[S2000magic]

Both vulnerable, you deal and pick up:

♠ A 8 7 3
♥ A J 4
♦ A K 6
♣ A Q 9

You open 2♣, and the bidding proceeds:

2♣ - 3♦ - Dbl. - Pass
?

Although you play negative doubles through 3♠ (over a one-of-a-suit opening), you haven't discussed this sequence with your partner.

How do you interpret the double?

What call do you make?

[pooltuna]

my interpretation of the X is that partner is a lifelong member of the Bedlam Bridge Club; hoping to survive the hand I call "Hamman eggs in one basket"

[BunnyGo]

I interpret the double as showing a "bust" the equivalent of a double-negative response. I would pass, as I expect to set this (at least one trick) in my own hand, and don't expect to have a game opposite a 0-3 HCP kingless hand.

[jillybean]

Agree with Bunny

[Zelandakh]

This is one of those areas where you have to weigh up your partner. If you think they are A/E or a well read intermediate then the double is likely to be a negative. If your partner appears to not be so hot on bidding theory, even if they are otherwise excellent, then the double is probably a positive of some kind. If they are very old or a novice then the double might even be a suggestion for penalty but (much) more likely it is just general values without a suit to show.

[kenrexford]

The "expert standard" treatment is that the double is showing a bust hand.

However, this "expert standard" treatment is one of the greatest secrets in all of bridge, it seems. About every person I know who now knows that "rule" was genuinely shocked when it was mentioned to them. "Oh, really?!?!?" So, I would not trust that a random person "knows this."

[S2000magic]

Should I interpret "bust" to mean "This hand is good for defending against 3♦X but not much else", or "This hand is pretty much useless for anything"?

[jillybean]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-23, 09:47, said:

Should I interpret "bust" to mean "This hand is good for defending against 3♦X but not much else", or "This hand is pretty much useless for anything"?

"This hand is pretty much useless for anything" - I am going to pass your next bid, the double does not suggest ♦ defense.

[BunnyGo]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-23, 09:47, said:

Should I interpret "bust" to mean "This hand is good for defending against 3♦X but not much else", or "This hand is pretty much useless for anything"?

It's the type of hand that in "classic" 2♣ systems would be passing a 2NT rebid or bidding the cheapest minor after a suit rebid. It's just showing 0-3 HCP no king (in general). Basically useless unless a magic fit is found with the strong hand. Since the strong hand here has no shape, seems like no fit is to be found. I'd count on partner for 0-1/2 of a defensive trick.

[ggwhiz]

Pass instead of double should show a better hand regardless and even if the double is T.O. I'm not interested in a 4-4 or shudder 4-3 spade contract with the opps advertising a lot of shape.

3nt is what I would bid if pard passed. Might be a small imp loss but at mp's it could be a bottom by bidding as easily as by passing so I'm taking my plus right here and hope for the best.

[wyman]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-23, 09:47, said:

Should I interpret "bust" to mean "This hand is good for defending against 3♦X but not much else", or "This hand is pretty much useless for anything"?

It's a hand that would bid an immediate double negative over 2C if one were available. Pass in responder's seat is GF. [The same goes over 2C (X): XX is a bust, and all other bids are GF.]

At least that's the "normal" treatment. But as others have said, you'll need to size up partner.

edit: and to be clear, I'll pass and hope for 5-6 tricks against 3Dx.

[S2000magic]

ggwhiz, on 2012-February-23, 10:32, said:

Pass instead of double should show a better hand regardless and even if the double is T.O. I'm not interested in a 4-4 or shudder 4-3 spade contract with the opps advertising a lot of shape.

3nt is what I would bid if pard passed. Might be a small imp loss but at mp's it could be a bottom by bidding as easily as by passing so I'm taking my plus right here and hope for the best.

To be clear: are you bidding 3NT over the double, or passing the double?

[mgoetze]

On "general principles", I would usually assume pass = takeout and double = penalty. But I don't normally have a double-negative bid available.

Of course, given our diamond holding, it is quite improbably that double was meant as penalty.

I agree that your partner's background is a major factor.

[neilkaz]

kenrexford, on 2012-February-23, 09:35, said:

The "expert standard" treatment is that the double is showing a bust hand.

However, this "expert standard" treatment is one of the greatest secrets in all of bridge, it seems. About every person I know who now knows that "rule" was genuinely shocked when it was mentioned to them. "Oh, really?!?!?" So, I would not trust that a random person "knows this."

Yes, this has been my experience as well. I do have to ask what the reasons are for X to be bust and pass to be at least semi-positive rather than the other way around?

thx .. neilkaz ..

[han]

I would never assume that double shows a bust, I think that it is a bad treatment for 3-level overcalls. This 2C opening that you guys are discussing is virtually unheard of in the Netherlands, so I don't have agreements about this with my regular partner.

[ArtK78]

I consider the double as showing a bust hand. It is a warning that opener proceeds at his own peril. A pass shows values, and, obviously, any bid shows values.

After the double, opener, with a balanced strong hand, should seriously consider passing for penalties.

[aguahombre]

neilkaz, on 2012-February-23, 10:47, said:

Yes, this has been my experience as well. I do have to ask what the reasons are for X to be bust and pass to be at least semi-positive rather than the other way around?

thx .. neilkaz ..

Because when we pass with some semblance of stuff, we allow partner an extra call (double) to mean whatever we want it to mean within the 2C opening context. When we have nothing, that extra call we give to partner is unlikely to be useful.

[S2000magic]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-23, 11:20, said:

After the double, opener, with a balanced strong hand, should seriously consider passing for penalties.

The winning choice: 3♦X goes for 800 and gives you a top.

[kenrexford]

neilkaz, on 2012-February-23, 10:47, said:

Yes, this has been my experience as well. I do have to ask what the reasons are for X to be bust and pass to be at least semi-positive rather than the other way around?

thx .. neilkaz ..

To be honest, I have not thought about it. What I do know is that many years ago, I also did not know this. When I said that I had never heard this rule, I was mocked as being an idiot rookie. So, I suppose my reason for playing this is that Moses had it on the third tablet.

[aguahombre]

han, on 2012-February-23, 10:50, said:

I would never assume that double shows a bust, I think that it is a bad treatment for 3-level overcalls. This 2C opening that you guys are discussing is virtually unheard of in the Netherlands, so I don't have agreements about this with my regular partner.

My plus on this post was not a misclick. Han gives a perspective from a region where apparently nobody opens 2C with a balanced 22 count. This is a good thing for people who also are unfamiliar with the style to read.

He is excused for using one of my peeves: describing a treatment as "bad", without knowing how it fits in with the partnership's other agreements/continuations.