[paulg]

How do you play double and pass in the following auction:

West [space] North [space]East [space] South
1[he] [space] [space] Dbl [space] [space]Rdbl [space] 2[di]
?

I have generally played that double is takeout by both West and East in this auction. I have seen others play that double is penalty by both West and East. Both styles seem playable to me.

However I saw something new this weekend as Reisig and Garozzo play that pass shows either short or long diamonds. Presumably double shows something in-between.

At first glance this seemed better as you will be able to double them when they are in a 7-card fit and you both hold three cards in their suit, traditionally something that is difficult to do.

However further thought has me confused (mind you, that's not tough to achieve).

How does the original redoubler act after a pass? If he has a true penalty double, and he could have 5 diamonds on this auction, then how does West know to leave it with his singleton? Presumably the redoubler also has to double on a doubleton in case opener has four diamonds?

Any advocates of this style like to explain their methods and success of it?

Thanks

Paul

[whereagles]

The classic meaning (that I know of, at least) for dbls/pass is this:

- Direct dbl: true penalty
- Direct pass: no true penalty, waiting & forcing
- Delayed dbl: optional. At least xxx (but usually Hxx) or better in opps' suit. Opener tends to pass with xxx or Hx or bid something otherwise.

Some reverse direct dbl/pass, making pass = asks pard to dbl and dbl = take-out. Others play garozzo 2/3 dbls, etc.

As for the merit of each method.. well, all schemes have good & bad points, but they're all playable. One should pick the scheme one feels best with.

[MickyB]

Whereagles, how do you plan to make a delayed double of 2♦ on this auction?

Paul, I imagine that they give up on penalties when the long trumps are under the diamond bidder. It might work to play that responder's double is also two-way, but sometimes opener will have a penalty pass when responder's diamonds are too long for a takeout double.

[helene_t]

cardsharp, on Nov 7 2006, 01:36 PM, said:

How does the original redoubler act after a pass? If he has a true penalty double, and he could have 5 diamonds on this auction, then how does West know to leave it with his singleton? Presumably the redoubler also has to double on a doubleton in case opener has four diamonds?

Any advocates of this style like to explain their methods and success of it?

If opener has a singleton trumps he will take out responders double whether playing tranditional or Garozzo/Reisig. Or, if he would respect redoubler's penalty double with traditional method, he will double in the G/R method. So the options for defending are the same in both methods.

The advantage of the G/R method is that opener, when he does not want to leave in redoubler's penalty double, has more bidding space. He can either bid directly or pass and take-out.

In the tradictional methods, he can try do that as well, but the auction may become messed up when redoubler does not double. He will then bid something that may deprive opener from the bidding space he planned to use.

[inquiry]

They were playing Garozzo 2-3 doubles, where a double shows 2-3 cards in the bid suit (after a redouble) and a pass shows 1 or 4+. Bidding on instead of pass or double is frequently with a void.

There is a lot of places you can read about this treatment. But since Glenn Ashton post here take a look at his excellent www.bridgematters.com website.. .which is where I first learned of this convention (I have stole it and use it on a number of auctions beyond redouble ones).

[Apollo81]

cardsharp, on Nov 7 2006, 07:36 AM, said:

How do you play double and pass in the following auction:

West [space] North [space]East [space] South
1[he] [space] [space] Dbl [space] [space]Rdbl [space] 2[di]
?

I usually play doubles after 1MXX as penalty and doubles after 1mXX or 1NTXX as takeout.

[pclayton]

This is a textbook penalty double. I don't understand the logic of this being a takeout double, since you don't want pard to convert.

Papi's treatment is interesting. I suppose the theory is that with a stiff ♦, you are not leaving in a double anyway, so communicate to partner that you have 2 or 3. Pard can still convert with extra values and 3 diamonds for instance.

What is confusing to me is what is a reopening double by responder? Is it a stack that can mangle 2♦ opposite shortness? Or is it shortness that wants to let pard convert with length. I suppose 'at the table', you can determine it, but sometimes the opponents stumble into an 11 card fit, although this might be the outlier you pay off to to extract a lot of +300's .

[whereagles]

MickyB, on Nov 7 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

Whereagles, how do you plan to make a delayed double of 2♦ on this auction?

well, by passing and waiting for pard to dbl

[cherdano]

pclayton, on Nov 7 2006, 08:40 PM, said:

This is a textbook penalty double. I don't understand the logic of this being a takeout double, since you don't want pard to convert.

Papi's treatment is interesting. I suppose the theory is that with a stiff ♦, you are not leaving in a double anyway, so communicate to partner that you have 2 or 3. Pard can still convert with extra values and 3 diamonds for instance.

What is confusing to me is what is a reopening double by responder? Is it a stack that can mangle 2♦ opposite shortness? Or is it shortness that wants to let pard convert with length. I suppose 'at the table', you can determine it, but sometimes the opponents stumble into an 11 card fit, although this might be the outlier you pay off to to extract a lot of +300's .

The reopening double is the same, showing 2-3 trumps, so it will be left in with 4 trumps, and taken out with 1 trump.

I think the logic behind Garozzo 2-3 doubles is more or less as follows.

1. We can't nail them every time they deserve so. (If we leave in penalty doubles with a void or single, we may not be able to double with so-so 4 trumps. If we take them out, we miss penalties when one of us has 5 trumps etc.)

2. Given that, the method chooses is optimized so we can always penalize them when we have 4-2 trumps. This not only is the most frequent case where we have good defense, but is also one of the worst holdings for our own contracts somewhere else.

3. As a side benefit, we can often determine from a pass (or a non-double bid) that partner has a single, which is very helpful for our own bidding.

It makes a lot of sense to me at the 2-level, where we don't often want to defend vs their 8-card fit. I am not sure they make sense at the 3-level (and don't know at what levels Garozzo plays them).

Ben knows this better though, he plays them more than I do.