[Blofeld]

Scoring: XIMP

- - - (P)
1♦ (2♣) 2♠ (P)
 P (3♣) P (P)
?

---

You open fairly light. 2♠ was (obviously) NF, 5+ cards but will be a good suit if just 5, around 7 to a bad 11 points.

Three questions:

1) Do you think double here is better as takeout or penalty?

2) If double is takeout, what do you bid?

3) If double is penalty, what do you bid?

[mike777]

I never get these right but here are my best guesses.

1) takeout..since in front of club bidder.
2) pass, we wanted them to make last guess and they did, yes?
3) pass

[whereagles]

Take-out for what? We have already set spades as our suit by passing 2♠.

Since double is penalties, and the spade bidder didn't double, I'll try 3♦ with a lot of conviction

[MickyB]

I'd expect 2♠ to be fairly solid if 5 cards, perhaps lighter if 6 cards - in the former case we have half of the points, in the latter we have a 6-2 spade fit, so I don't want to sell out here with shortness - either double (if takeout) or 3♦ (if double is pens). Which should it be? It should definitely be the same both under and over the club bidder IMO, so that you can pick up penalties from both sides, and a values double isn't much use when you have both limited your hands.

I think double should be takeout. If one partner has a penalty double the other will (95%+ of the time) have a takeout double, so no problem there; and you want the 2♠ bidder to be able to suggest competing without being unilateral about it, after all the hand could be a complete misfit.

[Gerben42]

Surely a penalty double. That's another "general rule": We don't double for take out "for the fourth suit only". Partner's Double would be penalty too here. I pass.

Partner could be as extreme as 6115 with bad 5♣.

[Chamaco]

Quote

1) Do you think double here is better as takeout or penalty?

Cards, cooperative, usually showing 5 cards and a 10 count or so and at least xxx in opps suit

Quote

2) If double is takeout, what do you bid?

3) If double is penalty, what do you bid?

2) is out of the question.
In case 3) I pass.

BTW, if the agreement is that opener can be THAT light, then I do believe that a NFB should be more something like 8/9-12, and that the requirements for doubling to show a max are more strict.

[MickyB]

Gerben42, on Feb 10 2006, 03:10 PM, said:

Surely a penalty double. That's another "general rule": We don't double for take out "for the fourth suit only".

I don't see how double is in any way "for the fourth suit only". You are showing interest in competing in Diamonds, Spades, and possibly even Hearts.

[cherdano]

I think this is penalty. Not because three suits have been bid, for eample I would think (hope) that (1♣)-1♦-(1♠)-X would be understood as takeout without agreement (call it snap-dragon if you prefer). But because the non-forcing 2♠ has defined partner's hand.

(If you want to fit it into the "doubles is takeout until we have found a fit"-rule: after 2♠, we assume we have found our fit in spades, same as after a weak two opening.)

Arend

[inquiry]

Let me stick my head in here...

First, can double be cards? I think not, at least is I understand what cards mean. You passed 2♠ which could be as much as 11 hcp with 5+ spades. How many cards can you have?

Second, can double be penalty. Yes is could be, if pass meant "spades" is our fit. The logic here is that after finding a fit, doubles are not for takeout anymore. They are either penalty or "cards" (the infamous do something intellegent partner doubles). Since I don't play negative free bids, rahter or not you agree that passing 2♠ establish a fit or not is up to you and your partnership agreement

Third can double be takeout? You betcha. And this is the hand to use it on. I heard you bid ♠ partner, but I don't have great spades, but I can stand if you bid them. I have goodish diamonds, but not so good to bid 3♦ last time nor this time, so I don't want to suggest we play there if it not suitable for you, and I also have hearts which you didn't know about until I doubled. I suspect your 1♠ bidding partner might pass this double some reasonable percentage fo the time for penalty (when he has clbus and is is short in diamonds). For me, double would be takeout.

Now to the specific questions.

1) Do you think double here is better as takeout or penalty?

Takeout. On a lot of hands where I had a penalty double of 3♣ I would have rebid 2NT over 2♠. And on hands like this where I want to compete, the only way for me to do it intellegently is with a double. The double implies tolereance for spade (Hx) or I would have run earlier or raised spades now.

2) If double is takeout, what do you bid?

At matchpoints I would double, at imps it is much closer. I think I will still double but I am less certain this is correct.

3) If double is penalty, what do you bid?

I pass. My diamonds are not good enough for 3♦ bid.

[Echognome]

Here was my point at the time.

I opened my 11 count with a natural 1♦. I have passed 2♠ showing at least weak spade preference. Can you tell me why I need to bid my hand again?

RHO has been awfully quiet and may have some values and no fit. LHO may have some scattered values as has come in twice unfavourable. The point is that I can't be sure what's going on here. I may lose a partscore swing. It's just possible that I may lose 6 imps if I pass.

But it's also possible that I may lose a bucket if I bid. On a hand that seems a misfit, why am I competing? Ok I have club shortage. If we play in spades, that is no good. ♠ lead, ♠ return. No ruff. So I need to play in diamonds or hearts. Well I just don't know partner has any support. So I may get forced enough to lose control.

Maybe this is all overly pessimistic, but I'm just trying to figure out why we haven't already bid our hand.

[whereagles]

I don't think you told the whole story. There might be more to say about the hand, especially in terms of distribution. But one thing is clear: spades is ok as a fit, and that removes, IN MY OPINION, the need for a take-out double.

If you want to try for a new fit, 3♦ does that. You couldn't possibly have passed 2♠ and now be competing without decent spade support.

[inquiry]

whereagles, on Feb 10 2006, 11:00 AM, said:

I don't think you told the whole story. There might be more to say about the hand, especially in terms of distribution. But one thing is clear: spades is ok as a fit, and that removes, IN MY OPINION, the need for a take-out double.

If you want to try for a new fit, 3♦ does that. You couldn't possibly have passed 2♠ and now be competing without decent spade support.

This loses the penalty pass of 3♣ double. That is if your parnter has a black hand, he might relish a takeout double on a hand where no one can make anything.

[MickyB]

Echognome, on Feb 10 2006, 03:46 PM, said:

Here was my point at the time.

I opened my 11 count with a natural 1♦.  I have passed 2♠ showing at least weak spade preference.  Can you tell me why I need to bid my hand again?

Because partner will frequently have a hand that wants to sell out to 3♣ if you have two of them, but not if you have one. That stiff makes a *lot* of difference.

Quote

It's just possible that I may lose 6 imps if I pass.

But it's also possible that I may lose a bucket if I bid.

Worst case scenario, they make 3♣ doubled. That "bucket" of IMPs is only twice as many as the (much more frequent) double part-score swing. If conceding that doubled game is likely to send you or your partner on tilt, then I'd agree, competing here isn't a good idea - but I believe that doubling here will increase our IMP expentancy on this hand, which is all that matters in my partnerships.

Quote

Ok I have club shortage.  If we play in spades, that is no good.  ♠ lead, ♠ return.  No ruff.  So I need to play in diamonds or hearts.  Well I just don't know partner has any support.

It could cost them trump tricks to lead trumps. The tempo they give up to take trumps out could let us establish our tricks elsewhere. They might not lead one anyway. Partner could easily have diamond tolerance. If none of these things are true, we may well quietly drift one or two off against their part-score - people don't make marginal penalty doubles at IMPs.

[MickyB]

whereagles, on Feb 10 2006, 04:00 PM, said:

I don't think you told the whole story. There might be more to say about the hand, especially in terms of distribution. But one thing is clear: spades is ok as a fit, and that removes, IN MY OPINION, the need for a take-out double.

If you want to try for a new fit, 3♦ does that. You couldn't possibly have passed 2♠ and now be competing without decent spade support.

I was the 2♠ bidder - Despite taking Owen's double as takeout, my instinct at the time was the same as yours. But what if the 2♠ bidder has a stiff club and wants to compete? He needs double to be takeout, and the double should mean the same from both sides.

[paulg]

I play that all doubles are penalty after we have tried to pass a hand out. A simple rule that saves quite a few brain cells.

So 3♦ looks clear here.

p

[Echognome]

Quote

Because partner will frequently have a hand that wants to sell out to 3♣ if you have two of them, but not if you have one. That stiff makes a *lot* of difference.

Sounds like threading the needle to me. You are bidding partner's hand. What is more likely is that partner bid all he could with 2♠.

Quote

Worst case scenario, they make 3♣ doubled.

Or... partner cannot pass the double, bids and you go for 500 vs a partscore. Your RHO couldn't double 2♠, but he can definitely double the 3-level. That is exactly the point I'm trying to make. RHO may be frozen in this auction with some scattered values and a misfit. You don't seem to think he exists.

Quote

but I believe that doubling here will increase our IMP expentancy on this hand, which is all that matters in my partnerships.

I don't understand your point. Are you trying to say I play to lose? I will refrain from further comment until you clarify.

Quote

It could cost them trump tricks to lead trumps. The tempo they give up to take trumps out could let us establish our tricks elsewhere. They might not lead one anyway. Partner could easily have diamond tolerance. If none of these things are true, we may well quietly drift one or two off against their part-score - people don't make marginal penalty doubles at IMPs.

Sure. Nothing is a certainty. My view was simply that passing was the lesser risk. You may disagree (and you're certainly entitled to), but I'm entitled to my opinion as well.

[cherdano]

I am with Echo. If I had to make a bet, I would put my money on all 3-level contracts going down. What should be the purpose of a takeout double? Certainly we don't have a heart fit, a diamond fit only plays well if partner brings an honor, in spades we have only a 7-8 card fit, and trumps could break badly. Increasing the plus by a penalty pass by partner is a very small target. I think the bidders deserve to be -500 in 3♠X.

Arend

[mike777]

I play negative free bids and open these 10-11 hcp hands all the time.

Most important is passing 2s does not infer a fit. It does not promise a fit or even a small xx in spades!. In fact you may pass with a void and many hand types. That is one reason partner does not bid 2S on random 5 card suits!


Keep in mind when p bids 2S she expects you to pass 90% of the time, not run too a second suit or rebid a 6 card suit. If you do not like this style and many do not then do not play NFB.

The main goals of NFB is to play the hand at the 2 level or push the opp to the 3 level and make them guess. We have so we now have an easy pass.

If you want to have other goals, fine, just do not play NFB.

If you agree with these goals then our priority should be too limit our hand with pass. Would not be surprised if the opp can make 3nt.

As for direct penalty doubles, I thought they were outlawed in modern bridge .

[mikeh]

mike777, on Feb 10 2006, 02:24 PM, said:

I play negative free bids and open these 10-11 hcp hands all the time.

I'm confused. Mike, you wrote on another thread that AJ10xxx AQxx xx x should be passed as dealer if playing sound openings, and you have made similar posts before (I think). Now you say that you open 10-11 counts with playing strength well below the AJ10xxx AQxx xx x hand?? What gives?

[mike777]

Actually I think the hand was worse than that 5/6 loser hand that I passed but perhaps not. I would open that one . I like the ten of spades.

But I do understand less than zero players seem to play Roth style openers even as a learning experiment on BBO .