

phil_20686, on 2012-May-30, 05:15, said:

The argument you are making against a t/o double is the same argument against a penalty double. We are agreed 100% that partner needs a t/o double, so when you are making your pen x, you presumably have 4 good spades, so it is extremely likely that partner passed with 0-2 spades, in which case he didnt have the 8-9 HCP he needs for a t/o double. Making a pen x at the two level when you are not known to have a the balance, and in fact may have considerably less, does not seem sensible.

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?

Quote

I tend to think that you should dble two spades for t/o with any hand that would dble after 2s p p, which is pretty much any opening hand with two spades. Here you have almost identical information - partner must have some values, rho does not have a good fit or a good hand.

Why do you think this auction should be different from 1c (2s) p p, for example, when you are likely to be happy to make a t/o double with some 2(443).

Because my 1 NT rebid limited the hand in several ways.

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... And why should partner have fewer spades, given the bidding so far?
After the given bidding, partner rates to hold around 3 spades- with around 20 HCPS and 9 spades, they will outbid you anyway.