# BBO Discussion Forums: take out the take out double - BBO Discussion Forums

Page 1 of 1

## take out the take out double

### #1Fluffy

• World International Master without a clue
• Posts: 17,394
• Joined: 2003-November-13
• Gender:Male

Posted 2013-January-15, 18:07

J10xx
QJ98
x
J10xx

(pass)-pass-(2)-double
(5)-pass-pass-double
(pass)-??

IMPs, our side vulnerable
0

### #2gnasher

• Andy Bowles
• Posts: 11,993
• Joined: 2007-May-03
• Gender:Male
• Location:London, UK

Posted 2013-January-15, 18:09

No, definitely don't take it out. To cover all of those losers, partner would need a monster, and we might not even reach a 4-4 fit.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

### #3mikeh

• Posts: 11,718
• Joined: 2005-June-15
• Gender:Male
• Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2013-January-15, 18:23

The LOTT may have fallen into disfavour, but it has some uses, and this may be one for anyone even thinking of taking this out.

One can assume partner to be most often 4=4=1=4, i.e. mirrored, and I'll come back to that in a moment.

On that assumption, there are 19 trump. If we can make 11 tricks, they make 8. So IF we make 11, we lose 3 imps to their presumed 650 if they play 5M.

However, mirrored hands tend to underplay expectations. So I would suggest that the total tricks are likely to be 18 rather than 19, if the working assumption is correct. Now, if we make 650, they go 800.

So even if we assume that we CAN make 11 tricks, bidding seems to be a 50-50 proposition.

But why are we assuming that we can make 11 tricks? We certainly want partner to double them on, say, AQxx Axxx x AQxx, don't we? In fact he could have less, and even on this (clear) double and double hand, we want no part of 5, thank you very much.

Of course, we could be on for slam, but statistically he is far more likely to be dealt the 'down at the 5 level' hand than the slam making hand.

I would expect this to be a unanimous, tho not necessarily happy, pass in an expert panel.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

### #4PhilKing

• Posts: 3,240
• Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-January-15, 18:25

They have opened a third in hand weak two and bid to the five level.

In this situation I play penalty doubles from both sides, and I would double them myself.
0

### #5aguahombre

• Posts: 12,029
• Joined: 2009-February-21
• Gender:Male
• Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-January-15, 19:16

PhilKing, on 2013-January-15, 18:25, said:

They have opened a third in hand weak two and bid to the five level.

In this situation I play penalty doubles from both sides, and I would double them myself.

Yeh, but I would call it responsive, and then partner gets to leave it in unless she has one of those special hands where she might want to know I have support for everything and she can drive to her 6-bagger (21 total tricks?.
0

### #6PhilKing

• Posts: 3,240
• Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-January-15, 19:25

aguahombre, on 2013-January-15, 19:16, said:

Yeh, but I would call it responsive, and then partner gets to leave it in unless she has one of those special hands where she might want to know I have support for everything and she can drive to her 6-bagger (21 total tricks?.

Sounds like another name for pass/double inversion?

Townsend/Gold played it your way when I coached them - pass in all high-level FP auctions asked partner to double.
0

### #7aguahombre

• Posts: 12,029
• Joined: 2009-February-21
• Gender:Male
• Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-January-15, 19:37

PhilKing, on 2013-January-15, 19:25, said:

Sounds like another name for pass/double inversion?

Townsend/Gold played it your way when I coached them - pass in all high-level FP auctions asked partner to double.

Yes, at that level the names coincide, and in this situation (Neither opp has a 1-bid) a FP should be in force.
0

### #8lycier

• Posts: 7,612
• Joined: 2009-September-28
• Gender:Male
• Location:China

Posted 2013-January-15, 21:51

The first double is a take-out,the hand which the second double showed can't be changed into other shapes not because of what the second take-out is,but because of which hand must be made more stronger! I decide to bid 5nt so as to let partner pick up a suit..
0

### #9mikeh

• Posts: 11,718
• Joined: 2005-June-15
• Gender:Male
• Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2013-January-16, 00:48

lycier, on 2013-January-15, 21:51, said:

The first double is a take-out,the hand which the second double showed can't be changed into other shapes not because of what the second take-out is,but because of which hand must be made more stronger! I decide to bid 5nt so as to let partner pick up a suit..

Sorry: massive fail

Thunk of a few hands for partner, with which he can't afford to let them play 5 undoubled. I know...you'll come up with massive 23 counts Then tone it down and imagine decent 15 counts with say 3 Aces. Now imagine bidding a slam!

Just because a bid is defined as 'takeout' shouldn't prevent bidder's partner from thinking, drawing inferences, and making decisions.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

### #10gnasher

• Andy Bowles
• Posts: 11,993
• Joined: 2007-May-03
• Gender:Male
• Location:London, UK

Posted 2013-January-16, 02:06

lycier, on 2013-January-15, 21:51, said:

The first double is a take-out,the hand which the second double showed can't be changed into other shapes not because of what the second take-out is,but because of which hand must be made more stronger! I decide to bid 5nt so as to let partner pick up a suit..

Partner's double doesn't say that he has enough for 11 tricks in his own hand. It says that he thinks we have a game bonus to protect. What do you want him to do with AKxx AKx x KQxxx?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

### #11lycier

• Posts: 7,612
• Joined: 2009-September-28
• Gender:Male
• Location:China

Posted 2013-January-16, 06:11

gnasher, on 2013-January-16, 02:06, said:

Partner's double doesn't say that he has enough for 11 tricks in his own hand. It says that he thinks we have a game bonus to protect. What do you want him to do with AKxx AKx x KQxxx?

Of course,why not? if the partner can't hold that hand,why did he double twice?your meanings is a penalty even if oppsite of zero point in his hand?
0

### #12gnasher

• Andy Bowles
• Posts: 11,993
• Joined: 2007-May-03
• Gender:Male
• Location:London, UK

Posted 2013-January-16, 07:34

lycier, on 2013-January-16, 06:11, said:

Of course,why not? if the partner can't hold that hand,why did he double twice?your meanings is a penalty even if oppsite of zero point in his hand?

You misunderstand me. I think that partner can have AKxx AKx x KQxxx.

I think his double says "I have a good hand with short diamonds, and I think it likely that we could make game." I don't care what you call that double.

Anyway, you agree that partner can have AKxx AKx x KQxxx. You also say that you want to bid 5NT with J10xx QJ98 x J10xx. So, with these two hands, you will reach 6. Can you see any problem with this?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

### #13Fluffy

• World International Master without a clue
• Posts: 17,394
• Joined: 2003-November-13
• Gender:Male

Posted 2013-January-17, 17:00

Thx for the answers, my partner got finally convinced, 5 -500 undoubled, 5 +300 partner's double is dubious K98x AK QJ AQxxx
0

### #14aguahombre

• Posts: 12,029
• Joined: 2009-February-21
• Gender:Male
• Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-January-17, 17:16

Fluffy, on 2013-January-17, 17:00, said:

Thx for the answers, my partner got finally convinced, 5 -500 undoubled, 5 +300 partner's double is dubious K98x AK QJ AQxxx

His second double might be dubious, but since a couple of us would have doubled 5D from the other side, he wouldn't have to worry about it.
0

### #15PhilKing

• Posts: 3,240
• Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-January-17, 17:47

Fluffy, on 2013-January-17, 17:00, said:

Thx for the answers, my partner got finally convinced, 5 -500 undoubled, 5 +300 partner's double is dubious K98x AK QJ AQxxx

Looks like a normal penalty double.
0