[paulg]

Scoring: IMP

1NT (3♣) ?

---

We often explore the minimum holding for an action and this is one where a junior thought differently to me, although we ended up agreeing it was just too close.

Do you double, for take-out, when partner's 1NT is (i) 14-16 (ii) 15-17?

Paul

[billw55]

I double either way. What's the worst that can happen?

[kfay]

Heck, I might double playing a weak NT!!!

[jjbrr]

dbl isnt GF

[mich-b]

I would double , realizing that if pd rebids 3NT , I have likely done the wrong thing.

[paulg]

jjbrr, on Feb 9 2010, 02:58 PM, said:

dbl isnt GF

No, but it is invitational so partner will often force to game with a hand that looks like a maximum.

So we play at the 3-level opposite many hands and 4-level opposite a maximum. I didn't think this was so great a choice non-vul at the time, although I see my view is definitely minority.

[billw55]

cardsharp, on Feb 9 2010, 11:34 AM, said:

jjbrr, on Feb 9 2010, 02:58 PM, said:

dbl isnt GF

No, but it is invitational so partner will often force to game with a hand that looks like a maximum.

So we play at the 3-level opposite many hands and 4-level opposite a maximum. I didn't think this was so great a choice non-vul at the time, although I see my view is definitely minority.

I can see the argument for passing - double could be trading +50/100 for defending 3♣ into -50/100 for declaring 3♦/♥/♠/NT. On the other hand, pass could turn +110/140 into -110. Not sure which is more likely.

[jdonn]

What would be wrong with playing game opposite a maximum? And partner even knows to downgrade club length and values for offense so our auction has been helped by the opponents. Sometimes partner can make a good penalty pass too. I'm pretty sure this hand is the reason double exists.

I'm just slightly less comfortable opposite 14-16 but it's too good of a double to think about passing anyway.

[jjbrr]

I feel like I set up jdonn well to elaborate on my posts when I keep them short.

[gnasher]

If double isn't game-forcing but is invitational, how you you bid Q9xx Qxx AQJx xx opposite AKx Kxxx Kx Axx?

[jjbrr]

gnasher, on Feb 9 2010, 12:51 PM, said:

If double isn't game-forcing but is invitational, how you you bid Q9xx Qxx AQJx xx opposite AKx Kxxx Kx Axx?

12 cards

[jdonn]

Also too good for 1NT probably. However obviously the question is what does opener do with just one 4 card major and a maximum since there might be no fit. Probably people should agree that 4NT over 4M is to play and something like the next suit is keycard. I have to admit it has never come up. You could also play opener can't bid above 3NT without a maximum and both majors (that is probably the normal thing to do), or you could incorporate some kind of transfers.

But no matter what you agree I would still want to double on the given hand.

[PhantomSac]

The point is if X is not GF, opener cannot jump in a 4 card suit since responder does not promise both majors. Opener also can't jump in diamonds ever obviously.

I don't think this is really a big issue, you can be forced to game if you find a 4-4 major suit fit and be fine.

[gnasher]

jjbrr, on Feb 9 2010, 06:57 PM, said:

gnasher, on Feb 9 2010, 12:51 PM, said:

If double isn't game-forcing but is invitational, how you you bid Q9xx Qxx AQJx xx opposite AKx Kxxx Kx Axx?

12 cards

I think that's my first ever 12-carder. And I spent ages constructing it too.

PhantomSac said:

I don't think this is really a big issue, you can be forced to game if you find a 4-4 major suit fit and be fine.

Does that work? With 4-4 in the majors opener can cue-bid, so 3M can deny the other major. What if opener has one major but wants to accept the invitation?

In one of my partnerships we've decided that if we find a 4-4 major fit we want to be in game, and if we haven't got a fit we'd rather play in 3NT than fester in a Moysian. Hence we play double as game-forcing.

[Fluffy]

I play double as game forcing because it is consistent with the fact that partner will bid 3♣ with most positional stoppers.

I am not familiar to the 14-16 range, but if it has anything to do with doubling on a 5 count oppsite a 15-17 hand it is a very very ugly thing to do.

15-17 is much closer I pass because I expect at least 1 suit to break 4-1.

[gnasher]

Opposite 15-17, I'd double on this hand even playing it as game-forcing. Obviously that could lead to an absurd result, but the combined chances of finding a 4-4 major-suit fit and taking a penalty of 300 or so make it worthwhile.

[PhantomSac]

gnasher, on Feb 9 2010, 02:13 PM, said:

In one of my partnerships we've decided that if we find a 4-4 major fit we want to be in game, and if we haven't got a fit we'd rather play in 3NT than fester in a Moysian.  Hence we play double as game-forcing.

The only area we disagree is playing 3N rather than 3M in a 4-3. I would rather play 3M if partner has less than 8 and 3 of my major and try to scramble it home than play 3N.

Also, I think you should be able to stop in 3D, because if neither of you has a club stopper you need a LOT of values to make 5D. With a club stopper and no M I think opener should just bid 3N.

[paulg]

gnasher, on Feb 9 2010, 07:53 PM, said:

Opposite 15-17, I'd double on this hand even playing it as game-forcing.  Obviously that could lead to an absurd result, but the combined chances of finding a 4-4 major-suit fit and taking a penalty of 300 or so make it worthwhile.

This is my view too.

I passed the actual hand opposite a 14-16 1NT. The junior at the other table also passed opposite 15-17 1NT.

Paul

[Codo]

I am a junior. Good to know....

[the hog]

Pretty obvious t/o x imo