[mcphee]

Very nice, I have opened the bidding and now I am faced with a horrible choice of 2N or 3C, it serves me right. I will opt for 3C praying partner will forgive me for what ever calamity takes place. I have zero interest to encourage partner to try 3N at this time.

You open these hands and poor partners end up feeling silly for trying to compete later in the game, the become concerned about having no shot for a game when they have an opening bid themselves!

[kenrexford]

mcphee, on Nov 19 2008, 09:04 AM, said:

Very nice, I have opened the bidding and now I am faced with a horrible choice of 2N or 3C, it serves me right. I will opt for 3C praying partner will forgive me for what ever calamity takes place. I have zero interest to encourage partner to try 3N at this time.

You open these hands and poor partners end up feeling silly for trying to compete later in the game, the become concerned about having no shot for a game when they have an opening bid themselves!

Huh?

So pessimistic.

[ASkolnick]

I bid 3C. I agree with CODO it promises 2 places to play, usually that means the major and either support or the other minor. So, if I bid 3C, he should have either

S&C,S&D or S&S and a weak hand.

[FrancesHinden]

Codo, on Nov 19 2008, 07:41 AM, said:

We had been there before, so yes the double OF COURSE promised spades and clubs.

This is like a religion: Many belive that a double just promises a major, others that it promises the unbid suits. The belives are strong, the facts remote.

I personally think, it promises the unbid suits or a way to bid the hand after any possible rebid from partner, including even 4 Club in this case.

There is no statistical knowledge which way is better, so we all just state our opinion or the opinion of the experts we follow.

I really think you are wrong here.

After a 1-level overcall, it is playable, although now uncommon, to play that the double promises both unbid suits (or the ability to control the auction).

After a jump overcall, it's not playable to have double as promising the unbid suits. What are you supposed to do with a 4=3=3=3 distribution with a 13-count and no heart stop? Pass? Bid 2S? It's hands like that for which take-out doubles were invented.

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Nov 18 2008, 07:24 PM, said:

TimG, on Nov 18 2008, 01:54 PM, said:

There is probably much less agreement about whether 1C-(1D)-DBL and 1D-(2C)-DBL show both majors.

That's pretty universal among experts too (ignorring the ones who use special methods of course.) The first one promises both majors since it's very easy to bid your major with just one. The second promises only one major, but you have to be prepared if partner bids the one you don't have which presumably means support for partner.

I discovered recently that there is a fairly strong minority who, playing a 5CM system, like to play 1C (1D) DBL as denying a major (i.e. usually with club support, or rarely 3343 with no stop) on the grounds that with a major they can just bid it, but they look stupid raising clubs when 1NT is the best spot.

But even more recently than that, the trend now seems to be to the 'special method' where x shows 4+ hearts, 1H shows 4+ spades, and 1S shows the "unbiddable" hand. Hey, even I play that in one partnerships, it must be getting widespread...

Fully agree on the second: 1D (2C) DBL basically shows two places to play, typically a major + (other major or partner's suit). It's a bit more dangerous having NT as an option, because partner is usually entitled to jump to 4M over the double. So 1D (2C) x (P); 4H (P) 5D is simply a contract correction, not a cue for hearts - it implies spades, but with both majors opener would have cued clubs.

[Sadie3]

I am intrigued by the many 2NT responders logic. I had not thought of it before because the opening hand was a 12 pointer with 0 quick tricks. My question is, what kind of point count does the negative doubler over a weak 2H bidder need? It is possible to make some number of no trumps if partner has 3 Aces and a suit. But, with Q 10x holding in hearts, it is also possible to lose 6 tricks before you have a chance to take one. I agree with all the others that partner definitely promises spades and I also think partner promises great tolerance for clubs. He might have only 3, but no less and that is my reasoning for bidding 3C. I am contributing to the auction this way but letting my pard participate as well. I can see that all my non protected kings are vulnerable with the 'strength' opponent on my left unless my pard is promising all those missing aces.

[Codo]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 20 2008, 12:22 AM, said:

Codo, on Nov 19 2008, 07:41 AM, said:

We had been there before, so yes the double OF COURSE  promised spades and clubs.

This is like a religion: Many belive that a double just promises a major, others that it promises the unbid suits. The belives are strong, the facts remote.

I personally think, it promises the unbid suits or a way to bid the hand after any possible rebid from partner, including even 4 Club in this case.

There is no statistical knowledge which way is better, so we all just state our opinion or the opinion of the experts we follow.

I really think you are wrong here.

After a 1-level overcall, it is playable, although now uncommon, to play that the double promises both unbid suits (or the ability to control the auction).

After a jump overcall, it's not playable to have double as promising the unbid suits. What are you supposed to do with a 4=3=3=3 distribution with a 13-count and no heart stop? Pass? Bid 2S? It's hands like that for which take-out doubles were invented.

When I have 13 HCPS and a 4333 I surely can cope with any bid pd will make. So this is an easy double for me. What exactly horrible shall happen? That he jumps to 4 Club with some 1444, 17 HCPS and no heart stopper? Possible, but not probably.

I guess we all agree that all ways have their pros and cons. After all, when the double just promises spades here, what will you answer with Kx,xxx,Akxx,Kxxx?
I guess, you try 2 NT, but why should this work opposite AQxx,x,xxxx,Qxxx?
Okay, you can rebid 3 Club and if pd does not have clubs, he surely has diamonds, so you will find a fit. But don't try this after a 1 Club opening.


I guess the difference is that I would pass with a 4333 with 7 or 8 HCPs and expect partner to reopen the bidding with any excuse. (He won't do here, but maybe their 2 Heart is our best spot then anyway.)

And at least here in Germany "we" are not in a minority. But as far as I remember the discussion (and what do I remember...) it is a minority view at least between the experts in Italia, England, Scandinavia and the US, so MAYBE your view is the modern and more successful.

[Lobowolf]

ASkolnick, on Nov 19 2008, 09:29 AM, said:

So, if I bid 3C, he should have either

S&C,S&D or S&S and a weak hand.

Which is another way of saying he shows spades, and no other specific suit.

[FrancesHinden]

Quote one:

Quote

When I have 13 HCPS and a 4333 I surely can cope with any bid pd will make. So this is an easy double for me. 

Quote two:

Quote

We had been there before, so yes the double OF COURSE promised spades and clubs.

[helene_t]

Hanoi5, on Nov 18 2008, 06:20 PM, said:

What if you opened 1♣? Does it change? Would you bid 3♦ instead of 2NT over the double?

No, and this is one reason why most people open 1♦.

[fromageGB]

Here's another answer : 2♠. Double being a transfer any strength showing 5 or more.

With normal methods it has to be 2NT in the UK as X does NOT show anything other than 4 spades. So says an EBU rep when I queried whether I should alert such a double, as you should alert if "it is not takeout". I suggested takeout showed both other suits or a hand strong enough to take further action (that's the way I was brought up), but no, you do not alert, as "just spades" is normal.

I constantly get confused by the EBU regs, as the closest approach they have to a definition of the takeout double (elsewhere) is as I originally understood.

[Codo]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 20 2008, 02:36 AM, said:

Quote one:

Quote

When I have 13 HCPS and a 4333 I surely can cope with any bid pd will make. So this is an easy double for me. 

Quote two:

Quote

We had been there before, so yes the double OF COURSE promised spades and clubs.

Dear Frances,

you did realisze the smiley in the second quote? And that I wrote in the same text something more about my personal belive (both suits or control of the auction?), which I repeated in the second text?

If not, I may quote:

Frances:

Quote

I really think After a overcall, it is playable,  to play that the double promises both unbid suits (or the ability to control the auction).

Maybe this is not exactly what you said, is it?
Same is true about your quote.

[jdonn]

Codo, on Nov 20 2008, 02:40 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Nov 20 2008, 02:36 AM, said:

Quote one:

Quote

When I have 13 HCPS and a 4333 I surely can cope with any bid pd will make. So this is an easy double for me. 

Quote two:

Quote

We had been there before, so yes the double OF COURSE promised spades and clubs.

Dear Frances,

you did realisze the smiley in the second quote? And that I wrote in the same text something more about my personal belive (both suits or control of the auction?), which I repeated in the second text?

If not, I may quote:

Frances:

Quote

I really think After a overcall, it is playable,  to play that the double promises both unbid suits (or the ability to control the auction).

Maybe this is not exactly what you said, is it?
Same is true about your quote.

LOL. She took a FULL SENTENCE from your quote, in fact it was a full paragraph, INCLUDING the smiley that you believe makes it so obvious you were joking (although honestly it's impossible to tell. In fact that particular smiley looks more like you are embarrassed to finish the sentence than it does that you are joking.) And in response you CHANGED her quote by deleting from the middle of it! Where does this come from where people think it's ok to change what people said and quote it? Doing that should be grounds for suspension from the forums, it's inexcusable.

[Codo]

Josh,

so you think to take a paragraph out of the context is okay, but to change a sentence is not? Interesting way of thinking. I think both is wrong and see no difference between these bad quotes.
But you are free to take the borderline where it fits you and your opinion well.

And of course I disagree to suspend any bad quoter from the Forum. It happens so seldom that I can see nobody commiting a major crime.

[jdonn]

Codo, on Nov 20 2008, 05:11 AM, said:

so you think to take a paragraph out of the context is okay, but to change a sentence is not?

One is a LOT worse than the other, and it would take a pretty dense customer not to realize that.

[skjaeran]

helene_t, on Nov 19 2008, 07:43 PM, said:

Hanoi5, on Nov 18 2008, 06:20 PM, said:

What if you opened 1♣? Does it change? Would you bid 3♦ instead of 2NT over the double?

No, and this is one reason why most people open 1♦.

Are you sure about that "most" part, Helene?

In Scandinavia, a HUGE majority would open 1♣. I'm pretty sure many would elsewhere too.

[P_Marlowe]

skaeran, on Nov 20 2008, 03:06 PM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 19 2008, 07:43 PM, said:

Hanoi5, on Nov 18 2008, 06:20 PM, said:

What if you opened 1♣? Does it change? Would you bid 3♦ instead of 2NT over the double?

No, and this is one reason why most people open 1♦.

Are you sure about that "most" part, Helene?

In Scandinavia, a HUGE majority would open 1♣. I'm pretty sure many would elsewhere too.

Playing Acol, 1C is certainly the standard opening bid.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikestar]

2NT seems the best of a bad lot.

I have some sympathy for an initial pass on this crud--the 4 eight spots are nice but only the ♣8 is really likely to be useful. No aces, diamonds have no body, poor length in majors. You won't miss many games passing this.

I think weak notrumpers will do best here--you open 1NT and partner has a good idea what you have and you may even avoid the 2♥ overcall as opponent likely doesn't have sufficient constructive value. If he stretches and overcalls 3♥, you can leave partner's negative double in.

[mr1303]

P_Marlowe, on Nov 21 2008, 11:59 AM, said:

Playing Acol, 1C is certainly the standard opening bid.

Sorry, really disagree with this.

For one thing, most Acol players would open this 1NT. And if I were playing a strong NT in this position, I would still open 1D