[Walddk]

jdonn, on Jan 5 2008, 08:13 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jan 4 2008, 04:56 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 3 2008, 11:04 PM, said:

...but I hope you understand that playing penalty doubles of a strong NT opening is a losing proposition to begin with.

Nope. I don't understand that, I play double as penalties. It's vital against a 1st or 3rd seat NV 1NT opening, and I don't find I'm losing out against other openings either.

I agree with Phil (though I wouldn't state it as fact.) The reason I find it a loser (and that you wouldn't see it) is that the loss is on all the other hands you can no longer show. Whether it's single suited, major and a minor, or whatever, there is simply too much burden on the other bids if you don't have double available to show something, IMO.

I don't find it a loser at all. You can bid 2♣ for the majors, 2♦ for one major and 2M for the major and a minor. The only thing you lose is a 4c major with a longer minor (Woolsey).

Right, I also lose both minors (in case you play dont), but that does not bother me one bit.

Roland

[pclayton]

Walddk, on Jan 5 2008, 10:21 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 5 2008, 08:13 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jan 4 2008, 04:56 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 3 2008, 11:04 PM, said:

...but I hope you understand that playing penalty doubles of a strong NT opening is a losing proposition to begin with.

Nope. I don't understand that, I play double as penalties. It's vital against a 1st or 3rd seat NV 1NT opening, and I don't find I'm losing out against other openings either.

I agree with Phil (though I wouldn't state it as fact.) The reason I find it a loser (and that you wouldn't see it) is that the loss is on all the other hands you can no longer show. Whether it's single suited, major and a minor, or whatever, there is simply too much burden on the other bids if you don't have double available to show something, IMO.

I don't find it a loser at all. You can bid 2♣ for the majors, 2♦ for one major and 2M for the major and a minor. The only thing you lose is a 4c major with a longer minor (Woolsey).

Right, I also lose both minors (in case you play dont), but that does not bother me one bit.

Roland

Roland, in the JEC vugraph the other night, when asked which NT defense you you prefer, you replied:

"Woolsey, by far"

Do you remember that?

[Walddk]

pclayton, on Jan 5 2008, 08:38 PM, said:

Roland, in the JEC vugraph the other night, when asked which NT defense you you prefer, you replied:

"Woolsey, by far"

Do you remember that?

I do (remember) and I do (prefer Woolsey). All I am saying is that it is not losing to play double as penalties. Since I was young I have always been flexible regarding systems and conventions, so if a partner I care for prefers to let double be for penalties I will comply, happily even, because I think that this could work very well.

As most of you know there are conventions I do not play, but they have to be really awful before I say "thanks but no thanks." With a regular partner it's all about compromises, and if you can't get the one you love, you've got to love the one you get.

Roland