[diana_eva]

This deal was played in one of those stars exp +++ team matches on bbo.

---

Should East double 4d for the lead? How close is it?

Spoiler

None of the tables doubled 4d and contract made. One of the players declaring thought it was a clearcut lead directing x. I thought pass was OK. Just curious how experts see it.

Full deal here:

---

[CSGibson]

 diana_eva, on 2012-September-25, 00:16, said:

This deal was played in one of those stars exp +++ team matches on bbo.

---

Should East double 4d for the lead? How close is it?

Spoiler

None of the tables doubled 4d and contract made. One of the players declaring thought it was a clearcut lead directing x. I thought pass was OK. Just curious how experts see it.

Full deal here:

---

If east makes a lead directing double, then it gives N-S a chance to right side the contract (along with possible XX action). I would not do it personally. If my hand was much weaker overall, it would be more tempting.

[Zelandakh]

Switch one of West's clubs to a diamond and the minor suit queens between N-S. Is it still clear for East to double for a ♦ lead?

[Codo]

AS 4 ♦ obviously promised the queen, the double is clearcut.
If the opponents play another system, where 4 ♦ just shows hearts, pass is clearcut too.

[diana_eva]

lol

ok, thanks

[ahydra]

My partner made a couple of "interesting" lead-directing overcalls the other day. First was on AJ9 (yep, just AJ9). Naturally declarer scored her king and ten when I led the suit twice.

The second was on a void! (The idea being to get a ruff against a suit contract, but when they finished in 3NT I of course led small from Q10xx, everyone starts laughing, and declarer wins with the 7. Thankfully I don't think it cost)

Holding all those AK, I don't think East here should be worried about 4DXX. I think the point is partner clearly has nothing, you have 3 tricks and need one more, so a lead through dummy's Q would be ideal. But you'll just end up on lead anyway and won't be able to lead away from the King later.

Make it KJ10, on the other hand...

ahydra

[Quantumcat]

Does anybody play the double as takeout of hearts? If not, why not? Esp. interested in answers from people who would double a 2♦ transfer for takeout of hearts, rather than showing diamonds.

Also, do most people play a double of a Bergen raise as takeout of the bid major, or showing the suit the raise was made with?

[mycroft]

When would doubling for takeout be of an advantage to "taking the transfer" as takeout, and doubling for the suit?

Serious question; I can see where double means that you're likely to be able to get out if partner's broke, but on the other hand, double and partner's broke has likely given the opponents a trick. Maybe we want our takeouts to be sound enough that we're not hoping to defend the accepted transfer. I don't know, and I'm probably missing something.

At the 4 level, I can see things being more perilous; but it's amazing how annoyed the opponents can get after 1NT-p-2♦-2♥ "takeout of hearts". They *should* know what they're doing over that, but most don't...

[lalldonn]

I mean it looks weird to most people to double 4♦ but it's not a ridiculous idea. It's very easy to imagine a diamond lead being needed if dummy has either the ace or queen, and given how many tricks we have there is almost no chance they will be able to play it in 4♦ doubled or redoubled profitably.

That said, I wouldn't fault someone for not doubling.

[Quantumcat]

 mycroft, on 2012-September-25, 17:32, said:

When would doubling for takeout be of an advantage to "taking the transfer" as takeout, and doubling for the suit?

Because 4♥ would be michaels. In all my regular partnerships, over a major-suit transfer, double is takeout and 2 of their suit is michaels. If there were some experts here who did the same thing, but not over a 4♦/♥ transfer, then I would be interested to read their opinions why it is a bad idea.