[awm]

What's the standard meaning for double here? What do you play in your regular partnerships? Assume strong notrumps (although not obvious if it matters).

[aguahombre]

obviously not the same as 1N (2S) P (P) X, where the double is wtp takeout.

In the OP's case you are behind the Spade hand and I can think of a couple reasons it should be penalty.

1. It is consistent with the fallback that double behind is penalty, and under is takeout.
2. Your center opponent has been given another chance to come into the auction, and you might have a hand that really wants to discourage that.

[cRi cRi]

Well, my only advice, don't dbl if you have discuss that with your partner .%
I personally play it as penalty.

[gnasher]

Takeout, with something like xx AQxx KQxx KQx. You should want to bid with this hand, and you will get many more penalties by playing takeout doubles from both sides than by playing penalty doubles.

[Fluffy]

The fact that I am behind or before the overcaller never plays a role when deciding that a double is penalty or not.

It is just a big mess to have different aproaches by position.


I had a similar sequence where I though penalty made more sense a couple of days ago:

(1♦)-1ST-(2♥)-X

But having a diffeent meaning for this one and say

(1♣)-1ST-(2♦)-X

Would end to many missunderstandings.

[rd6789]

gnasher, on Aug 31 2009, 04:04 AM, said:

Takeout, with something like xx AQxx KQxx KQx. 

yes, and p can bid 2NT with 4-4 in the minors to find your fit

[Jlall]

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Aug 31 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

I presume there is substantial tolerance for conversion by partner so it is really a DSIP X

[TimG]

Shouldn't 1N-(P)-P-(2♠), DBL and 1N-(P)-P-(2♠), P-(P)-DBL have the same meaning? I think both takeout would be most common.

With regular partners, I play that these doubles show exactly two spades. We might not catch them when our spades are 3-3 (or worse), but then we ought to be just as well off defending 2♠ as declaring 1N, probably better off.

[cherdanno]

pooltuna, on Aug 31 2009, 09:12 AM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 31 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

I presume there is substantial tolerance for conversion by partner so it is really a DSIP X

Yeah, I usually have 2 spades and 14+hcp for this double.

[matmat]

cherdanno, on Aug 31 2009, 11:08 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Aug 31 2009, 09:12 AM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 31 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

I presume there is substantial tolerance for conversion by partner so it is really a DSIP X

Yeah, I usually have 2 spades and 14+hcp for this double.

LOL

[ArtK78]

Jlall, on Aug 31 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

I don't know what expert standard is for this double.

I know that, without any discussion, Dave Treadwell plays it as a penalty double, and I have not seen any evidence of any local experts playing the double as anything but a penalty double.

I know that I had an agreement with one of my partners that a double by a 1NT opener always showed shortness in the bid suit.

Suffice it to say that one should discuss the meaning of the double with one's partner.

[Lobowolf]

Do they even make penalty doubles anymore?

[Coelacanth]

According to BWS, this is a penalty double

Quote

(i) one notrump — (overcall) — pass — (pass) — double is for takeout, but one notrump — (pass) — pass — (overcall) — double is for penalty

[Double !]

Jlall, on Aug 31 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

Takeout is how I play it. I assume this to be expert standard.

I agree, although I don't play with enough "experts" to know what is "expert standard".

I have several books from way back when (i.e.: before some of you might have been born) that assert that the dbl behind the suit bidder is penalty. I have rarely, if ever, been fortunate enough to have such a hand.

Treating the dbl as takeout seems much more sensible, sort of tantamount to opening 1suit-p-p-2S-X: correct shape and enough to be able to play at the 3-level. Partnership should establish what a 2NT response to the X will be: (natural, minors, Leb, etc?) IMO, the 1NT opener doesn't even need a max 1NT opener to X 2S: just a hand that wants to compete. (Suggestion: check the vulnerability and your ODR. It might be easier to get +200 by passing than to get +110/130/140. Remember also: responder did not take any action over your 1NT opener including transferring to Hts.)

DHL

[awm]

I think one of my bidding rules is:

If partner could have a yarborough, then double of the opponents partial in a suit is not penalty.

This goes along with my rule that:

If partner could have a yarborough, then pass is not forcing.

However, I suspect that a lot of players (especially older players) do not agree with these rules.

[cherdanno]

Coelacanth, on Aug 31 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

According to BWS, this is a penalty double

Quote

(i) one notrump — (overcall) — pass — (pass) — double is for takeout, but one notrump — (pass) — pass — (overcall) — double is for penalty

I am happy to bet that this will be different the next time they poll this question for BWS.

[jdeegan]

take out
small doubleton ♠, max HCP, 2-4-4-3 distribution and an unbalanced mind. I guess this means that a 2NT bid would show: a small doubleton spade, max HCP, 2-3-4-4 distribution and an unbalanced mind. Do you think BWS will buy that?
Then again, what do I do with a small doubleton ♠, max HCP and 2-4-5-2 distribution? Bid 2NT and correct 3♣ to 3♦? Will BWS buy this?

[nigel_k]

I don't claim to know what most other people do, but takeout is better.

The downside is the small number of times you have good spades, partner doesn't have a takeout double and they don't find a better spot.

If you normally play partner's double as takeout, the upside is you can now get them when partner makes a penalty pass of your takeout double.

If you normally play partner's double as penalties, the upside of switching to takeout is you have 2NT as a scramble which you wouldn't if he had to bid 2NT for takeout. And he can bid 2NT to show a different hand.

[Fluffy]

awm, on Aug 31 2009, 09:24 PM, said:

If partner could have a yarborough, then pass is not forcing.

I generally agree with your guidelines, but there is at least one excepction, after opening 2♣.