[Kungsgeten]

There are several situations in which you might double, or redouble, an artificial bid in order to show strength -- instead of showing the suit actually bid. If your RHO passes your partner's (re)double, when do you pass and when do you bid? Do you have any agreements on this?

If it is the other way around: your partner bids something artificial and the opponents (re)double, do you have meta agreements of what pass is? If you do choose to pass, does it set up further doubles for penalties and if so: a forcing pass situation?


Some examples:

(2D)-Dbl-(pass)-?

2D is multi and shows a weak hand with a major. Let's say your partner double to show 13-15 NT or a hand too strong for other bids. Now RHO passes. The opponents doesn't alert the pass, and if you ask them they say that they don't have any agreements of what pass means. What would your pass show here? If you choose to pass and double/pass later, what's that?

1C-(pass)-1D-(Dbl);
Rdbl-(pass)-?

This start could be common in many types of systems, but let's take a strong club as an example. Partner's 1C shows 15+ hcp, your 1D is negative, the opponents doesn't really know what the double of 1D means (or maybe they say "points", or perhaps "majors"). Opener's rdbl shows extras, perhaps 20+ hcp and a balanced hand (what do people usually play Rdbl as)? Now your RHO passes the Rdbl, and if asked they don't have any agreements of what pass is. When would you, yourself, pass the redouble in this situation? How should your further doubles/passes be treated?

1NT-(2C majors)-Dbl-(pass);
?

So you open 1NT and LHO overcalls 2C showing both majors. Partner doubles to show strength, and RHO passes. They don't have any agreements on what the pass show, if asked they explain that bidding 2D would ask for the better major. When would you pass 2C?


I'm sure there are lots of other examples like this. They aren't very common in practice, but they do happen from time to time and it seems like it could be worthwhile to have some kind of agreements here. Are we going to gamble on playing a (re)double contract, even if we might not have that great of a holding in the suit (and partner haven't promised any real length in the suit)? If we bid, it seems like we give the opponents a cheap escape.


On a similar note: Do you have any agreements on when passes of the opponents' redoubles are for penalty? We currently play (1X)-Dbl-(Rdbl)-Pass as forcing, wanting doubler to bid his best suit. Not so sure about other situations.

[straube]

I think you have to define these redoubles at the 1-level....hopefully as something that partner can pass frequently (and define continuations when not).

1C dbl really helps IMprecision (compared to 1D 0-7) because
P 0-4
rdbl 9+ bal
1D GF unal

OTOH. I don’t think 1C-1D dbl rdbl has been defined.

At the 2-level (e.g. 2D dbl P where 2D is multi). I think it is more of a guess. I would usually want to defend here but not if I have an offensive hand.

Good topic. I hope you get some more replies.

[nullve]

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

There are several situations in which you might double, or redouble, an artificial bid in order to show strength -- instead of showing the suit actually bid. If your RHO passes your partner's (re)double, when do you pass and when do you bid? Do you have any agreements on this?

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

If it is the other way around: your partner bids something artificial and the opponents (re)double, do you have meta agreements of what pass is? If you do choose to pass, does it set up further doubles for penalties and if so: a forcing pass situation?

So if A is the artificial bid, which I assume is a suit bid, then the situations you describe seem to be

1) ...(A)-X-(P)-?,
2) ...A-(X)-XX-(P); ?
3) ...A-(X)-?

and possibly also

1') ...(A)-P-(P)-X; (P)-?
2') ...A-(P)-P-(X); XX-(P)-?.

In my system,

* X is never strength-showing in 1) or 1')
* XX is never strength-showing in 2) or 2');
* Pass never sets up a FP situation in 3). (But maybe A did.)

But that doesn't mean my meta-agreements cover these situations very extensively.

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

Some examples:

(2D)-Dbl-(pass)-?

2D is multi and shows a weak hand with a major. Let's say your partner double to show 13-15 NT or a hand too strong for other bids. Now RHO passes. The opponents doesn't alert the pass, and if you ask them they say that they don't have any agreements of what pass means. What would your pass show here? If you choose to pass and double/pass later, what's that?

Even if they have no agreement about what pass means, I'm pretty sure Opener will take it as willingness to play 2♦X. So Opener may pass and you're essentially advancing as if partner had made an identical, but obviously unplayable, double of a Weak 2♦, i.e. as if the bidding had gone

(2♦*)-X**-(P).

* Weak 2♦
** 13-15 BAL or very strong.

Instead I play X as takeout of diamonds.

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

1NT-(2C majors)-Dbl-(pass);
?

So you open 1NT and LHO overcalls 2C showing both majors. Partner doubles to show strength, and RHO passes. They don't have any agreements on what the pass show, if asked they explain that bidding 2D would ask for the better major. When would you pass 2C?

This is similar. Overcaller may take pass as willingness to play 2♣X, so you're effectively rebidding as if the bidding had gone

1N-(2♣*)-X**-(P),

* natural
** strength-showing

which is oviously very awkward.

I play "sys on" here, btw, so X is Stayman.

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

1C-(pass)-1D-(Dbl);
Rdbl-(pass)-?

This start could be common in many types of systems, but let's take a strong club as an example. Partner's 1C shows 15+ hcp, your 1D is negative, the opponents doesn't really know what the double of 1D means (or maybe they say "points", or perhaps "majors"). Opener's rdbl shows extras, perhaps 20+ hcp and a balanced hand (what do people usually play Rdbl as)? Now your RHO passes the Rdbl, and if asked they don't have any agreements of what pass is. When would you, yourself, pass the redouble in this situation? How should your further doubles/passes be treated?

Also similar. Pass might be taken as willingness to play 1♦XX, so you're in the same position as over

1♣-(P)-1♦-(X*)
XX-(P).

* diamonds

Seems like you need a few diamonds in order to pass. And if you don't have that, opps may have succeeded in getting you out of the book.

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

I'm sure there are lots of other examples like this. They aren't very common in practice, but they do happen from time to time and it seems like it could be worthwhile to have some kind of agreements here. Are we going to gamble on playing a (re)double contract, even if we might not have that great of a holding in the suit (and partner haven't promised any real length in the suit)? If we bid, it seems like we give the opponents a cheap escape.

It seems to me that these strength-showing doubles and redoubles are based on the old-fashioned and very misguided idea that in order to penalise the opponents, doubles must at some point be for penalties. Well, it's certainly possible to play strength-showing redoubles, e.g. over 1x-(X), and play takeout doubles after that, which should work, but most pairs seem to combine these redoubles with penalty doubles*, only to suffer the consequences in bread-and-butter auctions like

1♦-(X)-XX-(1♠)
P-(2♠),

for pretty obvious reasons.

* usually vaguely defined, and often made with 3,4 and 5 cards in opps' suit alike

Kungsgeten, on 2018-September-02, 14:29, said:

On a similar note: Do you have any agreements on when passes of the opponents' redoubles are for penalty? We currently play (1X)-Dbl-(Rdbl)-Pass as forcing, wanting doubler to bid his best suit. Not so sure about other situations.

I just try to follow standard practice here, which I believe is that pass is as you describe at the 1-level, but for penalties at higher levels.

[awm]

For me, passes of these are strong suggestions to play. So for example:

1A-X-XX-Pass = lets defend
1nt-2C (majors)-X-Pass = I have clubs
2D (Multi)-X-Pass = I have diamonds

There are a few exceptions in specifically defined auctions; in particular:

1m-X-Pass = some nondescript balanced hand, not a long stack of cards in the minor; opener can pass if he really has the minor of course but this is not as strong a “to play” suggestion as the above
1nt-pass-2D-X-Pass = not really a suggestion to play 2DX, but instead showing no fit for hearts

If the question is about what the next person needs (in what might be pass out seat) it depends a bit on what the pass meant. For example:

2D (Multi)-X (usually weak NT)-Pass-???

If pass was a suggestion to play 2D, I’d want some actual diamonds to pass here (probably four). If pass is “bid your major” I’d pass here with most balanced hands. If opponents have “no agreement” it’s based more on table feel but I’d probably want Hxx or so in diamonds to pass.