[lmilne]

At the moment, I'm doing some work on my partnership's doubling notes. I was thinking about two common auctions:

(1NT) Dbl (2X)

and

1M (Dbl) Rdbl (2X).

a) Are there accepted guidelines for what to double with and what to pass with, from both the hand sitting over their trump suit and the hand sitting under it?

I'm particularly interested in penalising them profitably when our trumps are 3-3, and avoiding a wrong penalization when our trumps are 4-1.

b) Does it matter whether you play penalty doubles or takeout doubles after the first (initiating) action? It is very common to play next double is takeout in the first auction and penalties in the second auction - how does this change things?


I'm not great with the search function on these forums so apologies if this topic has been discussed before!
Very interested to hear what you have to say.

[suokko]

(1NT)dbl(2m) F1 pass and dbl is penalty
(1NT)dbl(2M) NF pass and dbl is T/O

In low level forcing pass situation without fit I prefer double to deny penalty or shortness from direct seat and balance double is penalty with assumption partner knows what pass holds. That helps doubling correctly with our trumps break 3-3. But this approach needs quite a lot practice before one gets used to it. Also it has a weakness that opponents failing to make fit pre-emption we might double them from 11 card fit at low level. But I don't play 1M/m(x)xx as strong. That prevents some problematic auction to read the meaning of pass correctly if playing this inverted double in a low level penalty situation.

[helene_t]

In the first auction, if you play forcing pass you can double with four trumps and pass with three (or v/v if you prefer). If you don't play forcing pass then I think it is best to play double as t/o but this means that you won't be defending doubled with 3-3 trumps. I am OK with that.

In the second situation it is a bit different since redoubler has suggested defense against all unbid suits so it makes a lot of sense for opener to double with three trumps and pass with two, at least at the two-level. So you will get to defende with 3-3 trumps.

By the way, when you defend with six combined trumps they will typically be in a 5-2 fit on the first auction (unless they play SWINE or some such) but typically in a 4-3 fit on the second one.

[Free]

When we're in a penalty situation and opps are scrambling into a fit, we like 2-3-doubles.

It basically comes to this:
pass = 4+ cards in opps' suit / non-min with 0-1 cards in opps' suit (forcing pass principle)
Dbl = 2-3 cards in opp's suit
new suit is weak + short in opps' suit

This is a fairly simple agreement which usually gives us an accurate image of what to do. When your partner doubles and you have a 4-card you can let it stand. When you hold 2-3 cards you know opps have found a decent fit. Also after pass you can double with shortage of length yourself or scramble into a fit of our own.

[daffydoc]

many partnerships play 1X P 1nt 2y dbl as tko and many - including my personal pref is to play it as penalty oriented - meaning that was what I was going to bid. Having played against Benito for many years I can tell you how he played it - the first Dbl in any similar auction alerted partner to the fact that IT IS OUR HAND - thereafter dbl showed 2/3 in their suit and pass showed 1/4 and one could sork out what to do from there. With unknown or undiscussed situations I would normally play most dbls as TKO. Keeps it simple. daffydoc

[Gerben42]

Traditionally, the 2nd sequence is penalty, for the 1st sequence, modern players play T/O I think.
However, I prefer both auctions as T/O. Here's why:

Assuming the auction goes
(1NT 12-14) X* (2!H)

*15+

there is no clue who has the majority of points, and our fit could be anywhere. Playing Dbl as T/O makes things much more flexible.

The second auction is for example:

1!H (X) XX (2!D)

This auction is different: Rdbl means you have committed to at least 2!H. This means it is not allowed to go all Pass in this auction, which means there is no big difference between passing and doubling for penalty. For simplicity sake we play both cases as the "XXX-convention".

If first X / XX shows values, then the 2nd X / XX from either player is T/O, and the third is penalty.

[lmilne]

Thanks for replies to far. Are there many current top pairs who play this "2-3 double" after 1M X XX? Some have suggested Italians.

Side note: what is standard for how high the auction is forcing, how high a new suit by responder is forcing, and what to adopt after they pre-empt over the redouble?

[Free]

lmilne, on 2015-February-16, 07:31, said:

Are there many current top pairs who play this "2-3 double" after 1M X XX? Some have suggested Italians.

I would also say Italians. Note though that many pairs no longer play RDbl for penalties, but as a transfer. The first time I read about 2-3 Doubles was in a NT context.

lmilne, on 2015-February-16, 07:31, said:

Side note: what is standard for how high the auction is forcing, how high a new suit by responder is forcing, and what to adopt after they pre-empt over the redouble?

That depends what you agree upon. A simple example is when partner showed an INV+ hand with fit in our Major. In that case the auction is obviously forcing to 3M, no special agreements there. A new suit by responder depends a lot on the system and whether it's a 2/1 response or not. In 2/1GF, 1M-2m is forcing to at least 4m while in other systems it may be forcing up to 2NT.

[Vampyr]

Free, on 2015-February-16, 13:27, said:

In 2/1GF, 1M-2m is forcing to at least 4m while in other systems it may be forcing up to 2NT.

And in other systems up to 2M.

[PhilKing]

After 1NT-X-2m, my view is that it is worth an insane amount to play double for takeout and pass as non-forcing.

In the UK, this kind of auction is commonplace, in fact it occurred on Sunday in the Tollemache ...

You double a weak NT with:

♠J62
♥AK9
♦A95
♣K954

Pretty borderline, I admit, but they are vul and you are not. Anyway, it goes 2♣-P-P where partner's double is for takeout. If you pass this out, it's a huge goal as lefty has:

♠KT93
♥QT642
♦Q76
♣8

But if pass is forcing, lefty can bid 2♣ for no cost, as we can't float it. Partner has:

♠8
♥J7
♦JT32
♣QJ7632


You should pass out 2♣ for zillions off, yet the absurd forcing pass theory forces you to act. Many of us gave this up 25 years ago, but the theory still persists.

[shevek]

Liam,

We have had bad experience with these action-style doubles. Worst was when we each had honour-third and doubled their 5-2 fit on balance of power & knowledge that they were in a 7-card fit.
The hand was something like this:

---

1NT was 15-17, double by West penalties.
XX claimed ownership and South's double was action-style, honour third. "Half a double"

South led ♦K and we were feeling uneasy. Our 3-3 trump fit meant -670 when we had +140/120 available.

Nick

[helene_t]

lmilne, on 2015-February-16, 07:31, said:

Side note: what is standard for how high the auction is forcing, how high a new suit by responder is forcing, and what to adopt after they pre-empt over the redouble?

In the first auction it is a common agreement that the redouble shows the values for a 2n bid and that pass is forcing to 2nt therefore. New suit by responder is gf. new suit vby opener at the twolevel is weak while pass and pull is gf.

In the second auction some play that they can't play 2m undoubled. Anyway I prefer pass to be nf.

I dunno about standard but I like to play responders freebid nf except for jumps. presumably the suit under their suit is forcing as weaker hands can scramble.