[kgr]

Partner opens and RHO does intervene with a weak jump overcall. You play negative doubles.

1) 1C-(2H)-DBL

2) 1C-(2S)-DBL

Suppose you have 4-card in other Major.
What strength do you promise with these doubles? 8+HCP or rather 1O+HCP?
What is the minimum you would stretch this to?

[Fluffy]

2♠ X is 10+, 2♥ X can be made with a bit less (8+?) I would say.

[joker_gib]

Fluffy, on Jun 10 2005, 08:12 AM, said:

2♠ X is 10+, 2♥ X can be made with a bit less (8+?) I would say.

I agree and I would add that, as always, distribution and vulnerability play a great role here !

Alain

[kgr]

joker_gib, on Jun 10 2005, 01:17 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Jun 10 2005, 08:12 AM, said:

2♠ X is 10+, 2♥ X can be made with a bit less (8+?) I would say.

I agree and I would add that, as always, distribution and vulnerability play a great role here !

Alain

How will vulnerability influence this?
...If opps are NVUL you DBL faster because they can have less?
...If you are VUL you DBL faster (you don't want to miss game then) or you need more (because it gets more dangerous)?

[han]

In "negatiuve doubles" (a good read!) Bergen recommends something similar (8+ points for 2-level, 9+ for 2S).

[joker_gib]

VUL you don't want to miss game but it's not a reason to give 200 or 500 to opps by going down (dbl or not) at the 3-level !

With 8-9 in front of an opening, we are still far from game.

I confess thet my post was more MP oriented where giving away the magic 200 to opps is tragic !

Alain

[P_Marlowe]

In my partnership 8+.

I may stretch, if my shape
provides compensation.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[HeartA]

Fluffy, on Jun 10 2005, 08:12 AM, said:

2♠ X is 10+, 2♥ X can be made with a bit less (8+?) I would say.

Agree basically.

[Winstonm]

I can only give you my views such as they are and influenced to a degree with my parter, Edgar KapRoth.

1C-2H. In this auction, there is some room to be doing multiple things: competing for the partscore, trying for game, or later forcing to game.

However, with 1C-2S, things change somewhat. One level is removed that affects the decisions. Without this step, 1 of the three things above has to be sacrificed to increase accuracy. For most, the thing that goes is the "partscore bid". With less room, it is more vital to tell my partner that I have closer to "invitational" values or game going values - although there are methods to reverese all this, but even then the Double carries only 2 meanings instead of 3 - so it is really up to you and your partner to decide how much hand this requires.

For my partnership, I have to keep in mind that the double over 1C-2S has "invitational" intent so must be more careful with distributional hands - the weaker the hand, the more likely I am to have a fit for partner's minor along with my hearts. Minimum? Maybe something like this: xx, Kxxxx, x, Axxxx. I can do this as in our negative double agreement, partner will either have both unbids and adequate values OR the unbid major and support for partner's suit. This gives me an "out" if partner is forced into a 2N bid; if he bid 3D, I can then bid 3 hearts and always, (for us) get out in 4C. This may be too high, but preempts work sometimes and you can't alway just sit on your hands when game is possible.

WinstonM

[awm]

Length/Shortness in the opponents' suit is often an important factor in these decisions. Over a 2♠ preempt, I would tend to double with many 7-9 point hands including singleton spade. For example:

x Axxx Kxxx xxxx

I think is a clear double after 1♣-2♠-X. The problem is, there are many hands where you can make a partscore or even game, but partner has too many spades to balance easily.

On the other hand:

xxx AQxx Kxxx xx

I would pass. If we have a making partscore or game, partner will balance with something. With spade length, I want a good 10 or even 11 to double after the 2♠ bid (as others have commented, lighter is fine over 2♥).

I really prefer to think of these doubles more as "takeout" and less as "showing four cards in the other major" but I'm probably in the minority on this.

[Double !]

Once again, this question exposes the vulnerabilities of strong NT systems. Me guess you need enough to tolerate a pass/ converting to penalty double, or a 2NT rebid by opener.