[JLOGIC]

So to summarize, the more spades I have the more overall offensive values I need to double. The less spades I have the less values I need to double.

This makes sense to me because the less spades I have, the less HCP I will need in order to make a game.

After seeing gnashers post I will say there is one annoying category he left out, hands where we can beat them a lot and also make 3N or 4H on power (rather than a partial), but cant make 5H because we have too many spade values. Those hands might end up having to defend undoubled but those hands are very unlikely given their bidding.

And even when they occur, it requires the hand with the good spades to have all the extra values in the partnership. If this is not the case, the other guy will be able to double anyways.

I think worrying about that hand type is wrong though since it almost never comes up.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

The idea is that one hand doubles to say "We probably have the wherewithal for game, but I'm not willing to bid any higher by myself", and the other hand then decides whether to defend or to bid.

As I understand it, you're advocating that double mean simply "We can defeat this contract", without expressing an opinion about what we might be able to make.

Don't we usually already have the information about whether we are in game zone or not? If responder has an opening hand, then we were in the game zone already, the opening bid already told us, opener doesn't have to double 4s for us to know. Opener knows responder is at least 9+ or so, almost game zone. The real question is whether we are in the bid 5 over 4 zone or not.

Andy & Justin don't seem to be doubling on the same hands, from what I gather. What if responder has some opening hand with doubleton spade, 5/6 hearts. You probably expected to make 4h on power, probably can beat 4s a couple tricks on power. But 5h is probably too much, partner can have doubleton spade also and there's another loser somewhere. Justin says don't double, just take your (small) plus? Andy you are doubling or not? Same with 3 small spades, partner didn't double with his shortness since he had a min opener, you still expect to beat 4s on power, don't want to bid 5 since partner is min.

[JLOGIC]

If I have a doubleton spade and a good hand I will always double as either hand fwiw, I include doubleton as short spades. I'm pretty sure andy and I would double on the same hands based on what he's said, maybe he would double a little more often than me with 3 spades but probably not a big diff.

[Stephen Tu]

To me that's tough to handle though. Partner doubles showing a good hand and 0-2 spades. You are sitting on a doubleton. If partner also has doubleton, you are probably not right to bid on, they get 2 spades and some trick elsewhere. Otherwise you want to bid. How to tell? It's even worse when the opps are maniacs and might even be bidding this way with only 8 spades.

[gnasher]

Stephen Tu, on Jul 16 2010, 12:00 AM, said:

Don't we usually already have the information about whether we are in game zone or not?  If responder has an opening hand, then we were in the game zone already, the opening bid already told us, opener doesn't have to double 4s for us to know.

Opener knows responder is at least 9+ or so, almost game zone.  The real question is whether we are in the bid 5 over 4 zone or not.

If we both already know that we have the values + shape for game, it's a forcing pass situation. If only one of us knows that we have the values + shape for game, a double by that hand says "we have the values + shape for game (and I don't have a strong aversion to hearing you bid)".

(I would also play forcing passes where we both know that we have close to game values, but Justin, I think, would not.)

Quote

Andy & Justin don't seem to be doubling on the same hands, from what I gather.  What if responder has some opening hand with doubleton spade, 5/6 hearts.  You probably expected to make 4h on power, probably can beat 4s a couple tricks on power. But 5h is probably too much, partner can have doubleton spade also and there's another loser somewhere.  Justin says don't double, just take your (small) plus?

Where did he say that?

Quote

Andy you are doubling or not?

Yes, I'm doubling, to protect my game bonus. After I've doubled, if partner judges that "5h is probably too much", he will pass. If he judges that 5♥ is not too much, and 4♠ is going for an inadequate penalty, he'll bid.

Obviously in real life it isn't as neat as that sounds - my double has to cover a range of shapes and strengths, and opener will sometimes misjudge.

Quote

Same with 3 small spades, partner didn't double with his shortness since he had a min opener, you still expect to beat 4s on power, don't want to bid 5 since partner is min.

You might have to give me an actual hand, but if it exists it sounds like a reluctant pass.

[gnasher]

Stephen Tu, on Jul 16 2010, 12:33 AM, said:

To me that's tough to handle though. Partner doubles showing a good hand and 0-2 spades. You are sitting on a doubleton. If partner also has doubleton, you are probably not right to bid on, they get 2 spades and some trick elsewhere. Otherwise you want to bid. How to tell? It's even worse when the opps are maniacs and might even be bidding this way with only 8 spades.

Many hands with 0 spades would bid rather than doubling. And if we reach the five level with a doubleton in each hand, it will usually be xx opposite xx, so we may be solid elsewhere.

Anyway, in my experience the problems you describe don't seem to be as common or as hard to solve as you suggest. Instead of dealing in abstractions, why don't you tell us about some actual deals where this style has caused you insoluble problems?

[JLOGIC]

Agree that having a doubleton is the hardest problem, the same is true with 4S p p X and other auctions

Generally I err on the side of passing and taking the money when I have a doubleton because bidding on if partner also has a doubleton is a disaster.

Depending on the auction and opps, they might be extremely likely to have 10 trumps, in which case I would pull more often with a doubleton.

I once wrote on here that in auctions where they haven't bid and raise, you should always be passing with a balanced hand, and I believe that. In auctions where they've bid and raised it's slightly different, but that rule is often true.

Again it all depends on various factors, including the rest of your hand. The fact that you sometimes have hard problems that you might misjudge doesn't mean it's right to play penalty doubles, or that your judgments are largely going to be random, imo

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Yes, I'm doubling, to protect my game bonus. After I've doubled, if partner judges that "5h is probably too much", he will pass. If he judges that 5♥  is not too much, and 4♠  is going for an inadequate penalty, he'll bid.

Obviously in real life it isn't as neat as that sounds - my double has to cover a range of shapes and strengths, and opener will sometimes misjudge.

See here's what I don't get. Apparently you are saying that opener has a hand that wants to either defend 4♠ undoubled, or play 5♥ if responder has the extra K or so for doubling rather than the 9/10 count he might have stretched to make a free bid with? I'm not sure what that hand looks like. If opener has a good hand for hearts, fit + spade shortness, and is always pulling the double, what's bad about just bidding 5♥ over 4♠ as a 2 way shot? Otherwise, it seems that responder wasn't sure about bidding on, opener still shouldn't be sure so he ought to pass. And if opener is passing, that means responder's double is basically just penalty, he can double with defensive as well as the offense power hands that will beat them on power.

Now opener's double in non-balancing chair is another story, maybe that should be played differently, giving responder a more info to act with his shapely hands. But I feel it ought to be better defined in terms of spade length, either promising 2+ or denying 2+, to constrict the range of shapes and make the guessing more accurate.

[JLOGIC]

Stephen,

You are annoyed with the guesswork involved (and sometimes the lack of penalties?) with the way we are suggesting.

But if you play penalty doubles, you are almost always going to have to guess by yourself whether to bid or double them. Often you're supposed to be bidding to the 5 level, but you won't know that. It seems like penalty doubles will introduce far more guesswork than what we are suggesting.

You just suggested 2 new possibilities, double shows 0-1, or double shows 2-3

If you double with 0-1 and extras:

You must bid when you have 2-3 and extras, or pass. This is clearly the worst possible, because you will often be 2-2 which will force you both to pass. You are going to miss the most penalties possible this way, especially if the opps are crazy as you say and can have an 8 card fit. If you bid you might catch partner with 1 and a minimum, or you might catch him with 2.

If you double with 2-3 and extras:

You will have to bid unilaterally by yourself with a singleton and extras. Since this is frequent, you will very often just 5 over 5 yourself. When you have a singleton and extras it is the most important time to involve partner in the decision of whether to double them or bid on, but you're forcing yourself to just bid.

You want it to be all about shape, but there is also the strength issue (you're not in a forcing pass), and what the rest of your hand is like. If you want to break it down by shape only then you can play that you're in a forcing pass, as gnasher suggested. Then you can easily double with length and pass with shortness and it's all fine and dandy.

But I'm sure you're not talking about this specific auction, but these auctions in general when you're not in a FP yet.

The way I think it is correct to break it down is that you have these hand types:

1) Minimum with good offense
2) Extras with good offense
3) Minimum with bad offense
4) Extras with bad offense

Note, generally good offense and bad offense are broken down by shortness in trumps or not.

With 1 you can pass. If partner passes it out, he has either hand 3, or 4. He could have hand 1 but he would stretch to bid. This is fine, the worst part is that you don't get to double them sometimes when he has hand 4.

With hand 2 you double. If partner has 1 or 2 he bids, 3 or 4 he passes. No problem, and you've done well.

With hand 3 you pass. If partner passes no problem, if he doubles no problem you pass.

With hand 4 you must pass. If partner has hand 1 or 3 or 4 he passes, and you don't double. But if you have "bad offense" meaning wastage/length in their suit, partner is likely to have "good offense" himself. Hand 3 and 4 are impossible. Hand 1 he might stretch to bid, and if he passes it out it's not the end of the world, you just missed doubling them.

The biggest problem with this scheme is as you pointed out, a doubleton can be tough to diagnose (is this good offense or bad offense, depends on the rest of the hand and if parnter is also doubleton. If you both judge it as good offense you will misjudge and bid). Generally with a doubleton the doubler should play it as good offense, and the passer should play it as bad offense, but of course this is not set in stone.

That is the most complicated issue, but the initial doubler with extras will not be unhappy if partner bids, he should have enough cards in the other suits for that to be fine. If partner passes, he won't be unhappy either, he has extras and should beat the contract. Responder will typically err on the side of caution, knowing that the opps contract will go down, and not risk bidding on. This makes it hard to bid on to 5 correctly with a 2-1 fit, and you might just defend 4S X, but again this is not the end of the world. It is much better to me than bidding on to the 5 level unilaterally and hoping it all works out.

This scheme, which I will call expert standard, allows you to judge the most intelligently whether or not you should be bidding on or defending. Sometimes by defending you just get to defend undoubled rather than doubled, but that is not a huge deal. With the space allowed, priority must be placed on bidding or defending correctly the highest %age of the time, even if sometimes defending means you don't get the max penalty...at least you went plus.