[maxentius]

How do you use to play after opponents redouble?...Do you have any agreement?

(1X)-dbl-(Rdbl)- ?

1. pass is for playing this contract?...does it depending if x= minor or major?...what is the meaning of 1Y bidding?...2/3Y-jump bidding?...2NT?...the cuebid?
2. will be a different scheme for their (2X) oppening?

[gwnn]

Hi Max,

if you get too few opinions here there was another thread a while ago that covered something similar:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=17301

I think most people said that 1x-x-xx-p was uncertainty with regards to strain and 2x-x-xx-p (or higher than 2) was penalty.

[maxentius]

thx for the link

[Jlall]

gwnn, on Nov 23 2009, 04:05 AM, said:

Hi Max,

if you get too few opinions here there was another thread a while ago that covered something similar:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=17301

I think most people said that 1x-x-xx-p was uncertainty with regards to strain and 2x-x-xx-p (or higher than 2) was penalty.

lol you're such a hero!

[hanp]

Last Saturday we had the following auction at our table:

1S - X - XX - 2H
X*

The double was alerted as either penalty or takeout. From what I understood it denied precisely 3 hearts but it could be any other length.

The opponents bid on and it didn't become clear what opener had until he put dummy down in a silly 3NT.

Is there anybody around who has better experiences with this agreement?

[helene_t]

It is known as Polish doubles (probably a term invented by some Polofobe who disliked the method) and it applies in many other situations as well I think. I have never encountered it at the table, though.

[paulg]

I recall David Burn recommending this 'takeout or penalties' approach in a defence to multi-style 2-level openers.

I cannot remember which side he was recommending it for

Paul

[kfay]

hanp, on Nov 23 2009, 06:57 AM, said:

Last Saturday we had the following auction at our table:

1S - X - XX - 2H
X*

The double was alerted as either penalty or takeout. From what I understood it denied precisely 3 hearts but it could be any other length.

The opponents bid on and it didn't become clear what opener had until he put dummy down in a silly 3NT.

Is there anybody around who has better experiences with this agreement?

I swear I saw a powerhouse pair using this in the BB. Lauria-Versace maybe?

Anyway I agree with gwnn, but I'll take a look at the thread.

I do have an inclination to believe that 1x-p-2x-dbl; rdbl-p should also show an unclear direction.

[gnasher]

hanp, on Nov 23 2009, 12:57 PM, said:

Last Saturday we had the following auction at our table:

1S - X - XX - 2H
X*

The double was alerted as either penalty or takeout. From what I understood it denied precisely 3 hearts but it could be any other length.

The opponents bid on and it didn't become clear what opener had until he put dummy down in a silly 3NT.

Is there anybody around who has better experiences with this agreement?

It sounds ridiculous. For a two-way double to work, there has to be a large disparity between the possible lengths, and preferably some expectation of help from the opponents. Playing
  (Multi) pass (2H) dbl
as an overcall in hearts or a takeout double of hearts meets both criteria, but Han's sequence meets neither. The defender's heart fit could be 4-3 or 5-5, and they're not going to be bidding again in either case.

[ArtK78]

I was really surprised when a teammate of mine messed up this seemingly elementary sequence in a double KO match last week:

1♠ - x - xx - ?

She held 6-2-1-4 distribution and this threw her for a loop. Instead of bidding the obvious 2♣, she passed. When her partner took this out to 2♦ and got doubled, she ran to 2NT! This also got doubled, and went for 1100, opposite our more mundane 400 at the other table.

My teammate is not quite as old as Dave Treadwell (who, by the way, is doing well although he recently suffered a fall), but she is in the ballpark. She is a fine player and I would not expect anything so elementary to get the best of her like this hand did. She was a teammate of mine on a District 4 GNT champion team some 15 or so years ago.

That just goes to show that some seemingly simple situations still plague many otherwise competent players.

[barmar]

ArtK78, on Nov 23 2009, 02:25 PM, said:

That just goes to show that some seemingly simple situations still plague many otherwise competent players.

Sometimes things just don't come up often enough. Then when they do, even if you should know it, the surprise boggles your mind a little, and you think yourself out of the correct action.

And sometimes it's just plain brain farts.

[kenrexford]

I have never seen anyone ever be able to explain the theory here, to my recollection, but I once read that some Italian players (years ago, I think Italian) played that Advancer bid his worst suit in this situation.

Thus, 1♣-X-XX-1♥ meant that Advancer disliked hearts the most.

I never could understand why this was done. I remain curious.

[pooltuna]

kenrexford, on Nov 23 2009, 02:58 PM, said:

I have never seen anyone ever be able to explain the theory here, to my recollection, but I once read that some Italian players (years ago, I think Italian) played that Advancer bid his worst suit in this situation.

Thus, 1♣-X-XX-1♥ meant that Advancer disliked hearts the most.

I never could understand why this was done. I remain curious.

Surely you must have conjectured some of the more obvious possible reasons.

1) preemptive effect; usually in these auction you are trying to escape with minimum loss as XX is normally indicative of the hand ownership

2) a TO bid to guide partner where to save.

[athene]

Perhaps you are thinking of the t/o doubles in the Roman Club system played by Belladonna-Avarelli in the Blue Team?

They used to make offshape t/o doubles and advancer started with his shortest suit.

I think they had some problems with it especially with opps psyching and some of the other Blue Team members tried to get them to drop it but Belladonna was convinced it was sound.

[kenrexford]

athene, on Nov 23 2009, 03:38 PM, said:

Perhaps you are thinking of the t/o doubles in the Roman Club system played by Belladonna-Avarelli in the Blue Team?

They used to make offshape t/o doubles and advancer started with his shortest suit.

I think they had some problems with it especially with opps psyching and some of the other Blue Team members tried to get them to drop it but Belladonna was convinced it was sound.

Yeah -- that's it. Any more on how it worked?

[athene]

I'm afraid don't know much about it - I haven't read the Roman Club book; there might be some stuff in there about it.

In the 1966 Bermuda Bowl final, Board 81, this hand came up:-

Scoring: IMP

---

North was Lew Mathe and opened 1♥; East, Belladonna, doubled. Now South (Hamman) psyched 1♠. West, Avarelli, couldn't show spades and strength easily - if he had doubled it would have meant the same as bidding 1♠, which would have been SHORT spades. So he just bid 1NT and they missed game.

Belladonna said it was Avarelli's fault not the system's.

Not that this really answers your question - sorry