[shevek]

The solution is to double all notrump openings for penalty. The dominant paradigm needs to be subverted.

The other day I doubled 1NT (15-17) with this

♠AKx  ♥KQx  ♦AT8xx  ♣Jx.

Tut, say the textbook writers. Rare hand, partner is broke, no good lead, end plays. Etc.
Well, partner had

♠xxx  ♥JT9xx  ♦J9x  ♣xx

and bid 2♥ for +110 and 5 IMPs when our team-mates were allowed to play & make 1NT. This is a frequent gain point - when you get to sit in partner's long suit.

The other big plus comes from limiting other actions. It's amusing when DONT players bid 2♥ with their balanced 17-counts.

[Lobowolf]

shevek, on Aug 20 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

The solution is to double all notrump openings for penalty. The dominant paradigm needs to be subverted.

The other day I doubled 1NT (15-17) with this

♠AKx  ♥KQx  ♦AT8xx  ♣Jx.

Tut, say the textbook writers. Rare hand, partner is broke, no good lead, end plays. Etc.
Well, partner had

♠xxx  ♥JT9xx  ♦J9x  ♣xx

and bid 2♥ for +110 and 5 IMPs when our team-mates were allowed to play & make 1NT. This is a frequent gain point - when you get to sit in partner's long suit.

The other big plus comes from limiting other actions. It's amusing when DONT players bid 2♥ with their balanced 17-counts.

DONT players DONT bid their balanced 17-counts; silly wabbit, balanced hands are for defending.

You didn't mention what system you're playing along with your penalty doubles of 1NT. For every hand where I wish I was playing doubles of a strong NT, I get a number of hands where I get to be involved in the auction on a moderate 5-4 (or 4-5) hand that I'd have to pass (playing natural) or risk getting to the 3-level (playing Hamilton).

[jdonn]

shevek, on Aug 20 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

The solution is to double all notrump openings for penalty. The dominant paradigm needs to be subverted.

The other day I doubled 1NT (15-17) with this

♠AKx  ♥KQx  ♦AT8xx  ♣Jx.

Tut, say the textbook writers. Rare hand, partner is broke, no good lead, end plays. Etc.
Well, partner had

♠xxx  ♥JT9xx  ♦J9x  ♣xx

and bid 2♥ for +110 and 5 IMPs when our team-mates were allowed to play & make 1NT. This is a frequent gain point - when you get to sit in partner's long suit.

The other big plus comes from limiting other actions. It's amusing when DONT players bid 2♥ with their balanced 17-counts.

Are you sure you didn't push your opponents to an always cold 3♣ for 110 or 130, or perhaps 2♠ for 140, when your teammates went down in 1NT since their ace of hearts was doubleton?

Anyway, if your point is simply to compete for more partscores, you will lose a lot more than you gain playing penalty doubles when compared to just about any other possible meaning for double. There is a reason penalty doubles are completely out of fashion, the expert world is not simply oblivious.

[Apollo81]

ghow, on Aug 6 2008, 11:18 AM, said:

Say you have agreed to play some defense versus weak no trumps that incorporates a penalty double and a different defense versus strong nt where double is something other than penalty. Clearly nt ranges starting at 15 or higher are "strong" and those with an upper limit of 14 or less are "weak". Which defense would you play versus 13-15 nt? 14-16?

My rule is it is weak if it doesn't contain 17/higher or it contains 13/lower

[rbforster]

Apollo81, on Aug 20 2008, 08:55 PM, said:

My rule is it is weak if it doesn't contain 17/higher or it contains 13/lower

A 13-17 NT sounds confusing under that scheme. Even a (13-14 or 17-18) NT would be. All these rules have lots of holes in them, but luckily no one plays the edge case ranges anyway.

[shevek]

jdonn, on Aug 20 2008, 08:48 PM, said:

shevek, on Aug 20 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

The solution is to double all notrump openings for penalty. The dominant paradigm needs to be subverted.

The other day I doubled 1NT (15-17) with this

♠AKx  ♥KQx  ♦AT8xx  ♣Jx.

Tut, say the textbook writers. Rare hand, partner is broke, no good lead, end plays. Etc.
Well, partner had

♠xxx  ♥JT9xx  ♦J9x  ♣xx

and bid 2♥ for +110 and 5 IMPs when our team-mates were allowed to play & make 1NT. This is a frequent gain point - when you get to sit in partner's long suit.

The other big plus comes from limiting other actions. It's amusing when DONT players bid 2♥ with their balanced 17-counts.

Are you sure you didn't push your opponents to an always cold 3♣ for 110 or 130, or perhaps 2♠ for 140, when your teammates went down in 1NT since their ace of hearts was doubleton?

Anyway, if your point is simply to compete for more partscores, you will lose a lot more than you gain playing penalty doubles when compared to just about any other possible meaning for double. There is a reason penalty doubles are completely out of fashion, the expert world is not simply oblivious.

Okay I found the hand

West had

♠QTx  ♥xxx  ♦xx  ♣Qxxxx

Indeed they make 3♣ and we shoot 1NT on a heart lead. Meanwhile - back in the real world - my hand led a diamond vs 1NT, the patzer. I didn't ask them why they couldn't get to 3♣ after my double. Common round here is to play DONT after a penalty double so XX = 1-suiter, 2♣+ = 2-suiters.
Then it might indeed have gone
(XX) - 2♥ - (X?) - 3♣.

Less frequent - but more satisfying - gains came from defending 1NTx. This is one from Istanbul Mixed in 2004.

Scoring: IMP

---

This was +1100, 2♣X is the same. Of course +400 is okay too, while +130 in 2♦ would be disappointing.

The old style penalty double of 1NT - a chunky suit and a few entries - was rare and useless. Usually they would run and you would bid your suit.
The modern style is more of a penalty suggestion. "We should get involved here, I'm too good to bid".

By the way, our bids are ASPRO, good for those major canapés. Never liked Cappelletti.

[gwnn]

After playing 14-16 a couple of month I can tell you it's a very good idea to treat it as weak. There will be a non-negligible amount of 13 counts your cheeky opps will look forward to open 1NT, especially with a good suit - so basically in this case you rate to have more hcp with better concentrated values, and have a good contract, which you'll find less often, so you should make them pay for it.

(the part after the hyphen could be bad reasoning).

BTW after a 3rd seat 1NT (at least when they're NV) double should be penalty. Many a time they misevaluate their 4x3 4 counts...

[gwnn]

A non-penalty double will occur much more often than AQ KQJx QJTxx Ax...

For every hand where they have 16 hcp and go for -1100 wherever they run there's a hand where you have their hand and go for 800 (because you can say you double 1NT only on good 16 counts) wherever YOU run!

A non-penalty double offers pard a choice of various strains, but quite often he can bid his suit if he thinks his hand is good enough. A penalty double just says "dude I have a good hand. but please run to your suit if you have a bad hand.. or just gulp if you don't have a suit."

Which method would you say will result in better partscores?

[shevek]

gwnn, on Aug 21 2008, 12:39 AM, said:

A non-penalty double will occur much more often than AQ KQJx QJTxx Ax...

For every hand where they have 16 hcp and go for -1100 wherever they run there's a hand where you have their hand and go for 800 (because you can say you double 1NT only on good 16 counts) wherever YOU run!

A non-penalty double offers pard a choice of various strains, but quite often he can bid his suit if he thinks his hand is good enough. A penalty double just says "dude I have a good hand. but please run to your suit if you have a bad hand.. or just gulp if you don't have a suit."

Which method would you say will result in better partscores?

The thing to avoid is having one strategic aim vs a 13-15 notrump and a completely different aim against 14-16. I guess in countries where it's all MPs and everyone plays 15-17, something like a raptor double (4M & 5m) makes some sense.
True, the carnage falls both ways when you double with "top of their range" but the side with the lead wins out long term. (No I can't back this up, just selective memory)

Again people confuse the modern stats-based penalty double with the 1950s rubber bridge version, which was virtually a command to pass.
Admittedly I tend to pass out partners double on a flat Yarborough if we are vul and they aren't. Take lumps, hope it's just -180. These days few redouble for blood so we won't have to turn over the table number to check the score.
If not vul, I like to scramble with these weak hands, maybe by 2♣ then redouble.

Often the opening side will have some silly method to help you out. For instance, their XX might show a 1-suiter, or pass forces redouble. This simply helps the doubler's partner to distinguish weak hands. Perhaps 1-suiters bid straight away; pass then bid = 2 suits.

We had this a month back

Scoring: IMP

---

(Is there a way to add the auction to this format?)
I doubled South's 1NT. North redoubled to show 1 suit, passing opener's forced 2♣. Looks bad but partner - god bless her - reopened with double and we scrambled to 2♥. Yes, it was a very small victory.

Using double as another way to compete destroys your game bidding. If you give partner another card like ♦Q, 4♥ is okay. Perhaps irrelevant at MPs but this was IMPs.

[OleBerg]

jdonn, on Aug 21 2008, 03:48 AM, said:

shevek, on Aug 20 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

The solution is to double all notrump openings for penalty. The dominant paradigm needs to be subverted.

The other day I doubled 1NT (15-17) with this

♠AKx  ♥KQx  ♦AT8xx  ♣Jx.

Tut, say the textbook writers. Rare hand, partner is broke, no good lead, end plays. Etc.
Well, partner had

♠xxx  ♥JT9xx  ♦J9x  ♣xx

and bid 2♥ for +110 and 5 IMPs when our team-mates were allowed to play & make 1NT. This is a frequent gain point - when you get to sit in partner's long suit.

The other big plus comes from limiting other actions. It's amusing when DONT players bid 2♥ with their balanced 17-counts.

Are you sure you didn't push your opponents to an always cold 3♣ for 110 or 130, or perhaps 2♠ for 140, when your teammates went down in 1NT since their ace of hearts was doubleton?

Anyway, if your point is simply to compete for more partscores, you will lose a lot more than you gain playing penalty doubles when compared to just about any other possible meaning for double. There is a reason penalty doubles are completely out of fashion, the expert world is not simply oblivious.

As I wrote earlier, I play penalty-doubles vs all NT-ranges, and I haven't found it that bad.

If you lower your requirements to something like 16, or maybe 15 and a good lead, the double is not that infrequent. And if you have the agreement that it doesn't establish a force, it really isn't that dangerous. Yes we might be endplayed at trick one, but declarer might be endplayed at trick two. And our strength sits over declarers.

It also removes some strain from the player in the balancing seat.

To be fair, almost all of my opponents plays a weaker range, so my experience vs the 15-17 nt is somewhat limited.