[awm]

Scoring: MP

---

The actual hand was something like the above (don't remember all the spots). Yes, the 1NT bid was forcing by passed hand. Whether this is a good treatment is unclear to me but it's what they were playing.

At the table, I passed over 2♠ and partner passed it out. Perhaps partner should balance, but I don't think partner can find a double with three small trumps, and 3-minor is somewhat touch and go. The end result was 2♠ down two on a trump lead and continuation.

In hindsight I think a double of 2♠ was called for. The trump holding is ideal for defending, and I definitely don't want to hear 3♦ (which is a possibility especially without some clear agreement about the meaning of a balancing 2NT here).

[mikeh]

Oh well: not for the first time it seems that I completely misread the meaning of partner's double. Frankly I think that he ought not to have doubled 2♣ with that hand, since he has to have expected the opps to run to 2♠ and now his partner might (if me, would) expect the kind of hand I described in my earlier posts.

Personally, I would have bid 2♦

OTOH, even tho my reading of the hand was way off base, my choice of double would have worked (if partner were brave enough to leave it in and smart enough to lead a trump). Better to be lucky than good, sometimes

[kgr]

Interesting. 2 questions:
1. Is it clear/best that doubling again shows something in ♠ rather then a ♠ void? eg 0=4=5=4 (tolerance for all suits).
2. Should DBL of 2♣ really show good ♠? With good ♣'s you expect that opps will go to 2♠ anyway (with or without your DBL). Why not tell your partner then that you have good ♣'s? Maybe you can play 3♣?

[SoTired]

If you make a takeout dbl and partner bids, then subsequent dbls by t/o dbler are penalty. Although it may be right to dbl 2S, dbler can't make a penalty dbl of 2S on SAx. Advancer has made a penalty dbl of 2C. If Advancer also has a penalty dbl of 2S, dbler can pass 2S and allow advancer to dbl it. A 3C bid shows no extra strength and only confirms 4 card club support.

[neilkaz]

SoTired, on Jul 6 2006, 11:30 PM, said:

If you make a takeout dbl and partner bids, then subsequent dbls by t/o dbler are penalty. Although it may be right to dbl 2S, dbler can't make a penalty dbl of 2S on SAx. Advancer has made a penalty dbl of 2C. If Advancer also has a penalty dbl of 2S, dbler can pass 2S and allow advancer to dbl it. A 3C bid shows no extra strength and only confirms 4 card club support.

We agree. You need more than a maximum pass combined with Ax in spades to think that doubling is correct here. I pass and if PD doubles which should show cards after his penalty double of 2C I then pass. PD with a nice 12 HCP opposite your delayed T/O X really shouldn't sell to 2S undoubled, IMHO.

On this hand you were fixed by 1NTF. It happens, but it can also backfire. .. neilkaz ..

[flytoox]

SoTired, on Jul 6 2006, 03:33 PM, said:

mikeh, on Jul 6 2006, 10:22 AM, said:

Partner HAS to have a good ♠ holding to double 2♣...nothing else is logical.

Mike, are you sure partner does not have something like xxx xx xxx AQJxx?

Pd cannot have this hand. He should not dbl with this hand. He should either pass or bid 3C.

You make a penalty double only if you can dbl again if they run after your first dbl. Otherwise, dont dbl.

[Free]

Pass: I already showed my hand, no need to do it again...

[awm]

Well I don't see how double of 2♠ can be "penalty." How can I have a penalty double of a suit I've already doubled for takeout? I don't really think that after I've doubled for takeout and partner's responded, a second double of the opponents original suit is penalty. Even after partner has tried to double for penalty, I'd be doubling a suit I can't hold! It seems like in this auction the choice of pass or double should indicate something about suitability to defend. One of these bids should say "If your hand is at all suitable, let's defend" whereas the other should say "Of course you can penalize with a big trump stack, but my hand isn't so great for it." On this particular auction (partner has penalized) it makes more sense to me for the double to be cooperative and pass to suggest a non-great defensive hand.

The best spot on this board is defending 2♠X. I submit that looking at our hand, we know this is almost certainly the case. Declarer has clubs, and the club cards are behind him. We can pull dummy's trumps quickly even if partner has 3-4 small spades. We have a maximum passed hand and partner has promised values. So why pass and leave the decision totally to partner?

Yes, perhaps partner should balance. But it's a tough problem from her side of the table. There's no way she can double -- she has three small trumps opposite a partner who's fairly likely to have one small trump. She doesn't know which minor is our better fit, and if it's clubs she knows we're getting a 4-1 or 5-0 break. If 2NT is "bid your better minor" perhaps she can bid that, but we haven't discussed it (and natural might be a reasonable interpretation too).

Pass seems like just a blame transfer. It puts the pressure on partner to make the right decision when we know the right decision and could've announced it.

[Apollo81]

awm, on Jul 5 2006, 05:59 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

---

RHO starts with a pass, I pass, and LHO opens 1♠. Partner passes, RHO bids 1NT (forcing). Now I double for takeout. LHO bids 2♣ and partner doubles (penalty). RHO corrects to 2♠. Now what? The auction so far is:

Pass - Pass - 1♠ - Pass
1NT! - X - 2♣ - X
2♠ - ??

Feel free to criticize the earlier calls if you like. Keep in mind that the scoring is matchpoints.

Do I mind penalizing 2s? No. Do I mind partner competing to 3c? No. Do I mind them going down 2 undoubled? Yes.

[benlessard]

If they play 1nt forcing 3rd seat (wich i think is a bit useless) its probably because they play constructive raise if so its possible responder has a weakish 5-7 with 3 trumps.


its really a mather of what will partner X with


IMHO there is 2 main option

(a hand that goes for the big number
opening hand and positionnal clubs and some spades length. in wich case you must X with your hand and the spades lead is mandatory.)

or a hand that might want to compete to the 3 level (my choice ) something like 5 clubs and 10-11 pts. partner is telling us that its possibly our hand and that opener may have bid a lousy suit hes inviting us to play 3 clubs.




same thing as


1d----X-----1s------X

The 2nd X doenst show the world (nor does it implies diamond lenght) and youre not looking for number your just telling your partner that they might be psyching up. and that 2s is maybe your spot.

[Joe de Balliol]

helene_t, on Jul 6 2006, 06:25 AM, said:

I voted pass but Han's case is convincing. Partner will probably lead a trump, and thanks to the ace I can return trumps, thereby reducing the club ruffs in the dummy.

Sums up my views and vote

[HeartA]

awm, on Jul 5 2006, 05:59 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

---

RHO starts with a pass, I pass, and LHO opens 1♠. Partner passes, RHO bids 1NT (forcing). Now I double for takeout. LHO bids 2♣ and partner doubles (penalty). RHO corrects to 2♠. Now what? The auction so far is:

Pass - Pass - 1♠ - Pass
1NT! - X - 2♣ - X
2♠ - ??

Feel free to criticize the earlier calls if you like. Keep in mind that the scoring is matchpoints.

pass, wtp?

pd heard your dbl.

[Winstonm]

I have been convinced that double is by far the best bid - this is a totally coopertive double and gives us the flexibility to play 2S doubled or our own contract. Pass puts too much pressure on partner to act again and makes him guess without input as to the best action. Double supplies him with information that allows an intelligent pass or pull.

[zimzam]

after this auction this hand is empty. nothing more to do here so I pass

[cade909]

Pass. It's the logical bid IMHO.

[willow23]

I dbl there ..

If p has defensive values he passes ..if not he bids on...

There..p's dbl may be responsive ...saying that he has ♥ and ♦

Well...all up to agreement..

Glad I am not in the hot seat on that one

[jdeegan]

My vote is for a cautious pass, although I have to admire a double. It says to me:

"gemino, ergo sum"