[bd71]

Please assume mainstream 2/1 context.

---

What is the double to you? What should it be without a specific agreement?

---

Assuming you agree the first two doubles are takeout, what is the 3rd double?

[BunnyGo]

bd71, on 2012-January-25, 15:08, said:

Please assume mainstream 2/1 context.

---

What is the double to you? What should it be without a specific agreement?

The answers to both questions are penalty.

Quote

---

Assuming you agree the first two doubles are takeout, what is the 3rd double?

Once a double has been intended as penalty or converted for penalty all future doubles are penalty.

[wank]

what he said

[Phil]

The double is, "please start opening your veins".

A long time ago, two of my good friends were teammates and couldn't double in the sequence:

2♠ - (3♣) - ?

because they played double as negative.

[quiddity]

BunnyGo, on 2012-January-25, 15:15, said:

Once a double has been intended as penalty or converted for penalty all future doubles are penalty.

The first double showed takeout shape and the subsequent two doubles do not change things. He still has a takeout of spades, the third double shows extra strength.

[CSGibson]

I would assume that the first double is take-out oriented for the minors, and I know that would be mainstream at the club games I play at.

On the 2nd sequence, I would bid on the assumption that partner has a huge balanced hand (something like 20+ HCP) which wants to offer the possibility of 3S doubled.

Edit: I, of course, brain farted. The first sequence is pure penalty after we've preempted. I was describing my agreement after 1H-(3S)-X.

[mgoetze]

bd71, on 2012-January-25, 15:08, said:

Please assume mainstream 2/1 context.

What is the double to you? What should it be without a specific agreement?

After we open with a preempt, all doubles by responder are penalty. I consider this very mainstream and not at all 2/1-specific.

Quote

Assuming you agree the first two doubles are takeout, what is the 3rd double?

Do something intelligent, partner.

[MrAce]

1- Penalty of course

2- Penalty, Opponents have no fit, and opener does not have good enough ♠ suit to bid 3♠ previous round. He was hoping to play 3♦ undoubled now he is trying his luck in ♠ suit with ♦ shortness and hoping that one of us will lift that dbl to rescue him imo.

It is nonsense to think that doubler can not make a penalty double just because he started a take out DBL on 1♠. What is he supposed to do with 23 hcp balanced hand and 3-4 ♠?

The Doubler's subsequent doubles here are not the same with auctions where they willingly raise each other.

[Codo]

1. penalty for anybody...
2. Partner has a strong hand with still no clear direction, so it is: Do something intelligent. He needs not to have a pure take out: Give him xxx,AKQx,Axx,AKQ and he had bid this way... At least I had.

[Fluffy]

After a premptive opening all doubles are penalty. And I am really surprised to see already 2 post withe people who don´t play it as such.

Only a small exception is made for doubles after multi 2♦ opening over major bids, but that needs agreement.


About the second hand, first and second double are take out. The third one cannot be pure penalty since we already showed lack of spade strenght. So it just shows even more extras, but it is intended to end the auction.

[gartinmale]

1. Penalty. Is there a super-penalty double?
2. Do-something-intelligent-partner (usually, pass). So penalty-oriented, I guess, according to the official ACBL double gradient chart.

[quiddity]

MrAce, on 2012-January-26, 23:49, said:

It is nonsense to think that doubler can not make a penalty double just because he started a take out DBL on 1♠. What is he supposed to do with 23 hcp balanced hand and 3-4 ♠?

It seems equally nonsense to think that doubler cannot double again with takeout shape to show strength just because the opps have dicked around.

[wyman]

So, I've asked 3 US Internationalists about this sequence, because I got into a heated discussion with a regular partner of mine about it. This brings up some really interesting questions IMO.

Quote

1)
(1S) X (3D wk)
Do you play X by advancer as t/o or pen? If t/o, you still play (1C) X (1S) X as spades, right? so where do you draw the line?

One said "takeout." One said "standard is penalty, but I think it's right to play takeout over a weak jump since presumably they are not psyching it so it would be tough to have a pen X ever." The third said "We still play the double of a jump is penalties(not a trump stack) I would expect a hand with 3+ trump and like a 10 count. We decided that we would rather just bid a suit than make a takeout double there. The only times we play double as TO is when it goes (1C) X (1D) X or if they respond 1NT after the TO double"

Note that this last comment is relevant to the other bd71 thread where Phil asks if he is "on another planet" for playing that (1H) X (1N) X is responsive.

Quote

2) if this continues:
(1S) X (3D wk) P
(P) X
is this X pure penalty, DSIP, or takeout-ish (like 1435-ish strong)?

One said "DSIP." One said "DSIP, usually strong balanced." The third said "Double there would typically be the 1435 strong hand (but life's not perfect)."

Quote

3) if it continues:
(1S) X (3D wk) P
(P) X (P) P
(3S) X
is this penalty or DSIP? Would pass of (3S) be forcing?

One said "DSIP, obviously shows extras." One said "Doubles once they run from a doubled contract are always penalty, so penalty." The third said "After we have started penalizing them all doubles are penalties"

Regarding whether pass of 3S is forcing, I heard: "no, maybe you could make an argument for it to be, but i don't see why it has to be." Also, "I would say no, but maybe that's dumb." And third, "I dont think double [pretty sure he meant pass -- wyman] is forcing here but there is a really good chance it wont go all pass. (I know this is a little inconsistant but general rules are hard to mess with)."

[BunnyGo]

Needless to say the heated discussion resulted in wyman getting stranded on a shutdown highway in NJ with a blown tire that wouldn't come off.

[wyman]

BunnyGo, on 2012-January-27, 14:20, said:

Needless to say the heated discussion resulted in wyman kicking Ben out of the car in the middle of the NJ Turnpike and making him take a cab the rest of the way to the airport

fyp

[nigel_k]

The subsequent auction doesn't change the fact that the doubler thought they had a takeout double of 1♠. Any further double of the same suit is extra values, not penalty. Maybe xx AKxx AQx AQxx. I wouldn't pull it with a balanced hand but with something like xxx Qxxxx x xxxx you should definitely bid.

[phil_20686]

wyman, on 2012-January-27, 14:26, said:

BunnyGo, on 2012-January-27, 20:20, said:

Needless to say the heated discussion resulted in wyman kicking Ben out of the car in the middle of the NJ Turnpike and making him take a cab the rest of the way to the airport
<br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); ">fyp

Thats it. No more drugs for you.