[pmacfar]

Scoring: MP

---

Bidding Goes as follows:

N - E - S - W

1S - 2H - X* - P
2S - 3H - ?

*negative (for minors)

How many spades does/should partner have?

What should be my next bid?

Thanks

[1eyedjack]

Q1: 5
Q2: X

Further thoughts:
Unless (unlikely) partner has a penalty pass of your initial double, he could have a hand with no guard in the opponent's suit and no 4 card minor. Effectively forced to bid, and with some anticipation of tolerance if not active support, he would choose to rebid 2S in preference to some higher bid, in the absence of additional values.

On the next round, just double to show extras. You cannot suddenly have a penalty double based on trumps, having shown a take-out double on the previous round. The cards have not been re-dealt within the auction.

[Walddk]

Agree with 1eyedjack and will add that your next double shows close to an opening hand (or better). Your first double could have been as little as 8 hcp when you have both minors.

Some play that double after 1♠ (2♥) doesn't promise more than 4-3 either way in the minors.

Roland

[luis]

Agree with the others, this will be almost universal.
Pd has 5 or more spades pd doesn't have a strong hand since 2♠ can be passed.
Your bid now should be DBL.

Luis

[Double !]

2S could be 5-card suit, a default whereby no other rebid was available such as a 5332 hand that couldn't bid NT. The neg dbl also usually suggests some tolerance for partner's suit (the way I learned it).

Double 3H: doesn't mean 100% penalty, it just means I have enough strength to compete one level higher than previously indicated by my negX, but no clear alternative: good hand, no suit, can't bid 3NT, nothing left to do, too good to pass.

[luis]

Double !, on Jul 26 2005, 07:30 PM, said:

2S could be 5-card suit, a default whereby no other rebid was available such as a 5332 hand that couldn't bid NT. The neg dbl also usually suggests some tolerance for partner's suit (the way I learned it).

Double 3H: doesn't mean 100% penalty, it just means I have enough strength to compete one level higher than previously indicated by my negX, but no clear alternative: good hand, no suit, can't bid 3NT, nothing left to do, too good to pass.

I'd like to say something about this.
There's some concept floating among some BBO members about first doubles being takeout and second doubles being for penalties. At least 3 players have asked me about this and now I see you are saying "not 100% penalties" when it should be "still 100% takeout" instead.

Is there any idea more absurd that a hand that first has a takeout double and then morphs into a penalty double? No! If you have a t/o double your 2nd double is still t/o showing maybe extra strength or extra shape.

Of course pd can pass a t/o double when he has a trump stack but that doesn't mean your 2nd double is more penalty oriented than the first one, not at all!

Luis

[Double !]

luis, on Jul 26 2005, 03:02 PM, said:

Double !, on Jul 26 2005, 07:30 PM, said:

2S could be 5-card suit, a default whereby no other rebid was available such as a 5332 hand that couldn't bid NT.  The neg dbl also usually suggests some tolerance for partner's suit (the way I learned it).

Double 3H:  doesn't mean 100% penalty, it just means I have enough strength to compete one level higher than previously indicated by my negX, but no clear alternative: good hand, no suit, can't bid 3NT, nothing left to do, too good to pass.

I'd like to say something about this.
There's some concept floating among some BBO members about first doubles being takeout and second doubles being for penalties. At least 3 players have asked me about this and now I see you are saying "not 100% penalties" when it should be "still 100% takeout" instead.

Is there any idea more absurd that a hand that first has a takeout double and then morphs into a penalty double? No! If you have a t/o double your 2nd double is still t/o showing maybe extra strength or extra shape.

Of course pd can pass a t/o double when he has a trump stack but that doesn't mean your 2nd double is more penalty oriented than the first one, not at all!

Luis

Perhaps I just chose my words poorly ("not 100% penalty"), but I thought that my following explanation clarified what I was trying to say. I apologize for my poor verbal and written communication skills.

[mike777]

pmacfar, on Jul 26 2005, 01:22 PM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> MP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> 10x </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> xxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> AKJx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> Axxx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

Bidding Goes as follows:

N - E - S - W

1S - 2H - X* - P
2S - 3H - ?

*negative (for minors)

How many spades does/should partner have?

What should be my next bid?

Thanks

Great teaching hand on many levels.
1) X is correct bid
2) X is not a typical beg. or int. bid. This is a bid that has a lot of meat on it.
3) For many players, including myself, this is about the limit of my bridge bidding.
4) Double can be a very very confusing bid to make or pass.
5) Hope this last comment helps us nonexpert bidders out there. When we have a choice of bids, is pass or double a reasonable option?

[han]

Agree that double is clearcut, although more advanced, and I agree that this is not a penalty double at all.

However, partner does not need a trump stack to pass. We have shown a good hand (we would be passing otherwise), we do not have support for partner, and we do not a have a suit that we could bid last time, partner can infer that we have some hearts and some defense. I think that this hand is typical for the auction (not to say that we must have exactly this hand or shape).

Also, I don't agree that partner has denied a heart stopper. What is partner supposed to bid with KQJ10xx Ax Qxx xx? Not 2NT I hope.

[P_Marlowe]

luis, on Jul 26 2005, 03:02 PM, said:

Double !, on Jul 26 2005, 07:30 PM, said:

2S could be 5-card suit, a default whereby no other rebid was available such as a 5332 hand that couldn't bid NT.  The neg dbl also usually suggests some tolerance for partner's suit (the way I learned it).

Double 3H:  doesn't mean 100% penalty, it just means I have enough strength to compete one level higher than previously indicated by my negX, but no clear alternative: good hand, no suit, can't bid 3NT, nothing left to do, too good to pass.

I'd like to say something about this.
There's some concept floating among some BBO members about first doubles being takeout and second doubles being for penalties. At least 3 players have asked me about this and now I see you are saying "not 100% penalties" when it should be "still 100% takeout" instead.

Is there any idea more absurd that a hand that first has a takeout double and then morphs into a penalty double? No! If you have a t/o double your 2nd double is still t/o showing maybe extra strength or extra shape.

Of course pd can pass a t/o double when he has a trump stack but that doesn't mean your 2nd double is more penalty oriented than the first one, not at all!

Luis

Hi,

there exist a expression for doubles "not 100% penalties", they
are called "optional" doubles, and those doubles make perfect
sense, so while your first double was neg., i.e. take out,
your second one is optional and partner can pass this, even if he does
not hold a trump stack, bal. minimum is enough, or do you expect partner
to bid on the 4 level with a 5-3-3-2 shape, hoping to survive in your 4-3 fit?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Walddk]

The term "optional double" is an illusion. Either a double is for penalties or it's for take-out. Both doubles would be for take-out. Partner can pass my second take-out double, sure, just like he could have passed my first double, but both doubles are still for take-out.

There is nothing optional. It's a term from about 50 years ago.

Another example: 3♥ X

I see many describe this double as an "optional" double. No it's not, it's a take-out double again. If partner leaves it in, it is his problem, but the double will remain a take-out double.

Roland

[Chamaco]

How do you define a "cardshowing" double independent of shortness in opps suit(usually with a bal hand)?
- Takeout
- Penalty
- Cooperative/optional
- other ?

PS- Please respond seriously, it's all to easy to make jokes about such a question

[Walddk]

Chamaco, on Jul 27 2005, 09:27 AM, said:

How do you define a "cardshowing" double independent of shortness in opps usit (usually with a bal hand)?
- Takeout
- Penalty
- Cooperative/optional
- other ?

PS- Please respond seriously, it's all to easy to make jokes about such a question

Card showing double.

"I have some high cards partner, but no clear direction".

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Walddk, on Jul 27 2005, 02:20 AM, said:

The term "optional double" is an illusion. Either a double is for penalties or it's for take-out. Both doubles would be for take-out. Partner can pass my second take-out double, sure, just like he could have passed my first double, but both doubles are still for take-out.

There is nothing optional. It's a term from about 50 years ago.

Another example: 3♥ X

I see many describe this double as an "optional" double. No it's not, it's a take-out double again. If partner leaves it in, it is his problem, but the double will remain a take-out double.

Roland

Right the concept of "optional doubles" is an old one,
but it surfaces again and again, just look into one of the
best modern books about competitive bidding:
"Competitive bidding in the 21st century" by Marshall Miles.

This surfacing again and again shows, that it has it's merrits,
something that cannot be said about most of the new gadgedts,
invented the last couple of years, most of them, will be forgotten
in a blink.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Walddk, on Jul 27 2005, 02:20 AM, said:

The term "optional double" is an illusion. Either a double is for penalties or it's for take-out. Both doubles would be for take-out. Partner can pass my second take-out double, sure, just like he could have passed my first double, but both doubles are still for take-out.

There is nothing optional. It's a term from about 50 years ago.

Another example: 3♥ X

I see many describe this double as an "optional" double. No it's not, it's a take-out double again. If partner leaves it in, it is his problem, but the double will remain a take-out double.

Roland

Hi,

another common example were "optional double" surface,
is the bidding seq.

4S (1) - X (2) - ...

(1) standard preempt
(2) for some player, even belonging to world class,
double is for take out, but also shows convertable
values, ... i.e. a classic "optional double"
Partner can pass if he is broke, and pass DOES NOT SHOW
a trump stack

There are people who play this special double as penalty,
but I am not going to discuss all the possible meaning here

With kind regards
Marlowe

[coyot]

4♠-x is actually easy - just card-showing - whereas 4NT can be used as a general takeout.

4♥-x is worse, because here you need takeout with 4 spades and 4NT would be pick a minor...

So if you happen to have a penalty hand (3 bad spades and not enough minors), you either have to pass and hope that p protects you with reopen double, or you clench your teeth and double, hoping for p to not bid 4♠ on Qxxx

[P_Marlowe]

coyot, on Jul 27 2005, 03:37 AM, said:

4♠-x is actually easy - just card-showing - whereas 4NT can be used as a general takeout.

Hi

"card-showing double" is just another word for "optional double"

With kind regards
Marlowe

[1eyedjack]

All doubles are optional doubles. You can leave in for penalties a double that partner would normally expect you to remove, and you can remove a double that partner would normally expect you to pass. These options available to you after partner doubles do not change the fundamental nature of the double, which says something of the doubler's hand.

If I had to define an "optional" double, it would be a hand that has a shape suitable for a take-out double but sufficient defensive strength to beat the contract without assistance. Partner removes it only in favour of a higher scoring (but expecting to make) game. I don't know if that is a widely shared definition.

[P_Marlowe]

1eyedjack, on Jul 27 2005, 11:57 AM, said:

All doubles are optional doubles.  You can leave in for penalties a double that partner would normally expect you to remove, and you can remove a double that partner would normally expect you to pass.  These options available to you after partner doubles do not change the fundamental nature of the double, which says something of the doubler's hand.

If I had to define an "optional" double, it would be a hand that has a shape suitable for a take-out double but sufficient defensive strength to beat the contract without assistance.  Partner removes it only in favour of a higher scoring (but expecting to make) game.  I don't know if that is a widely shared definition.

Hi,

no that is not what I mean.

There are doubles, which are for take out, double which are openalties,
and doubles, which are neither for takeout nor for penalty.

In the real world there exists a colour who is neither black nor white,
it is called gray, only in the computer age, we started to think in 0 or 1
categories.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

coyot, on Jul 27 2005, 06:37 PM, said:

4♠-x is actually easy - just card-showing - whereas 4NT can be used as a general takeout.

4♥-x is worse, because here you need takeout with 4 spades and 4NT would be pick a minor...

So if you happen to have a penalty hand (3 bad spades and not enough minors), you either have to pass and hope that p protects you with reopen double, or you clench your teeth and double, hoping for p to not bid 4♠ on Qxxx

Coyot, most advanced players these days use a double of 4S as takeout with support for 3 suits, not card showing and 4NT as a 2 suited takeout.

Again over 4H, 4NT should not be for the minors alone - that is far too restrcitive - it should be a 2 suited takeout.