[gwnn]

p-p-1♠-p
2♣-p-2♠-p
p-???

Jx
Axxx
Jxxx
KJx

imps all red. 2♣ was droori

[Phil]

The mad balancer passes this one.

Not quite an LOL but close.

[Lobowolf]

I thought *I* was the Mad Balancer.

White at matchpoints, I'm all over it. Red at IMPs, not so much.

[Jlall]

LOL

[jdonn]

Oh no, they stopped on the 2 level!

Phil it's too bad you posted, I was going to do my bad Phil impression. "I balance at mps, if I pass it's a 30% board."

[Codo]

I think that it would be of more value to double 2 club as a take out against spades then 2 spade.
You have much less risk and just lost the ability to show clubs.
(Same is true for Bergen raises.)

Now, you can choose how to lose, I will try the normal pass.

[gwnn]

I didn't believe my eyes that the guy doubled and had everybody's support for his decision from the table. But sometimes when I see one of these actions and post it I realize that it was me who was cuckoo. This time double didn't cost so much since after the drury bidder competed to the 3 level, opener still didn't accept the invite (for 620 or 650). They had a misunderstanding about the strength of 2♠. But all of this is beside the point.

[gwnn]

Codo, on Oct 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

I think that it would be of more value to double 2 club as a take out against spades then 2 spade.
You have much less risk and just lost the ability to show clubs.
(Same is true for Bergen raises.)

Now, you can choose how to lose, I will try the normal pass.

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=6275

while I don't want to imply that you're wrong just because "Fred said so", I think you might find his post (and the replies to it) here interesting.

[Jlall]

gwnn, on Oct 10 2009, 08:13 PM, said:

Codo, on Oct 10 2009, 08:26 AM, said:

I think that it would be of more value to double 2 club as a take out against spades then 2 spade.
You have much less risk and just lost the ability to show clubs.
(Same is true for Bergen raises.)

Now, you can choose how to lose, I will try the normal pass.

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=6275

while I don't want to imply that you're wrong just because "Fred said so", I think you might find his post (and the replies to it) here interesting.

Not surprised that I disagree with my old self. I now play Xing drury as takeout.

This is different than doubling a transfer imo, there is significant risk of passing and doubling with a takeout X over drury, and significant gain in being able to show that hand type risk free immediately.

Admittedly Fred's point remains that if they are going to bid game over drury then you have just told them how to play the hand for no reason. Still I kinda hate balancing after they drury because if they are good you're going to get doubled like A LOT...but if you just always pass you might lose some partscore swings.

edit: I guess technically I didn't disagree with myself since I didn't say what I liked to do over drury, but I know that 2005 and even 2008 jlall played X of drury as lead directing.

[P_Marlowe]

X.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

gwnn, on Oct 11 2009, 10:13 AM, said:

http://forums.bridge...?showtopic=6275

while I don't want to imply that you're wrong just because "Fred said so", I think you might find his post (and the replies to it) here interesting.

Thanks for the link! Very nice to read this stuff again.

[MFA]

I'm also used to X of Drury is takeout.

[mike777]

MFA, on Oct 12 2009, 04:15 AM, said:

I'm also used to X of Drury is takeout.

This is not an x of drury.


on this hand you do not have a takeout of clubs or a penalty of clubs.

[bid_em_up]

mike777, on Oct 12 2009, 04:21 AM, said:

on this hand you do not have a takeout of clubs

Is this serious?

The takeout X of the Drury response of 2C is a takeout double of their major (given they have a fit), and not a takeout double of clubs.

If you are using this treatment and the opponents are playing two-way Drury, I would guess that an X of 2D would also be a takeout double of their major?