[Coelacanth]

---

Matchpoints

How would you describe West's double on the continuum of penalty/optional/competitive/takeout/whatever? What kind of hand (shape/HCP) is West likely to have? Would your answers to these questions be different with different vulnerability?

This was just a random hand in a club duplicate, so nothing much depends on the outcome, but we did have a difference of opinion.

[ArtK78]

It is just a "do something intelligent Partner" double. Clearly, it shows some values, but not too much from the failure to make any strength showing response to partner's takeout double. It also shows some defense, but is not for penalties.

On your continuum, it is between the optional and competitive double. About 5-8 HCP and relatively balanced.

[mgoetze]

West has approximately 3145 shape. I expect a full 10 HCP at this vulnerability, could be less otherwise.

[JLOGIC]

Didn't his partner make a takeout X? Surely he could just bid 2N if he had a stiff heart. Something like a 3334 or 3235 or 2335 max makes much more sense.

[ggwhiz]

Our takeout doubles always have takeout shape (or lots of extras) and wests double is clubs with a side order of something. If that's 4-4 in the minors they have had an oops with the 2♣ bid.

On most flatish hands I'm passing and leading a trump.

[nige1]

Coelacanth writes "Matchpoints. How would you describe West's double on the continuum of penalty/optional/competitive/takeout/whatever? What kind of hand (shape/HCP) is West likely to have? Would your answers to these questions be different with different vulnerability? This was just a random hand in a club duplicate, so nothing much depends on the outcome, but we did have a difference of opinion."

IMO mainly penalty. e.g. ♠ xx ♥ QJxxx ♦ K ♣ Qxxxx

---

[SteveMoe]

Like Jlogic, but I discount the 3235 shape and offer 3325 instead. I would expect 3 ♥ for this double at the 2-level, a max for previous bidding (8- bad 10 HCP) and a tolerance for the other major. These hands appear much more frequently than pure 4+ card penalties of opponent's suit. I also think 2N here shows 2 places to play...

[jillybean]

Penalty Oriented , 2C bidder had a chance to bid spades and should presume partner to have them and could bid S/D if she had a second suit.

[Siegmund]

Sounds very penaltyish to me. I'd guess it will include 5 hearts more often than not though 4 very nice ones isn't impossible. Nigel's hand is possible; so are others with only 4 clubs like xx ATxxx xx KJxx or x QJTxx Axx Jxxx, not quite good enough to pass 1HX for penalty the first time.

I *dont* expect to see very many hands with 3 hearts and 8 HCP. Hands like xxx Kxx xxx AQxx or xx AJT xxx Kxxxx bid 1NT the first time around, not 2C.

The auction will be more common at other vulnerabilities, of course, but I think the essential features are about the same - a greater likelihood of beating 2H than of being eager to try 3 of a minor our way.

[JLOGIC]

Siegmund, on 2012-June-18, 23:35, said:

I *dont* expect to see very many hands with 3 hearts and 8 HCP. Hands like xxx Kxx xxx AQxx or xx AJT xxx Kxxxx bid 1NT the first time around, not 2C.

You conventiently gave those hands heart stoppers. What would you do with Kxx xxx Jxx AQxx or Qxx xx Kxx Axxxx? Double seems pretty standout.

But since you bring up hands with heart stoppers and values bidding 1N to begin with, how can you have a penalty X of 2H that bid 2C over 1H (not 1N, and not some stronger bid). That seems extremely unlikely.

Can someone please give a reasonable example hand of a hand that bids 2C then Xs 2H for penalty? I suppose it will be 5-5 with really good hearts like x KQJT7 Qx xxxxx or something. That is just an incredibly narrow target to be playing for when you need a competitive double pretty badly.

All of the hands given so far would never consider Xing 2H for penalty as far as I'm concerned, or would have started with 1N in one example.

This post has been edited by JLOGIC: 2012-June-18, 23:57

[Coelacanth]

ArtK78, on 2012-June-18, 14:30, said:

It is just a "do something intelligent Partner" double. Clearly, it shows some values, but not too much from the failure to make any strength showing response to partner's takeout double. It also shows some defense, but is not for penalties.

On your continuum, it is between the optional and competitive double. About 5-8 HCP and relatively balanced.

SteveMoe, on 2012-June-18, 22:28, said:

I would expect 3 ♥ for this double at the 2-level, a max for previous bidding (8- bad 10 HCP) and a tolerance for the other major.

Wow, lots of diversity of opinion here. I think the two quotes above come closest to describing the intent of the doubler at the table. West's hand is limited by the failure to bid 1NT the first time or to pass 1♥X for penalty. Thus, the double should show interest in competing (we have half the deck or more in high cards) with no clear direction.

The actual hand was ♠KJx ♥108x ♦K10x ♣J9xx.

Would you have bid 1NT the first time? Would you have gone quietly the 2nd time?

[gnasher]

Coelacanth, on 2012-June-19, 08:33, said:

The actual hand was ♠KJx ♥108x ♦K10x ♣J9xx.

Would you have bid 1NT the first time? Would you have gone quietly the 2nd time?

I think that's a normal hand for this action. This is somewhere in the middle of the range - it can be any hand that wants another go and doesn't have anything to bid. It doesn't matter that we have a wide range of strength here, because we're not bidding game, and we're unlikely to face any further competitive decisions.

[ggwhiz]

Coelacanth, on 2012-June-19, 08:33, said:

The actual hand was ♠KJx ♥108x ♦K10x ♣J9xx.

That's really on the low end for me. With such a min in high cards I would like to have a doubleton somewhere but wouldn't complain if pard hit it with this.

Did you lead a trump?

[MrAce]

Coelacanth, on 2012-June-19, 08:33, said:

Wow, lots of diversity of opinion here. I think the two quotes above come closest to describing the intent of the doubler at the table. West's hand is limited by the failure to bid 1NT the first time or to pass 1♥X for penalty. Thus, the double should show interest in competing (we have half the deck or more in high cards) with no clear direction.

The actual hand was ♠KJx ♥108x ♦K10x ♣J9xx.

Would you have bid 1NT the first time? Would you have gone quietly the 2nd time?

No i wouldnt bid 1Nt the first time. And yes i would DBL 2♥. I wouldnt argue strongly though with people who prefers to pass over 2♥

In general Justin said it all imo. The hand types he gave were same with the ones that came to my mind when i first read the topic.

[Coelacanth]

ggwhiz, on 2012-June-19, 16:25, said:

Did you lead a trump?

I was not on lead; I was West.

Partner led a club, and after declarer scored up 590 in 2♥X +1 (it can be held to just making for the same zero matchpoints) partner asked why I would make a penalty double with such a hand.

The winning action is to just let them play 2♥; holding it to 8 tricks (really not difficult, although we didn't manage it) would be a shared top. EW can't make anything on the hand, despite holding half the deck in high cards. Well, we could probably make 1NT from the west; if north leads a low heart from ♥AQJxxx, we have a double stopper. (East had ♥Kxx).