[pooltuna]

You hold, as a self described expert,

AJx
Axxx
Q2
KQTx

Playing IMP pairs with you V vs NV and using SAYC. Sitting in first
seat you hear this auction

West North East South
- - - 1NT
3S P P X
P P XX P
P P

Partner leads a small club and dummy plops with

9xx
KQJ
JT9xx
Ax

T1 xC A T x
T2 KH A x x
T3 QD A x x
T4 xH x K x
T5 QH x xC x
T6 xS x QS x
T7 xD K xD 2
T8 xD J JS x
T9 KC xS x x
T10 xS x 9 A
declarer claims

After inspecting the whole hand partner says "Why did you X, you don't
have the hand for it"

You smartly retort "I play that X for takeout"

[wclass___]

You should simply duck first ♥ (2nd trick), If the double was for take-out partner most probably would bid 4♥ with 5.
Anyway, funny story

[655321]

pooltuna, on Jul 25 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

After inspecting the whole hand partner says "Why did you X, you don't
have the hand for it"

You smartly retort "I play that X for takeout"

My advice would be to play with people you know instead of with random pickup partners. No doubt after scoring -760 you already realised what a foolish bid the double was, so it would be particularly galling to hear partner gratuitously offer a lesson.

Still, the comeback about takeout doubles was good, partner might be able to take the hint that he needs to learn some manners...

[Vilgan]

X was pretty wretched, and the defense that followed wasn't much better. I'm guessing with the "self described expert" comment you were the partner who had to put up with this nonsense?

[RichMor]

pooltuna, on Jul 25 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

You hold, as a self described expert,

AJx
Axxx
Q2
KQTx

Playing IMP pairs with you V vs NV and using SAYC. Sitting in first
seat you hear this auction

West North East South
-    -    -    1NT
3S  P    P    X
P    P    XX  P
P    P

<snip the play>

After inspecting the whole hand partner says "Why did you X, you don't
have the hand for it"

You smartly retort "I play that X for takeout"

I think the double should be takeout and the given hand is not suitable for such action.

[pooltuna]

RichMor, on Jul 27 2009, 08:09 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Jul 25 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

You hold, as a self described expert,

AJx
Axxx
Q2
KQTx

Playing IMP pairs with you V vs NV and using SAYC. Sitting in first
seat you hear this auction

West North East South
-    -     -    1NT
3S   P     P    X
P    P     XX   P
P    P

<snip the play>

After inspecting the whole hand partner says "Why did you X, you don't
have the hand for it"

You smartly retort "I play that X for takeout"

I think the double should be takeout and the given hand is not suitable for such action.

restating conditions V vs not, IMP pairs. Now you think X should be takeout by the 1NT bidder? Show me a hand that meets the criteria and that is not potentially volunteering our side for a ZIP code ending with two or three 0s

[gwnn]

xx
AKxx
AQTx
Axx

Yes we can go for -1100 but that is extremely unlikely. Surely this type of hand occurs more often than

QJT98
AKx
AKx
xx

since they bid spades! so our spades rate to be bad and not good!

[pooltuna]

gwnn, on Jul 27 2009, 11:05 AM, said:

xx
AKxx
AQTx
Axx

Yes we can go for -1100 but that is extremely unlikely. Surely this type of hand occurs more often than

QJT98
AKx
AKx
xx

since they bid spades! so our spades rate to be bad and not good!

And you assume that because your suggested hand occurs more frequently that you are safe enough to X? You were facing -140 or -170 at probable worst. Now you start losing IMPs at -200 and it is not enough that you have the hand you propose what is partner's holding likely to be. Do you think he didn't hear you bid 1NT?

[gwnn]

Yes, I think X is a long term winner with my proposed hand because

-partner could hold a balanced hand with a little defence but not enough to bid 3NT on his own. now we get 300 or something along those lines
-partner could hold a long suit of his own, now we're making a contract on the 4 level
-partner could hold a penalty pass (=something like 8 hcp with 2 trump tricks). now we could get quite rich

Yes partner heard me open 1NT but I could have had

xxx
KQx
KJTx
KQJ

so he had no satisfactory option. If I have a good hand with a small doubleton and a maximum opener, I think my IMP expectancy is clearly better if I reopen with a takeout double (provided that I have agreed to it beforehand). Of course it is up to debate whether
-what this post says is true (i.e. there exist hands which qualify for both a 1nt opener and a reopening double)
-agreeing to penalty doubles yields an even better imps expectancy than takeout doubles.

I think the answers are yes and no. You think the answers are no and yes.

[OleBerg]

Just a story. (But true.)

I once held something like:

♠ xxx
♥ KQJ10
♦ Axx
♣ xxx

I opened a 10-12 NT, and it continued:

1NT - (2♥) - Pass - (4♥)
X - (Pass) - Pass - (Pass)

Partner led a black suit, and their diamond loser went away. -790.

I have no idée what the moral, if any, of this story is.

[blewah]

I agree to gwnn and am surprised that our opinion is minority so far in this forum. A reopening double by an 1NT bidder should be a take out provided that the level is acceptable to be so. In this example, LHO's 3♠ is still an acceptable level for me to play the reopening DBL as take-out. Maybe that's not the case if LHO bids at 4 level. Also, what about both opps' level-4 bid?

I would think that in general, if reopening DBL of a 1NT opener is made in level 2, it is highly logical to treat it as take-out with the reasons explained by gwnn. Higher levels and both opps' interventions? Need agreement.

A small note: I think the hand in this example is not suitable for a take-out DBL.

[the hog]

I play Xs at he 2 level for takeout. The posted hand is not suitable for a penalty or a takeout double.

[Codo]

The_Hog, on Jul 28 2009, 02:29 PM, said:

I play Xs at he 2 level for takeout. The posted hand is not suitable for a penalty or a takeout double.

yupp. I would make a to double of 2 Diamond but not higher...