[Chris3875]

If the opposition open 1♦ and I have an opening hand but no 5-card suit, I can double to give that information to my partner.

If the opposition open 1♦ and I am asleep at the wheel and bid 1♣ (insufficient bid which is not accepted by LHO), can I then replace it with a double? Law 27B1b "If, except as in (a), the insufficient bid is corrected with a legal call that in the Director's opinion has the same meaning as, or more precise meaning than, the insufficient bid (such meanings being fully contained within the possible meanings of the insufficient bid) the auction proceeds without further rectification"

[Vampyr]

Chris3875, on Oct 23 2009, 03:04 AM, said:

If the opposition open 1♦ and I have an opening hand but no 5-card suit, I can double to give that information to my partner.

If the opposition open 1♦ and I am asleep at the wheel and bid 1♣ (insufficient bid which is not accepted by LHO), can I then replace it with a double? Law 27B1b "If, except as in (a), the insufficient bid is corrected with a legal call that in the Director's opinion has the same meaning as, or more precise meaning than, the insufficient bid (such meanings being fully contained within the possible meanings of the insufficient bid) the auction proceeds without further rectification"

The question you have to ask is whether every hand that would double would also open 1♣, and the answer is clearly no.

[Chris3875]

We play a "short club" - so my 1♣ bid would be saying, opening hand, no 5-card major - wouldn't the double be saying the same thing ?

[Vampyr]

Chris3875, on Oct 23 2009, 03:32 AM, said:

We play a "short club" - so my 1♣ bid would be saying, opening hand, no 5-card major - wouldn't the double be saying the same thing ?

There are other hand-types that might double though. For example, if you play a standard takeout-double style, your double might be based on a hand too good to overcall 1 of a suit, or too good to overcall 1NT.

[aguahombre]

too much information from the 1C insufficient bid. If you are playing weak NT, but might have overcalled 1N with 15-17--now you get to substitute a double to keep from barring partner? OP states that with an opening hand and no 5cM he "can" double to show that. He doesn't say he wouldn't make a shapely takeout double with slightly less that opening bid values--eliminated by the 1C bid.

I would not allow double to be subsituted with no restrictions on partner.

[duschek]

aguahombre, on Oct 23 2009, 12:46 AM, said:

If you are playing weak NT, but might have overcalled 1N with 15-17--now you get to substitute a double to keep from barring partner?

In theory, yes. It is only relevant what the replacement call showed before the insufficient bid was made. You are allowed to replace with a call with the same or a more specific meaning than the insufficient bid even if your hand would not normally be suitable for that call.

However, since a takeout double of an opening 1♦ bid may show a 4414 with 10 HCP or a 17+ HCP hand with 5+♥/♠ or any 21+ HCP hand, I agree that Law 27B1b does not apply (at least, in its strict interpretation) and hence the player cannot substitute 1♣ with a double.

---

A new question: When a player substitutes an insufficient bid under Law 27B1a (lowest sufficient bid in the same denomination), Law 16D does not apply (i.e., the fact that the hand may not fit with the description is authorised information for partner, but see Law 27D...).

However, Law 27B1b (same or more precise meaning) makes no reference to Law 16D. Therefore, information from the insufficient bid is now unauthorised, right?

[pran]

Sorry, forget it. I misread as a missing reference to L27D.

Sven

[Chris3875]

I want to just labour this point one more time because I really don't understand the subtle differences ....

My 1♣ opening can be 11 - 18 HCP - the only other information it gives is that it has no 5-card major. If I had 16-18 HCP and the hand was balanced I would open 1NT. If the opposition open at the 1-level and I then double I am telling my partner EXACTLY the same thing as my 1♣ bid. Why then, can I not double if I make a 1♣ insufficient bid ? I have read Law27B1b a hundred times (don't exaggerate Chris) and it seems (to me) to allow it.

[blackshoe]

What would you open with 6 good clubs and 5 not so good spades? (I want to leave aside the question of how you would treat 6 good spades and 6 lousy clubs, as one could argue that hand should be treated as 5-5).

[Chris3875]

If I had an opening hand I would always open with the major

[blackshoe]

Perhaps I asked the wrong question.

RHO opens 1♦. You say that double shows any hand without a 5 card major in the 11-18 range except hands which would open 1NT? How short is your "short club"? 4=4=4=1?

[Chris3875]

We don't play better minor, so a diamond would have to be 5 - therefore a 1♣ COULD be 1.

I have to say that I've never personally been in this situation (of wanting to replace an IB with a double) but I was asked the question recently and couldn't see any reason why not.

[karlson]

I think one of the first replies wondered what you would do over 1d with AKx AQJxxx AKx x. If that's not a double (though how can it not be) add however much else you need.

[aguahombre]

karlson, on Oct 23 2009, 08:28 PM, said:

I think one of the first replies wondered what you would do over 1d with AKx AQJxxx AKx x. If that's not a double (though how can it not be) add however much else you need.

what on earth does that have to do with the 1C insufficient bid???

[blackshoe]

The question is whether, in Chris' system, there are hands that would double 1D that would not bid 1C if RHO passed.

[gordontd]

aguahombre, on Oct 24 2009, 04:43 AM, said:

karlson, on Oct 23 2009, 08:28 PM, said:

I think one of the first replies wondered what you would do over 1d with AKx AQJxxx AKx x. If that's not a double (though how can it not be) add however much else you need.

what on earth does that have to do with the 1C insufficient bid???

The question that Max Bavin suggested we directors ask ourselves, in his paper for the EBU when the new laws came into effect, is:

"Would all hands which might make the new call (the replacement bid) have also made the old call (the insufficient bid)?”

So, the reason the hand is relevant is because the player would (I imagine) double first with that hand, but would not have opened 1C with it. The same would be true of a very strong balanced hand - eg a 22-count.

Thus the insufficient bid would not be "corrected with a legal call that in the Director’s opinion has the same meaning as, or a more precise meaning than, the insufficient bid (such meaning being fully contained within the possible meanings of the insufficient bid)"

[Chris3875]

I think I have finally got it !! (as per Eliza Doolittle).

If I had a hand with 21 points and RHO had passed, I would open that hand either 2C or 2NT depending on whether it was balanced or not. If RHO opened 1D, I would DOUBLE.

In other words, the double is not a legal substitution of an insufficient 1C bid because it does not describe ONLY a hand that is 11-18 HCP - it could be anything from 11 - whatever is left over from RHO's count and therefore does not meet the requirements of Law 27B1b (thanks to Ed Reppert for help with this one).

Whew ... another hurdle jumped over.

[blackshoe]

You're welcome.