[lamford]

Love all; IMPs. 1S-(Pass)-1NT-(Dble)-2S. Partner's double is take out of spades. You have QTxx Axxx x xxxx. What is double and what is 2NT and what would you bid?

[SteveMoe]

Pass. Would want 9+ to bid freely here. Partner will double again with a hand safe enough for us to play a 3-level contract.
Double in this position is Penalty, implying an opening hand with the wrong pattern for a Double or overcall (holding 4+ ♠).
2N cannot be forward going (Double instead). It should be Lebensohl (or scramble if you prefer). A good way to differentiate good 3 level advances (direct bids) from bad ones.

[Vampyr]

SteveMoe, on 2014-February-02, 22:08, said:

2N cannot be forward going (Double instead). It should be Lebensohl (or scramble if you prefer).

LOL well, quite. The main question here is whether 2NT should be Lebensohl or 2 places to play (is that what "scramble" means?)

[Zelandakh]

I checked PBaB and this is a Lebensohl situation for them, and that seems to be right. Generally Lebensohl trumps Scramble and this is particularly true when opps bid over the double.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2014-February-06, 03:59, said:

I checked PBaB and this is a Lebensohl situation for them, and that seems to be right.

Who are PBaB?

Quote

Generally Lebensohl trumps Scramble and this is particularly true when opps bid over the double.

Would you explain your reasoning? I felt that my thought process at the time was sound, so I am interested in hearing differing opinions.

The thought process:

1. Our agreement was that Lebensohl applied when the doubled bid was at the two-level; we had not discussed this situation. Of course, this is irrelevant now, since the discussion at hand is what is best.

2. Partner doubled 1NT, forcing me to the two level, and may not have had the values required to force me to the three-level; therefore, we were likely in a partscore battle, and I thought it was more important that:

3. We find the best spot, rather than partner knowing whether I had values.
O
4. Similarly, I felt that I could come in a bit light, knowing that we would find our best fit.

5. In the defense, we would have done several tricks better had partner known I had two 4-card suits. Would this be a consideration much of the time? I guess probably not, but it is a thought.

Also I wonder about the general implications of the fact that I didn't have to bid. (LOL yes I am aware that this means I could have passed, but I think the other stuff is more important.)

[Zelandakh]

PBaB is Partnership Bidding at Bridge (Robson + Segal). Their rules are:
--
Lebensohl is generally on and is always on when opps bid over the double.

Scramble is on in 3 specific situations:-
1. In strictly protective auctions. This section includes re-opening when our side has previously passed and doubling when both partners have denied good hands.
2. When one of us has bid 1NT.
3. When responder to the double already had a chance to bid a Lebensohl 2NT.
--

In this auction doubler is unlimited, neither of us has bid 1NT and there was no previous chance to bid a Lebensohl 2NT. The key is really the first of these - if Opener had been in second seat, and therefore doubler would be dealer, then Scramble would be appropriate despite the above rules saying it is still Lebensohl. At the end of the day it is probably best for most pairs to have such a short set of meta-rules rather than working it out on a case-by-case basis and having the odd misunderstanding.

[WellSpyder]

Have you discussed the slightly simpler auction
(1♠) Double (2♠) 2NT?

I think similar issues arise, and in a couple of my partnerships at least this is a recognised exception to our general rule that Lebensohl only applies when you are forced to bid. In those partnerships I would probably assume the same applied in the position raised in the OP and that 2NT was Lebensohl.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2014-February-06, 05:52, said:

In this auction doubler is unlimited, neither of us has bid 1NT and there was no previous chance to bid a Lebensohl 2NT. The key is really the first of these - if Opener had been in second seat, and therefore doubler would be dealer, then Scramble would be appropriate despite the above rules saying it is still Lebensohl. At the end of the day it is probably best for most pairs to have such a short set of meta-rules rather than working it out on a case-by-case basis and having the odd misunderstanding.

Yes, we had discussed the idea of doubler being unlimited, but my thinking strayed from this idea, as above.

I am not familiar with the term 'Scramble'. Does it mean 2 places to play?

WellSpyder, on 2014-February-06, 05:55, said:

Have you discussed the slightly simpler auction
(1♠) Double (2♠) 2NT?

I think similar issues arise, and in a couple of my partnerships at least this is a recognised exception to our general rule that Lebensohl only applies when you are forced to bid. In those partnerships I would probably assume the same applied in the position raised in the OP and that 2NT was Lebensohl.

I don't recall whether we had discussed this auction; I am guessing I would have assumed Lebensohl because it "looks like" Lebensohl LOL. And also because you have a responsive double available. But I'm not, as you mention, forced to bid, so I wouldn't be absolutely certain.

Why do you prefer Leb in these auctions?

[WellSpyder]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-06, 09:13, said:

Why do you prefer Leb in these auctions?

Good question!

The honest answer is that I think in most situations the important thing is to have an agreement rather than to have the theoretically best agreement, and since this is what my partner wrote in the system notes this is what I play. I can't really tell you why this was his proposal, but I think the default agreement in the absence of Lebensohl would be some sort of natural bid rather than two places to play. We only tend to play the latter in situations where it is entirely clear that you are just competing for the partscore, which tends to be when both players have clearly limited their hand (eg by passing or bidding 1N, or whatever).

[MrAce]

lamford, on 2014-February-02, 14:59, said:

Love all; IMPs. 1S-(Pass)-1NT-(Dble)-2S. Partner's double is take out of spades. You have QTxx Axxx x xxxx. What is double and what is 2NT and what would you bid?

One of them opened and other one responded. They have approximately 18-23 hcp between them after 2♠. 2 NT being natural is waste of time, you will not hold this hand. Pd is likely to hold 15/16 hcp at most on this deal. If you add another A or K to your hand then pd would be more likely around 12 hcp. So i do not see any good reason to play 2 NT as leben.

If i were to discuss this with my pd, i would go for scramble (2+ places to play)

I would normally pass with this at IMPs. It is very hard decision at MP though. I feel like trying to push them 1 more or play in one of our 4-4 fit at 3 level, which is not even guaranteed. I would talk myself into passing at the end though. Spades are likely to be split 6421, pd holding the stiff or doubleton, which means our 4-4 fit, if any, will break unfriendly and playing doubled is a high risk at 3 level especially if pd doubled with 12 ish hcp and/or we end up playing a 4-3 fit.

Defending 2 spades, i have approximately 3 tricks, i am not annoyed defending 2♠ that much.