[Hanoi5]

Both Red, Butler scoring. You hold on the second seat:

♠A8xx
♥6x
♦AK98
♣865

2♥-?

[mike777]

sure

[PhilG007]

Hanoi5, on 2013-September-07, 19:42, said:

Both Red, Butler scoring. You hold on the second seat:

♠A8xx
♥6x
♦AK98
♣865

2♥-?

As partner has not yet bid and the bidding is below game level,I would take any double as for takeout
unless there was partnership agreement otherwise. So double is the correct bid. If p is strong in♥
he can pass for penalties.

[mcphee]

While I appreciate the need for the short hand to act bidding may lead to a very bad situation. First seat weak 2 bids can be light (as opposed to second seat)so I am a passing this rock crusher. When I make a t/o dble which is forcing partner to play at the 3 level the responder has the right to expect something. For example, assume next hand were to pass, will you be a happy camper if partner bids 2NT lebensohl and you land on a 4/3 C fit from your side? Heaven help you should they smash you, because this will be a very large digit.

[ahydra]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-08, 01:26, said:

As partner has not yet bid and the bidding is below game level,I would take any double as for takeout
unless there was partnership agreement otherwise. So double is the correct bid. If p is strong in♥
he can pass for penalties.

I think the OP is asking whether this hand is worth a takeout X, not whether X is for takeout.

And in my opinion, it is not. It is a very flat hand, doubleton heart, sub-minimum strength and we are vulnerable. One bad split and 3CX is going down 500. Pass is clear - don't forget partner still has a bid!

ahydra

[gwnn]

Double. Of course it is a minimum but it has four spades and great controls. It is close in the sense that I'd pass with AQxx of diamonds but it's not so close in the sense that I got to this conclusion after relatively short consideration. But it would be much clearer at NV.

[ggwhiz]

If I opened this at the 1 level I would make minimum noises the rest of the way.

Usually forced to the 3-level (if we can make 2♠ pard is bidding at least 3) and the fact that with 4-4 in the minors partner will most often choose clubs and you have a tiny landing spot. I'm getting to where we belong much more often after partner bids or after I re-open with double if lho raises and partner passes.

[PhilG007]

ahydra, on 2013-September-08, 06:26, said:

I think the OP is asking whether this hand is worth a takeout X, not whether X is for takeout.

And in my opinion, it is not. It is a very flat hand, doubleton heart, sub-minimum strength and we are vulnerable. One bad split and 3CX is going down 500. Pass is clear - don't forget partner still has a bid!

ahydra

He who fears the bad trump split should give up bridge(!)

[Wackojack]

Very borderline I think.

The chance of partner having a 4 card spade suit is about 50% and median 11 points. So with: ♠ Kxxx, ♥ Kxx, ♦xx; ♣AJxx we would like to be in 2♠ and with ♠ Kxxx, ♥ Axx; ♦xx; ♣ KJxx even 4♠ looks possible albeit unlikely. Would partner balance with these hands if you passed? How many spades would you bid if he did balance? Would partner raise to a not so good 3♠ on the first hand if you did double for take out?

If partner does not have a 4 card spade suit then a not unlikely distribution would be 3334 Say ♠Kxx, ♥Kxx, ♦xxx, ♣ AJxx and partner is between a rock and a hard place. (Bob made me think)

I suppose most of the time fewer than 5 imps is at stake, but some of the time doubling could get you plus or minus 10 imps according to your luck. Are you feeling lucky?

[neilkaz]

This looks like a minimal double to me. A and AK and 4♠. It is important to get ♠ into the picture when opps bid ♥

[wyman]

I'm in.

X

[Winstonm]

Close but what sways me are the types of cards held: AAK are all undervalued cards in the Work point count. I would prefer better shape but aggression seems to pay more than conservation so I suggest a bid: X for takeout is my choice.

[JLOGIC]

It is criminal to not X

[PhilG007]

ahydra, on 2013-September-08, 06:26, said:

I think the OP is asking whether this hand is worth a takeout X, not whether X is for takeout.

And in my opinion, it is not. It is a very flat hand, doubleton heart, sub-minimum strength and we are vulnerable. One bad split and 3CX is going down 500. Pass is clear - don't forget partner still has a bid!

ahydra

Of course it's worth a takeout double. On that hand,no other bid makes sense(!)

[PhilG007]

Winstonm, on 2013-September-09, 10:28, said:

Close but what sways me are the types of cards held: AAK are all undervalued cards in the Work point count. I would prefer better shape but aggression seems to pay more than conservation so I suggest a bid: X for takeout is my choice.

I would definitely favour Aces and Kings over Queens and Jacks,under undervalued or not (!)

[VM1973]

I would not double with this, so according to JLogic I'm going to need a good defense lawyer. It's definitely a double in the balancing seat, though. 26 ZPs.

[beatrix45]

My heavens, yes.

[MrAce]

See Justin's reply. I also think passing is crime.

Experienced players know those are the hands that you should get in while you can, or you will either get robbed frequently or will bail out big numbers by getting in late with the fear of being robbed.

-We have the shape of a take out DBL,
-We have the values (minimum values i admit but AAK ffs!) for T/O dbl
-Our values are in our longest suits
-Our spots are not that bad.

[the hog]

I would not bid on this hand. However I would certainly double!

[PhilG007]

VM1973, on 2013-September-11, 09:40, said:

I would not double with this, so according to JLogic I'm going to need a good defense lawyer. It's definitely a double in the balancing seat, though. 26 ZPs.

Disagree It's vital to show the values as soon as possible before it's too late

"Twice arm'd is he that knoweth his cause be just,
but thrice arm'd is he that getteth his blow in first."