[han]

Hand 4. xx A10xx AJx AQJx

All white, matchpoints. RHO opens 2D, multi. Do you:

a. Bid 2NT, showing 16-18 balanced.
b. Pass, planning to double 2S for takeout.
c. Double, then pass if it goes 2H (pass) - 2S.
d. Double, showing 13-15 balanced or a good hand, planning double 2S for takeout.
e. Something else (describe).

[hrothgar]

 han, on 2011-May-31, 11:37, said:

Hand 4. xx A10xx AJx AQJx

All white, matchpoints. RHO opens 2D, multi. Do you:

a. Bid 2NT, showing 16-18 balanced.
b. Pass, planning to double 2S for takeout.
c. Double, then pass if it goes 2H (pass) - 2S.
d. Double, showing 13-15 balanced or a good hand, planning double 2S for takeout.
e. Something else (describe).

The hand seems too strong to pass and then double 2♠ (partner will never play me for three Aces)

I'm going to bid an immediate 2NT.

It's right on shape
It's right with respect to strength
There is no guaruntee that the opponents have Spades (or that they'll lead them if they do)

What's the old saying about getting there firstist with the mostist?

[Phil]

D

Its either “D” or “B”. I choose D. I think we might have a system edge here. If RHO bids 2♥, I have the option of just defending, but if the field is playing a weak 2♥, this hand would obviously overcall 2N. If partner passes out 2♥, how bad can that be, and I can always bid 2N over 2♠.

[mike777]

A

---

[Echognome]

A. Bid 2NT. If I play these methods, which I am happy to do, why would I not use the bid that describes my hand? I understand that if RHO had opened 2♠, I would be doubling for takeout and if RHO had opened 2♥, I would be bidding 2NT to play. But here both sides are left a little in the dark... including opening leader.

[whereagles]

Plan b seems fine because it seems I don't need to bid now. After I balance the likely 2♠ response pard uses lebensohl (I'm sure he will lol) and I'll be in game when I belong there

[Fluffy]

double and double

I think doubling first is clear with a weak major, not knowing what is coming next. On next round pass is a close decision, but I don't find any reason to downgrade this 16 count.

-----

didn't know there were options, Ihope Han understood I meant option D.

[Free]

Triple D (option D: Dbl-Dbl)

[P_Marlowe]

a) - I have 16-18 and a bal. hand.

That was what I have voted for, but now b) seems best.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[han]

Hand 4.

xx A10xx AJx AQJx

All white, matchpoints. RHO opens 2D, multi. Do you:

a. Bid 2NT, showing 16-18 balanced.
b. Pass, planning to double 2S for takeout.
c. Double, then pass if it goes 2H (pass) - 2S.
d. Double, showing 13-15 balanced or a good hand, planning double 2S for takeout.
e. Something else (describe).

Ben: B
Adam: B
Paul: D
Josh: B
Fred: B
Nigel: A
Vincent: D
Gonzalo: D
Frances: C
Roger: B
Justin: D
Hanoi: B
Michael: B
Andy: B

I had a similar hand at the table and decided to double twice. My partner thought this showed a significantly better hand. What should it be? Ben gave me a puzzle:

Ben: A pass. I am not fond of the proposed methods, I prefer multi-vs-multi, I will not list all the options but just say the balanced hands would bid 2♥over 2♦ showing 15=18 balanced (partner can pass with hearts, correct to 2♠ or 2NT, etc). In this method, DBL of 2♦ shows a really big balanced hand, or a major one suiter, or a three suited hand.

I decided to interpret this as a vote for option B, with A and Abstain as close seconds.

Adam: B. I'm assuming from the choices that I'm playing the ACBL defense two, where a takeout double of one major is supposed to pass and then double. I don't think this qualifies as a "strong hand" by their definition. If I were playing my preferred defense, I would double immediately for takeout of spades (which I guess is option E). There is no defense to multi specified in BBO advanced.

I imagine that there are more panelists who have a different prefered defence. I am glad that everybody was willing to give their choice with the specified method, which might well be part of ACBL defense two.

With the exception of Nigel and Frances, the panel chose to sell the hand as a takeout double of spades, with more panelists going for route B than route D. Let's hear from the majority first.

Michael: B. The alternative is a superaggressive X+X. But we still have lebensohl after the delayed double, so we should be fine. Hate 2N which wrongsides notrumps for no particular good reason.

Fred: B. With many similar hands I would overcall 2NT, but with nothing at all in spades and good support for the other 3 suits, I will hope that I get a chance to make a takeout double of spades. I don't like options C or D because my hand is out of range for both of those actions.

Hanoi: Pass and then double 2♠. This is one way of defending against Multi, to consider 2♦ as a 2♥ opening bid (we'd pass with this hand as stoppers in both Majors would be needed for 2NT) and the when 2♠ comes to treat it as a 2♠ opening. Is there any problem with this approach? Yes, the bidding could come at the 4 Level next time but it's a risk well taken I suppose.

Andy: B. 2NT is descriptive, and it may sometimes gain by causing LHO to lead the wrong suit against 3NT, but getting game played from the right side seems more important. 2NT is also likely to work badly if partner passes it.

I think that double-then-double shows a significantly better hand than this - the same high-cards in a 1435 shape would be a minimum for that action.

Roger. B, but to me this is just an issue of definitions. I don't think this hand is good enough to be called a strong takeout double.

I agree that this is just a matter of definitions, but I prefer a different definition.

Gonzalo: D. I think doubling first is clear with a weak major, not knowing what is coming next. On next round pass is a close decision, but I don't find any reason to downgrade this 16 count.

Paul: D. Important to place a stake in the auction and give partner some idea of where we stand. 2NT seems to overstate the values with no source of tricks, and passing may let the opponents pre-empt us.

Vincent: D. B might be better, but the range becomes very big if you pass/double with hands like this one and hands you want to balance with.

That seems exactly right. If double followed by double shows 19+, as Frances mentions, then the delayed double goes up to an 18-count. But if 2S is passed around to us, wouldn't we double with as little as 10 points, maybe even less when we are all white at matchpoints? That seems an awfully large range. It is true that, following Hanoi, we are not in a worse situation than if the opponents had opened 2S, but we should be ahead! I'd define this 16-count as a minimum for the double double.

Scores:
B = 100 (8)
D = 70 (4)
A = 40 (1)
C = 30 (1)

[han]

I'm going to stop here for today, the other hands will come later.

[han]

 Fluffy, on 2011-June-01, 07:47, said:

didn't know there were options, Ihope Han understood I meant option D.

Yup.

[Fluffy]

 han, on 2011-June-01, 21:42, said:

I'm going to stop here for today, the other hands will come later.

Hopefully I will get a 100 at least in the next 4 boards lol. I am always in the minority view

BTW I miss your own opinions/decisions. Its ok to be an objective poll master, but you can tell us what you'd do at least.

[Phil]

 Fluffy, on 2011-June-02, 09:33, said:

Hopefully I will get a 100 at least in the next 4 boards lol. I am always in the minority view

BTW I miss your own opinions/decisions. Its ok to be an objective poll master, but you can tell us what you'd do at least.

Count the votes. For instance, it appears Han found the obvious far-sighted call of ♥♥♥♥♥ on #3.

[han]

 Fluffy, on 2011-June-02, 09:33, said:

Hopefully I will get a 100 at least in the next 4 boards lol. I am always in the minority view

BTW I miss your own opinions/decisions. Its ok to be an objective poll master, but you can tell us what you'd do at least.

I thought I did make my own opinion quite clear on this hand (though not on the other 3).

First of all, as Roger said, the most important thing is to have an agreement about how strong a double followed by a bid or double is. After moving to the Netherlands where pretty much all opponents plays multi, I found out that styles vary greatly and it is very important to be on the same wavelength.

I don't like the style of passing first with hands that are this strong. I really don't understand the panelists who consider downgrading this 16-count, it looks like quite a good 16-count to me. If LHO bids 2S and it goes pass pass, I'd like to be able to reopen quite light, for example with a 1-4-4-4 8-count I might double. If I do the same with hands this strong the range becomes too large, even if we play lebensohl. So if I could have it my way, I would make this a minimal repeated double, and pass followed by double with hands a bit weaker. I don't like 2NT at all.

Of course, I tried to make the hand exactly on the edge of where I thought that the panel would not agree. The hand that I had at the table was close to this though.

[Cascade]

Pass then Double (of spades) seems to leave you very uncomfortably placed if it comes back to you at 2♥ (or some higher number of hearts). It will at least some of the time. I feel the hand has too much potential to sell out when that happens.

[karlson]

I admit that my multi defense also said the second double was 18+ but Han's argument is pretty convincing. The biggest downside is perhaps that with the larger range for the second double, you really have to play lebensohl (2n as scrambling seeemed best before).

[mfa1010]

For me 16 is the normal maximum for P-then-X. Having a low minimum for X-then-X makes it hard to advance that second double. So we will have a range problem regardsless of what we do.

Btw, how do you play:
2♦-X-2♥-P
P-X-P-2NT
?

I'm used to scrambling here. We have the meta-agreement that we don't have lebensohl available twice. There is lebensohl after 2♥, so now it is scrambling. With this agreement we would not be well placed to handle an aggessive X-then-X.

[benlessard]

D, ive said that X and X should setup lebensohl while. Pass and X should setup 2NT(by partner as scrambling)