[Chamaco]

Hi all !

I know many players play a "thrump" ("THRee notrUMP") double over opps preempts in various situations.

Under the thrump agrement, the double is primarily stop ask in the following sequences:

1x-(3y)-Dbl

The double asks to bid 3NT with a stopper in the preemptor's suit, and is NOT looking for majors.

I have read that some players have extended the use of the Thrump double even when our side does not open, and opps peempt.

E.g.
(3D)-X-(p)-?
(3H)-X-(p)-?

Under such agreement, now the main priority is NOT to show a major but to bid NT if possible ("Hamman's Law"?? ).

Anyway, I am a little worried by this use of the Thrump double, and I'll try to explain with an example.

Suppose bidding goes:
(3H)-X-(p)-?

you hold
AKxx-432-Kxx-Jxx

No stoper here, s 3Nt is not an option; but pard did not guarantee a spade fit with this double, so should you bid 4S even in a possible misfit with pard ?
Or leave the double in and find out that a slam in spades was laydown ?

Similar doubts arise in my mind in the sequences where opps preempt with
3C or 3D, pard doubles (not guaranteeing a major), and we lack a stopper but we have 4-2 in the majors.
E.g.

(3D)-X-(p)-?

you hold
Qxxx-32-432-AKxx

[awm]

Well I'm not a practitioner of thrump doubles. But it seems like if partner wants you to bid 3NT with just a stopper (and nothing else) it should promise a pretty good hand. It seems reasonable to suggest that the auction cannot end in 3 of a major. So with both the example hands, you bid 3♠ and it's forcing one round. Partner will raise to game with four spades (or maybe even with three and no better action), or bid his long minor or whatever.

[whereagles]

Why don't you just bid 3NT and think about stoppers later? This world-wide paranoia about stoppers has no justification because people nowadays open 3x on jack-high suits.

[pigpenz]

i remember watching Crane and Anderson they would just bid 3NT and say now that you opened that peice of cheese 3 what are you gonna do now