[helene_t]

IMPs, r/w.
(1♥)-x-(1♠)-3♦
(3♥)-p-(p)-x

If you are a LOTT-revisionist you may object to phrasing the penatlishness of the double in terms of required {diamonds minus hearts} to pull, but I hope you can give an indication anyway. (Or anyways in Justin's case).

I suppose most would say that failure to do something over 3♥ denies 0-5 reds.

Related question: How strong is 3♦?

[andy_h]

helene_t, on Nov 26 2009, 09:25 PM, said:

I suppose most would say that failure to do something over 3♥ denies 0-5 reds.

Ja, this for sure.

Otherwise I would generally pass as I trust partner's penalty double given that it's imps scoring and that he is under declarer. I would pass with 4045 as well.

3♦ is as if there was no 1♠ with a little higher minimum given you can freebid 2♦.

[aguahombre]

andy_h, on Nov 26 2009, 06:38 AM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 26 2009, 09:25 PM, said:

I suppose most would say that failure to do something over 3♥ denies 0-5 reds.

Ja, this for sure.

Otherwise I would generally pass as I trust partner's penalty double given that it's imps scoring and that he is under declarer. I would pass with 4045 as well.

3♦ is as if there was no 1♠ with a little higher minimum given you can freebid 2♦.

yep. Answered the poll with a pull if I have what I can't have. (0-5)

[kenberg]

My vote was for "other", which I suppose puts me in the LOTT Revisionist camp. Partner is bidding on the basis that my double will often be on something like a 12 count with four spades and reasonable support of diamonds. If that's what I have, why should I bid my same hand again? Maybe I'm crazy but with five diamonds, no hearts and very little extra beyond my double I think I bid 5D over 3H and I bid 4D at least some other hands, not waitng for 5-0. I don't know what partner has, but he seems to like diamonds. My spades are important. QJxx may be worthless in a diamond contract, Axxx is a trick and a control.


Usually I will be passing the double but not always and my decision will not be entirely based on counting red cards. For example with four diamonds and one heart, and with absolutely noting to show beyond my first double, I would certainly pass 3h and I would give serious consideration to pulling the double. With that shape and better and fitting values, I have already bid 4D.

[Phil]

Yes I have a hard time cannot imagine a hand that passes 3♥ and pulls a penalty x. 0-5 is out. 0-4? Maybe, but remember its quite possible the doubler has six hearts LOL.

[helene_t]

kenberg, on Nov 26 2009, 04:21 PM, said:

My vote was for "other", which I suppose puts me in the LOTT Revisionist camp. [.....]
Usually I will be passing the double but not always and my decision will not be entirely based on counting red cards.

Yes I agree that your A-D also depends on your spade honors.

I just use the number of red cards in order to create a simple scale for A-D, this is not to suggest that the number of red cards contain all the information you need, any more than the number of HCPs (or LTC, or whatever) are enough to decide whether to accept a game try.

[kenberg]

Since you mention LOTT, this hand has features frequently occurring in trying to apply it. Suppose an angel came down and told you that there are 18 total tricks on the hand. If there are ten tricks in hearts and eight in diamonds you are screwed, If there are ten in diamonds and eight in hearts, you are ok either way, at least at imps. If there are nine in hearts and nine in diamonds, I guess you better pull. Even if you are doubled, it's better than -530. But of course you have no idea of the total number of trump and anyway the L part of LOTT is definitely an overstatement. So it comes down to evaluation and placing a bet. As always. But anyway(s), if I have what my double implies that I have, I pass.

[aguahombre]

It is truly difficult to apply the LAW without looking at your hand. Partner's action suggests maybe the total tricks might be as low as 15. Unless your hand (the original doubler's) is very different from what partner might expect, it is probably best to let him do the LAW counting. All this leads to the same conclusion though, Ken. Pass seems to be the answer.

[helene_t]

Oh I am not suggesting that this is a LOTT decision. In fact it can't be, because LOTT decisions are judgment decisions, while this is mainly a question of knoving what the double means.

I mention the LOTT just because I use the LOTT-based measure of A-D.

[kenberg]

Crawling under to the other side of the table I have been trying to think of just when I might first bid 3D and then double 3H. I guess I am having a little trouble with it. If I have heart tricks, well, we are vulnerable and they are not, maybe we should be playing 3NT. If I don't have heart tricks, how exactly am I planning on setting 3H? Maybe I have heart spots and, say, a stiff spade and I am hoping that partner has the ace and will start in on spades? Except partner is probably leading a diamond.

Partner, the doubler, has passed over 3H. This seems completely consistent with him having 4+2+3+4 shape and, let's say, a 13 count. Maybe a 12 count. Surely with this hand, and with many others, he will pass the double. I have to think, and at imps I have to be pretty sure, that we will be beating 3H. What do I have?

[helene_t]

P had something like
Jx
KT9xx
Axxxx
x

I bid 4♦ with something like
Axxx
Qx
KJxx
QJx

I thought this was a dsip double and was wondering whether it would be my 4-card diamond support or my Qx of hearts that would pull the weight. Partly because I wasn't sure whether my ♥Qx argued for pass of for 3NT, partly because of fobia of doubled partscores at IMPs, I decided to bid 4♦. I guess I learned something new.

Phil said p might have six hearts. With 6 hearts he wants to make an unilateral penalty double, i.e. even with something like
Axxx
-
KQT
QJTxxx
(Edited now contains 13 cards)
I would have to pass it. I think that's the simplest way to play it, although a slightly less penaltish meaning might come up more frequently.

[gwnn]

you may always pull doubles with 12 cards since your partner will expect more from you.

[Phil]

helene_t, on Nov 27 2009, 09:54 AM, said:

P had something like
Jx
KT9xx
Axxxx
x

I bid 4♦ with something like
Axxx
Qx
KJxx
QJx

I thought this was a dsip double and was wondering whether it would be my 4-card diamond support or my Qx of hearts that would pull the weight. Partly because I wasn't sure whether my ♥Qx argued for pass of for 3NT, partly because of fobia of doubled partscores at IMPs, I decided to bid 4♦. I guess I learned something new.

Phil said p might have six hearts. With 6 hearts he wants to make an unilateral penalty double, i.e. even with something like
Axxx
-
KQT
QJTxx

I would have to pass it. I think that's the simplest way to play it, although a slightly less penaltish meaning might come up more frequently.

DSIP doubles don't occur when the opponents have made a strength showing call like 3♥. So the double is penalty, but as you have pointed out very few doubles can't be pulled.

With Qx and bad ODR I think you have an easy pass.

[Tomi2]

i can not imagine using this for penalties is useful, since I would nearly need 6 dias to jump to 3 level with modern takeout doubles and I am sitting in front of the hearts. Since I would need to have 5 trumps or so to make a 100% penalty double and I often have only 13 cards total, I would rather use it as "bid something intelligent" so a hand that can play 4♦ as well as 3NT as 3♠ as well as 3♥x

[kenberg]

Sorry to hear of your problems with bad ODR, although the Wik informs me this is short for Online Dating Rights or maybe Octal Data Rate so maybe it isn't too much of a social problem.

DSIP doubles generally put a heavy burden on us bears of small brain. I mentioned above that with a minimal had, four diamonds, and a stiff heart I would pass 3H and then might pull. If your queen of hearts were the deuce of clubs I imagine that you would have doubled 1H and now you would be faced with a crisis over partner's double of 3H. Here I might well pull on the grounds that while partner can approximately estimate my hand, neither the stiff heart nor the fourth diamond is guaranteed and when I have both it may be better to opt for 4D. Whether this sounds right to others I dunno.

I really like this hand as a source of thought and discussion.

[hanp]

Penalty.

[peachy]

Don't pull partner's penalty double unless you are CERTAIN by your OWN hand that you get a MUCH better score by pulling.