[mike777]

There was wide disagreement on this deal.

imps none vul.

T92.....K4....J763....T863


(1h)=p=p=x
(xx)=?

[aguahombre]

What would you do if he didn't redouble? Did XX take up any room? What would you do if you didn't want to take out 1H? What if opener is taking a free shot because of the likelihood that your side will get confused as to what a pass means?

Can't use 1NT for a scramble to a minor here. Too likely we should be playing 1NT if my hand is different. That leaves taking out the takeout double, if that is your style; or passing and letting partner bale herself out, hoping she will figure out what your pass means or doesn't mean.

Strictly a subject for agreement with your partner. You either take out takeouts or you don't.

[SteveMoe]

Passing in 2nd seat and passing again over partner's takeout double is normally for penalties. Opener's redouble shouldn't cloud the issue. Since I wouldn't pass without the redouble, I will not pass with it.

If we agree to pass for takeout here (presumably with either a weak hand or no shape to show) we give up the possibility to penalize 1-level contracts. On average I do not know what is better. Most disdain defending 1-level doubled contracts where possible.

[ArtK78]

SteveMoe, on 2012-September-01, 20:07, said:

Passing in 2nd seat and passing again over partner's takeout double is normally for penalties. Opener's redouble shouldn't cloud the issue. Since I wouldn't pass without the redouble, I will not pass with it.

No. While the pass would be for penalties at the 2 level or higher, it is generally accepted that a pass of a redouble of a 1-level bid is NOT for penalties. Any other agreement is non-standard.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2012-September-02, 01:28, said:

No. While the pass would be for penalties at the 2 level or higher, it is generally accepted that a pass of a redouble of a 1-level bid is NOT for penalties. Any other agreement is non-standard.

I am no expert on "standard", but I don't think we should lump two situations together.

(1H) X (XX) P......Here, I agree that most people treat the pass as throwing the ball back to the doubler.

The given auction is quite different. You might be right that a nebulous pass is still standard, but I don't believe it should be.

[Phil]

ArtK78, on 2012-September-02, 01:28, said:

No. While the pass would be for penalties at the 2 level or higher, it is generally accepted that a pass of a redouble of a 1-level bid is NOT for penalties. Any other agreement is non-standard.

Agree. The bulletin article was surprising to me.

[phil_20686]

I would have thought a pass in this position is for penalties, and should be for penalties. When responder XX you can be sure that they have the balance of the points, when opener XX he i showing a reasonable hand, but he could just have 18-19 balanced opposite 0-3, in which case with the hearts sitting over him he might be in real difficulties even at the one level.

I actually like to play 1H X XX P as for penalties too, though I agree that this is very non standard. Twice in my life I have had this auction and been 2-6 in the majors, and ended up playing doubled in a 3m partscore because I could not pass. I mean, there is no guarantee that they sit 1M xx if you pass, even when its right for them to do so, rho often looks at his 0-1 heart and runs to 1N, or his five card suit, looking to bid constructively. Particularly poor players at MP.

2D is obviously superior to 2C imo, since the auction might continue. The same reason that after 1c x p you bid 1S when 44 in the majors. If partner should cuebid for example I can at least get both my suits into the auction.

[rhm]

aguahombre, on 2012-September-02, 02:44, said:

I am no expert on "standard", but I don't think we should lump two situations together.

(1H) X (XX) P......Here, I agree that most people treat the pass as throwing the ball back to the doubler.

The given auction is quite different. You might be right that a nebulous pass is still standard, but I don't believe it should be.

I still believe that passing over RDBL after a takeout DBL is nothing but claiming I have no clear preference and this is very useful information and occurs time and again while I can not remember ever having a leave-in over a RDBL.
It does not matter which opponent redoubled.
For the hand I have it is perfect. If my partner has 4 reasonable spades and a minimum I want to stop in 1♠. 1♠ by me tends to show 4 cards in spades.
It is worth pointing out that passing in this scenario is attractive, because it often is quite important when the HCP are skewed to get opener on lead.
Also if I bid a suit after having passed -say 2♣ over partner's 1♠ - I would guarantee playability in the unbid suit left (♦s).
The fear that redoubler is taking us for a ride is clearly overblown and very dangerous for himself.
When did a fake RDBL last happen to you?

Rainer Herrmann

[aguahombre]

Whatever works for you folks is fine as long as you are on the same page.

Apparently, the Bulletin hand referrenced in the OP shows a lot of sucessful players who take for granted that the two situations are quite different.

[ggwhiz]

Yeah I was pretty surprised at scoring 2♣ ahead of 2♦ on this one.

I once had a discussion that pass of a rdbl was for penalty (all of them for consistency) and 5 minutes later doubled a 1♦ opener in 3rd on a piece of cheese. Rdbl - p - p and I ran. Pard eventually set us down in 3♦ +1 and said I'm guessing you won't ever do that again.

I also had an opponent double my pards 1♣ opening on 7 solid of them. Caught me with the rdbl - float.

Classic lose - lose situation for me so disregard any opinions I may admit to or better, go the other way.

[Fluffy]

ArtK78, on 2012-September-02, 01:28, said:

No. While the pass would be for penalties at the 2 level or higher, it is generally accepted that a pass of a redouble of a 1-level bid is NOT for penalties. Any other agreement is non-standard.

My first reaction was that, but then I though again and saw we are behind declarer, this is enough for me to make penalty pass at least conceibably possible, and that means that pass is a potential disaster so should be avoided at all cost.

[lalldonn]

ArtK78, on 2012-September-02, 01:28, said:

No. While the pass would be for penalties at the 2 level or higher, it is generally accepted that a pass of a redouble of a 1-level bid is NOT for penalties. Any other agreement is non-standard.

Totally disagree, I believe first of all that nothing is standard, but that it's closer to being standard that passing is for penalties any time you are behind the suit whether they redouble or not. I certainly play it that way.

Here I would bid 1NT planning to redouble if it's doubled. After he has redoubled partner won't be raising 1NT so he has given me this free method to not have to guess which minor to bid.

[FrancesHinden]

What lalldonn said.

While it's standard that 1H x xx is neutral, I don't think there is a standard for 1H P P x xx P. I play that as for penalties and here would bid 1NT then redouble.

[paulg]

I know that passing this redouble is penalties in my regular partnership, so I'd bid 2♣.

I'm not planning to bid again with this hand, so I want to make the bid that is most likely to get us to a sensible spot at the two level. I didn't really have the imagination to bid one notrump, perhaps because I didn't have the confidence of Frances and lalldonn that partner and I would be on the same wavelength.

[phil_20686]

Why are you bidding 2c rather than 2d? Do you play elc? It's quite unlike 2c buys the dummy IMO. If someone bids 2h wouldn't you rather have bid 2d?

[the_clown]

With my regular p we have the aggrement that passes at low level show no clear direction so I would pass. With a random good partner I will bid 1NT and XX when they double me, partner will hopefully pick his better minor then

[han]

We play that a pass after a first round (starting with the opening bid) double and redouble shows no clear direction.

[helene_t]

Bergen plays (1♥)-x-(xx)-1NT as showing minors. I wonder if it applies here also. If it is undiscussed then I bid 2♦. Pass should be penalties although of course some partners won't take it that way.

[mycroft]

1Hxx is game (and last time I played it, granted in a different auction, it was +1160). Without explicit agreement that this one means "no, you pick it, partner", I'm pulling and saving partner the guess. If it turns out I'm in the wrong contract because of that (what, partner doubled with 5=2=3=3?) and go down 800 instead of 500 or 300, so be it; it's not -560 or more.

Having said that, I think keeping penalty here is sane (as opposed to when responder redoubles); having it be "you pick" allows a "free" psychic redouble. How many people would do it? I don't know - but I might, even not knowing what their continuations are. With the right hand I might not "get away with it", and still go -600 into -980.

[lalldonn]

Btw, seperate from the topic of what is standard but instead on the topic of what is best, I think it's an enormous mistake not to play this pass as for penalty. A penalty pass is really likely even if opener really has his redouble.