[whereagles]

I'll just bid 2NT. After all, I could have opened that. However, if there's a chance pard might take this as a singleton heart, I prefer a pull to 3♥.

I don't like passing 2♠ doubled because I might not have an entry in dummy to elope my ♠8.

[MFA]

The_Hog, on May 24 2009, 09:41 PM, said:

MFA, on May 25 2009, 05:26 AM, said:

Winstonm, on May 24 2009, 03:53 PM, said:

I think you need to rethink your usage of the double in this sequence:  the only time it is of any real value is if your partner has made some kind of trap pass of 1S.  Otherwise, why takeout 1S when the opponents have no fit for spades?  And why waste a bid needed to show a superior hand type (meaning strong hand) for such a low-occurrence event as a 1S trap pass?

I would prefer to be able to double 1N for penalties - the time for takeout bids is when the opponents have shown a fit or there is a strong likelihood of their having a fit.

In your system, a pass is required as you don't have a takeout hand.

No, I'm satisfied with take-out doubles here. "Strong hand" makes it impossible for partner, if it could be any strong hand. Most strong hands would therefore want to pass, which is also a sensible plan even with this nice 21 count.

Take-out doubles provide a nice basis that partner can choose his bidding from. We can investigate fit in any of the remaining three suits. Partner could easily have useful distribution without the strength for initial action.
As is the case with most take-out doubles, it could be off shape if there is compensating power (and a reasonably attractive catch-up plan).

But what this means is that the X of 1NT was NOT "in principle a tkeout of S". In fact it can mean a variety of hand types. Sorry to be pedantic, but if you explained it as a t/o of S, I think a director call is coming.

If an opponent is having a problem with a 21-count t/o-x not containing at least 3 cards in every unbid suit, then I will wish him a pleasant journey in the world of bridge. Or whatever game of cards that he thinks he is playing at the moment.
Inwardly of course, since I don't expect his to be a particularly humourous type.

[MFA]

gnasher, on May 25 2009, 03:19 AM, said:

The best meaning for double of 1NT is probably an unbalanced hand with four hearts, isn't it?  This seems a lot more useful than either strong balanced or semi-three-suited.

It would be functional, but I think it's too narrow. The one thing partner doesn't have is 4 hearts and values. So I wouldn't really want to double in that sense unless quite strong. The problem is again that with the rest of my hand undefined partner would be ill-placed to make a decision, unless he can support hearts.

No I'm happy with t/o of spades.

Incidently, in the following auctions I play something like what you suggest with my regular partner:

1♦ - (1NT) - p - (p), X
1♥ - (1NT) - p - (p), X
1♠ - (1NT) - p - (p), X

Here the reopening double shows 4 spades, 4 spades and 4 hearts respectively. That is in a precision context, but I think it's a good idea regardless.

(The board of the thread was not played with my most regular partner, therefore no precision).