[Elianna]

Again, to be clearer, the auction went:
RHO...You...LHO...Pard
(1♣)...x...(p) ... (p)
2NT .... x

The 1♣ was alerted as "could be short". Presumably the 2NT was 18-19 balanced (at least, that's what the opponents seem to think that it should mean), and the question is what should the second double mean, if the first was a takeout double that was converted?

I just am curious to see what people think makes most sense. Thanks.

[dogsbreath]

hi
if declarer is 18/19 balanced he needs the help of a good psychologist. 1nt shows that hand (possibly). In this auction he has running tricks AND good HCP despite p's pass of 1c (5/6 small?).
Consequently the X is takeout ..p can convert with C suit held (ie: opp is a lunatic)

Rgds Dog

[Elianna]

dogsbreath, on Jul 5 2005, 07:35 AM, said:

hi
if declarer is 18/19 balanced he needs the help of a good psychologist. 1nt shows that hand (possibly). In this auction he has running tricks AND good HCP despite p's pass of 1c (5/6 small?).
Consequently the X is takeout ..p can convert with C suit held (ie: opp is a lunatic)

Rgds Dog

I don't know for certain if they had 18-19 points. My partner seemed to think that's what it said (tried lecturing me on it after the hand, and RHO didn't correct him). Also, RHO DID have 19 points. So it seems to be their agreement, though I don't understand it, either.

[mr1303]

A balanced 19 count opposite splat does not 8 tricks make.....

[cherdano]

Penalty. If opponents are silly enough to bid 2NT here with 18-19 points, I would be surprised if their declarer play would not give as the 3rd and 4th undertrick...

[mikestar]

One of the few rules I apply without exception--once we have made a penalty double, a penalty pass of a takeout double, or a balance of power redouble, all of our doubles are for penalty. To play otherwise will let them steal us blind. If RHO is stupid enough to bid 2NT on 19 opposite a fairly certain 0-2, we need to make him pay for it. Partner has a club stack and some side cards--otherwise he is duty bound not to pass the double, even if he has to bid a 3-card suit.

I admit I would pass the takeout double with xx xx xx xxxxxxx, but having misrepresented my defensive strength so badly, I will pull a penalty double of anything except clubs, so partner needn't worry about this hand.

[kenberg]

I like Mikestar's rule because it covers many situations beyond the immediate one (the immediate one being an auction that will not arise again in my lifetime). Another rule: If the auction clearly shows that someone at the table has lost his mind, assume it is the opponent and not your partner (and not yourself). This will not always be correct, but it is always a good idea. The double is for penalties.

[Fluffy]

Opponent's auction looks silly to me, I don't make take out doubles to NT (what is the suit I am showing shortness in?), and more rarelly to 2NT.

[luke warm]

definitely penalty, and i use the same rule mikestar uses.. that way both are on the same page

[Elianna]

It seems that most people agree on penalty.

That is exactly what I thought it should be at the table (and I still think that it should be so, here).

My partner was a local "expert" and not only was this the first time I played with him (and not by choice, really, but as a favor to my grandfather), we barely spoke the same language (my hebrew is very rusty, and he didn't speak english) so needless to say, this session was an adventure.

He decided to pull my double, holding ♠Qxx ♥ Jxx ♦ Jx ♣ QT9xx.

He bid 3♣, and I couldn't IMAGINE it being to play (I already showed shortness in clubs). I held ♠Axx ♥ KQTx ♦ KQT9 ♣ Jx, so (for your amusement) the final bidding was:

RHO ... me ... LHO ... pard
(1♣) ... x ... (p) ... pass
(2NT)... x ... (p) ... 3♣
(p) ... 3♦ ...(p) ... p
(x) all pass.

Clearly partner thought that I had long diamonds, and hence didn't correct to hearts. equally clearly, diamonds didn't do so well, but then again, hearts wouldn't have, either. I guess we needed to play 3♣ (which didn't get doubled) but how was I to know that?

[mikestar]

Partner had no reason to pass the takeout double--his hand is perfect for 1NT. He is no way certain he can beat 1♣ and has a perfectly descriptive alternative.

I would have treated his 3♣ as natural, as the only logical explantion for his bidding would be the very type of hand I cited: xx xx xx xxxxxxx (maybe with a couple of random Queens or Jacks)--all alternatives are horrible misdecriptions and he can beat 1♣, but he can't beat anything else, even 2NT as the clubs won't win any tricks defending NT.

His club bid can't be a cuebid, if he had such ahand he would bid 2♣ rather than passing the double.

Of course, his bidding was blatantly irrational, so you could only win by lucky guessing, if at all.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, would be forcing, so Dbl is penalty.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[bearmum]

PENALTY

If the HAS to force me to bid (seems unlikely with opener having so many points then he needs to Q bid ♣ (IN+MHO)

[helene_t]

I think this double shows "13 cards".

The reason is this: You're going to double 2NT anyway so pass would force partner to double. That would give opps an extra half-round to escape which would be silly.

So you shouldn't look at your cards, just double automatically (maybe except if you have some weired shape like 7411 so that you know that opps are going to bid 3♦, in that case you could do something else but you probably don't have any agreements about this situation).

It sounds as if partner and RHO both need to do the beginners course once again.

[kenberg]

I am not so sure that a pass over the 2NT bid is forcing. Clearly no one has agreements about this and no one can make much sense of 2NT. Nothing much can be made of opener's actions and you do best to clarify your own hand. So: Pass means I had my double, that's it. Double means I had a good take-out double. Armed with this, partner should be able to choose. Maybe 2NT was "I miscounted my hand and should have opened this 2NT". If so, partner might have the xx xx xx xxxxxx hand (with Mike's suggested scattering of quacks) and passing out 2NT may be right. At any rate, in weird auctions it seems to me it is best to go with simplicity. Here that means: If I double a second time I have extras, if I don't I have a minimum and you should use your best judgment but passing it out is allowed.

[Echognome]

Elianna, on Jul 6 2005, 05:01 AM, said:

It seems that most people agree on penalty.

That is exactly what I thought it should be at the table (and I still think that it should be so, here).

My partner was a local "expert" and not only was this the first time I played with him (and not by choice, really, but as a favor to my grandfather), we barely spoke the same language (my hebrew is very rusty, and he didn't speak english) so needless to say, this session was an adventure.

He decided to pull my double, holding ♠Qxx ♥ Jxx ♦ Jx ♣ QT9xx.

He bid 3♣, and I couldn't IMAGINE it being to play (I already showed shortness in clubs). I held ♠Axx ♥ KQTx ♦ KQT9 ♣ Jx, so (for your amusement) the final bidding was:

RHO ... me ... LHO ... pard
(1♣) ... x ... (p) ... pass
(2NT)... x ... (p) ... 3♣
(p) ... 3♦ ...(p) ... p
(x) all pass.

Clearly partner thought that I had long diamonds, and hence didn't correct to hearts. equally clearly, diamonds didn't do so well, but then again, hearts wouldn't have, either. I guess we needed to play 3♣ (which didn't get doubled) but how was I to know that?

Giving opener ALL of the remaining hcps and spots we can build up his hand as:

♠ KJ10
♥ A9x
♦ Axx
♣ AKxx

Or something similar. A decent hand no doubt, but one that would probably take around 5 or 6 tricks opposite a yarborough partner. Your partner should have left the double in.

[Double !]

Elianna, on Jul 5 2005, 11:01 PM, said:

That is exactly what I thought it should be at the table (and I still think that it should be so, here).

My partner was a local "expert" and not only was this the first time I played with him (and not by choice, really, but as a favor to my grandfather), we barely spoke the same language (my hebrew is very rusty, and he didn't speak english) so needless to say, this session was an adventure.

He decided to pull my double, holding ♠Qxx ♥ Jxx ♦ Jx ♣ QT9xx.

He bid 3♣, and I couldn't IMAGINE it being to play (I already showed shortness in clubs).  I held ♠Axx ♥ KQTx ♦ KQT9 ♣ Jx, so (for your amusement) the final bidding was:

RHO ... me ... LHO ... pard
(1♣) ... x ... (p) ... pass
(2NT)... x ... (p) ... 3♣
(p) ...   3♦ ...(p) ... p
(x) all pass.

Clearly partner thought that I had long diamonds, and hence didn't correct to hearts.  equally clearly, diamonds didn't do so well, but then again, hearts wouldn't have, either.  I guess we needed to play 3♣ (which didn't get doubled) but how was I to know that? 

Your partner's pass of 1♣X is questionable at best, his bidding anything with his hand after your second double is, well IMHO, disrespectful to you and very poor judgment on your partner's part. If you have your second double, then you guys are likely ripping 2NTX to shreads. Partner has supporting honors for any suit you choose to lead.

and, if you have long diamonds, you either also have a very good hand (3NT?) or else you might have initially overcalled. And if you have good hand with diamonds (besides there apparently being 50HCP in this particular deck), partner should never leave you hanging.

Sorry, but you have my empathy, and suggestion: maybe need to refresh your Hebrew.
let's see, aleph, bet, gimmel, daled, ....

[P_Marlowe]

kenberg, on Jul 6 2005, 07:33 AM, said:

I am not so sure that a pass over the 2NT bid is forcing. Clearly no one has agreements about this and no one can make much sense of 2NT.
<snip>
At any rate, in weird auctions it seems to me it is best to go with simplicity. Here that means: If I double a second time I have extras, if I don't I have a minimum and you should use your best judgment but passing it out is allowed.

Right, go with simplicity.

Partner, passing the takeout double, said:
"Partner the hand belongs to us, but we will get more
money, if we are trying to get their scalp."

In other words partners pass is forcing, I am not going
to assume partner is broke or that opener miscounted.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

So my view of the auction:

1♣ = systemic
double = takeout
pass = this must be rubber bridge when I have this hand
pass = I really like ♣
2NT = masochistic
double = sorry did you bid TWO notrump?
pass = when does the hurting stop?
3♣ = strict follower of Borm's rule of not doubling partscore into game
pass = phew...
3♦ = when does the hurting stop?
pass = phew...
pass = my partner doesn't understand me
double = how on earth can they make something without a fit?
pass = uh oh...
pass = who would've thought, eh?
pass = you better have a lot of ♦ partner or I will yell at you

[kenberg]

P_Marlowe, on Jul 7 2005, 03:47 AM, said:

kenberg, on Jul 6 2005, 07:33 AM, said:

I am not so sure that a pass over the 2NT bid is forcing. Clearly no one has agreements about this and no one can make much sense of 2NT.
<snip>
At any rate, in weird auctions it seems to me it is best to go with simplicity. Here that means: If I double a second time I have extras, if I don't I have a minimum and you should use your best judgment but passing it out is allowed.

Right, go with simplicity.

Partner, passing the takeout double, said:
"Partner the hand belongs to us, but we will get more
money, if we are trying to get their scalp."

In other words partners pass is forcing, I am not going
to assume partner is broke or that opener miscounted.

With kind regards
Marlowe

If the HCPs are distributed 19-13-4-4 and partner has six or even seven cards in my short suit, I would like to pass the second time and have partner pass the second time. If the HCPs are distributed 19-16-1-4 and I, as second hand, have a good lead, I would like to double the second time and have partner pass the second time. If they are 19-15-5-2, I may well double the second time but partner may choose to rescue me if his clubs are really long since he has so little help. If they are distributed 19-13-1-7 then I (second hand) can pass the second time and fourth hand can double. This leaves some guesswork around some edges, but that's bridge.

It seems to me all of the above point distributions are possible (given the opener's idea ofa 2NT rebid, but we may as well assume he has this holding since other possibilities will take care of themselves) and so a non-forcing pass is natural and caters to various possible holdings. Fourth hand's first pass only says he thinks playing 1C doubled is the best choice he sees. A pretty weak hand with lots of clubs is a very live possibility. If he has something else he can act over a pass of 2NT while if he has the weak hand he can pass.

The overall principle is: If you have more than you first said, you bid again. If you don't have more, you don't bid again. Partner goes by this and then does his best. Sometime his best wil be to pass.