[awm]

Fluffy, on Sep 1 2009, 08:30 AM, said:

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♣.

A lot of people invert the meaning of pass and double in some auctions after interference with a strong club, which is fine. But take some auctions like:

2♣(1) - Pass - 2♥(2) - 3♠
Pass - Pass

(1) Strong
(2) Double negative; denies a king or two queens

Is pass forcing here? It seems likely that responder has absolutely nothing, and that opener has a big balanced hand with 22-24 hcp. There is no particular reason that 3♠ cannot be making, and it is actually quite unlikely that our side can make a game...

2♣(1) - 2♠(2) - X(3) - 3♣(4)
Pass - Pass

(1) Strong
(2) Spades and a minor
(3) Negative; 0-2 hcp
(4) Pass or correct

Again, is pass forcing? I don't really think it should be. This is different from a pass being forcing on the strong hand at a low level, where it's hard to imagine selling to a two-level contract with 22 hcp in any case.

Some other common examples where people disagree with my guidelines:

1♠ - Pass - 1NT - Pass
2♠ - X

Penalty? My rules say no, but old-fashioned standard is penalty and a lot of good players disagree with me here.

1NT(1) - X(2) - 2♦(3) - Pass
Pass - X

(1) 12-14
(2) Cards; 15+ hcp
(3) To play

Was pass forcing? Is X penalty? I would say no to both because advancer could have a yarborough, but many good players disagree.

Anyway, the point is just that a lot of people think these rules sound good on the surface, but once we get to individual auctions they disagree with me pretty frequently.

[Fluffy]

my balanced 2♣ openings are stronger, 22-23 goes through 2♦.

[Quantumcat]

Life is easy if you play all takeout doubles except when we have found a fit or are in a game force auction.

[bid_em_up]

nigel_k, on Sep 1 2009, 05:06 AM, said:

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.

Please show me an example hand given the conditions:

1) partner is under the major suit bidder
2) partner likely will not hold 5+ cards in that major (no transfer initially) and,
3) partner is unlikely to have 8+ hcp and four good cards in the major (no stayman)

that would be suitable for converting the NT openers "takeout" double to penalty.

Given these conditions, I cannot consider this to be an "upside" of playing the NT bidders double as takeout as partner will "never"* hold a hand that is actually capable of converting this double to penalties.

* Never say Never, but the chances of this actually occuring will be much more infrequent than chances of the NT opener holding a penalty oriented hand, imo.

[nigel_k]

bid_em_up, on Sep 4 2009, 10:47 AM, said:

nigel_k, on Sep 1 2009, 05:06 AM, said:

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.

Please show me an example hand given the conditions:

1) partner is under the major suit bidder
2) partner likely will not hold 5+ cards in that major (no transfer initially) and,
3) partner is unlikely to have 8+ hcp and four good cards in the major (no stayman)

Obviously you'd need four good trumps, probably a sequence eg QJTx plus an ace or king.