[Fluffy]

our side vulnerable, MATCHPOINTS

♠AJ7
♥Q94
♦9643
♣A83

we deal and it goes

pass-(1♠)-2♥-(4♠)

[BunnyGo]

Whack.

[aguahombre]

They'll bid 5/5

[MrAce]

5♥ is insanity.

This leaves us between DBL and pass. You will not win too many events by passing and let them play in peace when you have this hand. However if you are one of those BBF ers who plays pure-take-out upto 7NT, you may choose to remain silent just to get a plus score.

I would DBL expecting pd to pass most of the time, and i have the sufficient values for it. If pd decides to lift, not because he thought i have a pure take-out but because he has extreme shape, then so be it. He may even make it or push them to 5♠

[the_clown]

I would double, seems pretty obvious especially at MP

[Codo]

Sure X. If partner was joking, they make, but my partners never have humour.

[gnasher]

Partner has a spade shortage. If I make a double which is defined as "takeout", "DSIP", "cards" or anything similar, he will probably take it out and we will probably go minus. So I would pass unless double was agreed as "penalty" (but see below).

Pass may not lead to a bad result. Partner is still there, with his singleton spade. We may not have been making 4♥ - I wasn't planning to insist on game with this. And 4♠ may be cold.

Even if I played this double as for penalties, I don't think it's obvious to make one with this hand. I have two likely tricks, and a double will probably ensure that ♠J doesn't score. Most of partner's strength will be in hearts, where one of the opponents is likely to be short. If we do beat it, we may only be increasing the penalty from 50 to 100, which will be worth some matchpoints, but it doesn't get us past anyone who was allowed to make something our way.

[gwnn]

 gnasher, on 2012-October-22, 07:23, said:

Partner has a spade shortage. If I make a double which is defined as "takeout", "DSIP", "cards" or anything similar, he will probably take it out and we will probably go minus. So I would pass unless double was agreed as "penalty" (but see below).

With a 5521 he will probably pull but I don't think he should do so with 5431's or 6331 or anything similar, unless you are playing real takeout doubles. Of course this is just a matter of definition but you seem to be implying that takeout, DSIP and cards are basically are the same thing (you probably don't agree with this but your post seems to). To me, DSIP and cards are the same but takeout is not, and should be "pulled" significantly more often than DSIP/cards.

We should finally standardise these terms on a 1-5 (or 10, or 100) scale, they have managed to do it with things like language proficiency, how hard would it be to do so with meaning of bridge doubles. Helene_t has already come up with a good term: "how penaltish is this double?" http://www.bridgebas...is-this-double/
Now we have in no particular order: penalty, cards, responsive, negative, takeout, maximal, optional, dsip, action, thrump doubles along with another 20 terms and many of them would be much better described by a simple number on the scale, and all of them would be very well described with that number along with any possible shape-specific requirements.

[PhilKing]

 gwnn, on 2012-October-22, 09:25, said:

We should finally standardise these terms on a 1-5 (or 10, or 100) scale, they have managed to do it with things like language proficiency, how hard would it be to do so with meaning of bridge doubles. Helene_t has already come up with a good term: "how penaltish is this double?" http://www.bridgebas...is-this-double/
Now we have in no particular order: penalty, cards, responsive, negative, takeout, maximal, optional, dsip, action, thrump doubles along with another 20 terms and many of them would be much better described by a simple number on the scale, and all of them would be very well described with that number along with any possible shape-specific requirements.

We did an excercise along these lines in the junior squad back in 1989.

There was a list of 20 doubles that we we identified the meaning, then marked out of ten according to how take-out we felt they were ("eg game try double, 8"). Pretty sure Gnasher and I agreed on most answers, but times change.

I think this is about a three, if ten means "never left in".

[Fluffy]

instead of a escale of numers use % for the times it will be removed.

[PhilKing]

 Fluffy, on 2012-October-22, 10:16, said:

instead of a escale of numers use % for the times it will be removed.

That makes sense.

28.4%.

[gnasher]

 gwnn, on 2012-October-22, 09:25, said:

you seem to be implying that takeout, DSIP and cards are basically are the same thing (you probably don't agree with this but your post seems to)

No, I didn't mean that they were all the same - that was meant to be three different types of double which I think he'd remove with a singleton. I think "DSIP" is more takeout-oriented than "cards".

PhilKing said:

I think this is about a three, if ten means "never left in".

I agree with that, if you mean it's a three when looking only at the auction.

On this deal, however, we know that partner has spade shortage. That increases the probability that he will take it out, to 82.4%.

[gwnn]

 Fluffy, on 2012-October-22, 10:16, said:

instead of a escale of numers use % for the times it will be removed.

Which is a 0-100 scale.

[PhilKing]

 gnasher, on 2012-October-22, 11:12, said:

No, I didn't mean that they were all the same - that was meant to be three different types of double which I think he'd remove with a singleton. I think "DSIP" is more takeout-oriented than "cards".


I agree with that, if you mean it's a three when looking only at the auction.

On this deal, however, we know that partner has spade shortage. That increases the probability that he will take it out, to 82.4%.

I don't think partner should be inclined to remove with 15(34) or 1633 (same as gwnn).

[Fluffy]

I don't think partner should bid 2♥ with 15(34), specially at this vulnerability, but its a style thing, it doesn't strike me as unplayable.

[gszes]

lets go and explore the insanity road for a moment and see if its as scary
as it is purported to be.

Never play me for the perfect cards because I will never have them (I dont remember
where i first saw that) BUT here is a hand where you NEVER has happened you have
PERFECT CARDS (OKOK the spade AJ could be the heart A and it would be better)
for being a passed hand. Your p would never play you for having this type of hand because
they would be asking for a miracle. YOU HAVE THE MIRACLE and you need to act on it
since p cannot.

P bid 2h vul/nvul for a reason (if your p regularly overcalls 2h on crud here then all bets are off).
There is a very decent chance opposite most decent 2h overcalls your side will go down at
worst 1 trick and making 5h should be a fairly strong overall chance of making especially since
we should be able to play the hand double dummy. I ask you anoither question how often do you
think the weak long spaded rho will let 5h sit?? Why x 4s when you can almost always x 5s??

This road does not look so bad after all I think i will take it:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

now where did i hide my flak jacket???

[Fluffy]

I'm happy that this hand started some discussion, because the most interesting thing of it hapened on the traveller, for something I bet I will never see again:

4♥ X N +500
4♦ X S +500
4♣ X E -100
4♠ X W -100 <-

---

in 4♠ doubled declarer guessed spades (thanks to my double), but missguessed clubs and messed up the timing a lot to end up unable to cash 5th diamond for +100

[MrAce]

 gnasher, on 2012-October-22, 07:23, said:

Partner has a spade shortage. If I make a double which is defined as "takeout", "DSIP", "cards" or anything similar, he will probably take it out and we will probably go minus. So I would pass unless double was agreed as "penalty" (but see below).

Pass may not lead to a bad result. Partner is still there, with his singleton spade. We may not have been making 4♥ - I wasn't planning to insist on game with this. And 4♠ may be cold.

As i said if you are playing this as pure take out, then i am with you, pass may be the only path that brings us a + score.

If dbl is DSIP, with 5431 or 6331 it is smart thing to pass by pd.

If dbl is showing cards, pd doesnt even need to be smart to pass with those shapes.

But i am afraid pd is void in spades and will almost always lift it, with 5530 or 6430 i am not sure how good we will play at 5 level with AJx in his void. So pass is not a bad option. I would dbl though, because i like to play high level doubles showing cards. Of course this maybe because i played in fields where people are agressive preempters at the madness level. Perhaps i would play like you do vs someone like JEC or vs people who are not preempting like a mad dog.

[MrAce]

 Fluffy, on 2012-October-23, 02:42, said:

I'm happy that this hand started some discussion, because the most interesting thing of it hapened on the traveller, for something I bet I will never see again:

4♥ X N +500
4♦ X S +500
4♣ X E -100
4♠ X W -100 <-


in 4♠ doubled declarer guessed spades (thanks to my double), but missguessed clubs and messed up the timing a lot to end up unable to cash 5th diamond for +100

Was 1♠ limited ? If not, 4♠ is quite a bid, and made by either e beginner or a genius who is aware of his pds weak openings combined with his card play skills !

Field is also impressing, playing 5-2 fit when have 5-4 spade, playing 4♦ when have 6-3 ♥. I was about to tell you that declarer would probably get it right even if you didn't double but i guess i am wrong

[gnasher]

I rather like the 4♠ bid. The risk of missing slam isn't high once they overcall, and it's easily compensated for by the +690s and +500s we're getting from the overactive BBF community.

For this to work, though, you have to be playing that bidding 4♠ then doubling 5♥ is for penalties. I would normally play that as an action double, but perhaps I should reconsider this.