[helene_t]

 johnu, on 2014-July-06, 17:03, said:

Preemptive bids are positive actions?

A balancing jump overcall is normally played as intermediate. In standard bidding it probably doesn't exist by a passed hand. But whatever it means, it must be specific enough to transfer captaincy to partner and thus make doubles be penalty. I think R/S would agree with that unless they say specifically that they play t/o doubles opposite jump overcalls.

[mikestar13]

 johnu, on 2014-July-07, 00:22, said:

Of course you can, just double when this auction comes up

I really like the way you think on this issue !

[whereagles]

Well, I suppose it all boils down to whether pass+2♠ rates as positive or negative

[bluechip10]

 EarlPurple, on 2014-July-06, 04:39, said:

Both sides vulnerable, board 4, dealer West. Scoring is match-points.

I am not showing my hand at this point. It's obvious what I want double to be if you look at my hand.

The auction goes:

---

Is "double" by South take-out or penalty.

(I cannot reveal the actual hand until at least 16th July and possibly even then I should not as someone might still play it afterwards).

Penalty.

[ayebee]

Penalties. It can hardly be for take out after the initial pass of 1c (what is partner supposed to respond other than rebidding his spades?)

It could I suppose be a negative double of sorts showing values and no fit in spades, but that just passes reponsibility back to partner.

As far as I can see he has either 0-4 points and 7 spades and didnt fancy a 3 level vulnerable pre-empt or 6 spades and 4 hearts and has agreed not to open weak 2s on that holding. On that basis partner could bid 3H with 4 card support and hope that partner corrects to 3S with 7 spades.

The only partner I play with that would take it as take-out has the initials GIB. For him/her/it everything is take out irrespective of previous bidding.

[Zelandakh]

According to the Robson-Segal rules this double shows a raise to 3♠ that also suggests a sacrifice in 4♠ (see page 124 and then again page 221). Without this specific agreement it is penalties.

[Lorne50]

 EarlPurple, on 2014-July-06, 04:39, said:

Both sides vulnerable, board 4, dealer West. Scoring is match-points.

I am not showing my hand at this point. It's obvious what I want double to be if you look at my hand.

The auction goes:

---

Is "double" by South take-out or penalty.

(I cannot reveal the actual hand until at least 16th July and possibly even then I should not as someone might still play it afterwards).

Penalty. Partner should have a good weak 2 in spades but did not open because he has 4 hearts. You have a club stack and short spades.

[johnu]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-July-07, 10:32, said:

According to the Robson-Segal rules this double shows a raise to 3♠ that also suggests a sacrifice in 4♠ (see page 124 and then again page 221). Without this specific agreement it is penalties.

Just for drill for those who don't have the book handy, what are the sample hands associated with the rules?

[johnu]

 ayebee, on 2014-July-07, 10:05, said:

The only partner I play with that would take it as take-out has the initials GIB. For him/her/it everything is take out irrespective of previous bidding.

GIB may describe many doubles as takeout but too often passes as if they were penalty On the other hand, GIB frequently takes out doubles that are for penalties when pass is indicated, so I guess everything balances out okay.

[EricK]

 johnu, on 2014-July-07, 13:27, said:

GIB may describe many doubles as takeout but too often passes as if they were penalty On the other hand, GIB frequently takes out doubles that are for penalties when pass is indicated, so I guess everything balances out okay.

And yet they say it is hard to get a computer to play in a human-like manner...

[mota51]

This has to be penalty double with assured shortage in sapdes and preventing p from bidding 3!s - just in case she may decide to do so (since she ventured 2!s after a pass)

[MrsD12345]

Its my first post, and have a horrid feelng that I am now totally unsure, yes its penalty / no its not [the correct bid is PASS] How much information are we giving away, what are we going to do next......... when in doubt, and all else fails, I PASS

[nige1]

 EarlPurple, on 2014-July-06, 04:39, said:

Both sides vulnerable, board 4, dealer West. Scoring is match-points. I am not showing my hand at this point. It's obvious what I want double to be if you look at my hand. Is "double" by South take-out or penalty. (I cannot reveal the actual hand until at least 16th July and possibly even then I should not as someone might still play it afterwards).

---

Perhaps 2♠ shows a near opening bid with a poor long suit e.g.
♠ x x x x x x x ♥ A Q x x ♦ K x ♣ -
Anyway, agree with everybody: double is penalty.

[gordontd]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-July-07, 10:32, said:

According to the Robson-Segal rules this double shows a raise to 3♠ that also suggests a sacrifice in 4♠ (see page 124 and then again page 221). Without this specific agreement it is penalties.

I can see nothing on page 124 that looks lie this situation, and the one on page 221 (described as takeout) doesn't really seem the same to me either. Since there are those who think the explanation for the given auction is that partner has a side four-card heart suit, there doesn't seem to be much utility in a takeout double here. I could however have a trump stack over the club bidder.

[kelk_r]

Has to be a penalty. N hand should be wk. South had to pass 1 C with strength of almost 1NT or a bit more with few C honours.

[ayebee]

 johnu, on 2014-July-07, 13:27, said:

GIB may describe many doubles as takeout but too often passes as if they were penalty On the other hand, GIB frequently takes out doubles that are for penalties when pass is indicated, so I guess everything balances out okay.

Conclusion: The main problem with playing with our good friend GIB is that it's impossible to beat him around the head (literally or figuratively) during the post mortem

[EarlPurple]

Well the hand itself is not GIB but Argine, the system designed by Jerome Rombaut and used on funbridge. The hand came from the last Elite serie (yes I'm an Elite there..) so someone might play it if they try "challenge Elite players" but such is unranked anyway.

I have no idea how my system differs to others but I'm the only one of the 20 who played it whose partner did not open the bidding 1♠. Partner has 11 points and 6 spades to the AQ10 and at every other table East overcalled 2♣ over 1♠. E/W make 6 tricks in clubs so defending here is not going to be good. I scored well on this board playing in 3NT (rather than 4♠)

[Cyberyeti]

 EarlPurple, on 2014-July-16, 02:51, said:

Well the hand itself is not GIB but Argine, the system designed by Jerome Rombaut and used on funbridge. The hand came from the last Elite serie (yes I'm an Elite there..) so someone might play it if they try "challenge Elite players" but such is unranked anyway.

I have no idea how my system differs to others but I'm the only one of the 20 who played it whose partner did not open the bidding 1♠. Partner has 11 points and 6 spades to the AQ10 and at every other table East overcalled 2♣ over 1♠. E/W make 6 tricks in clubs so defending here is not going to be good. I scored well on this board playing in 3NT (rather than 4♠)

Err if EW make 6 tricks in clubs then you're taking 800 at game all so defending is fine.

[Zelandakh]

 johnu, on 2014-July-07, 13:18, said:

Just for drill for those who don't have the book handy, what are the sample hands associated with the rules?

Sorry, I have been away on holiday without internet for a few days. The example from the book (albeit in a slightly different auction) is ♠K742 ♥653 ♦KQ42 ♣J7.

 gordontd, on 2014-July-08, 02:29, said:

I can see nothing on page 124 that looks lie this situation, and the one on page 221 (described as takeout) doesn't really seem the same to me either. Since there are those who think the explanation for the given auction is that partner has a side four-card heart suit, there doesn't seem to be much utility in a takeout double here. I could however have a trump stack over the club bidder.

The discussion starts at the bottom of page 123. They make the point that partner might well have a 5 card suit. I agree that the example auctions are different but I see nothing in the OP auction that would disqualify it from the rules or logic laid out. The real question is whether fourth hand is still wide-ranging or is now disciplined. The focus of R-S is on a wide-ranging style and this is essentially the reason they suggest this agreement for 2M WJOs. It would certainly not be unreasonable to say that this is not a position for a wide-ranging overcall and that the agreement is therefore off - but this is not discussed.

[biggerclub]

 EarlPurple, on 2014-July-06, 04:39, said:

Both sides vulnerable, board 4, dealer West. Scoring is match-points.

I am not showing my hand at this point. It's obvious what I want double to be if you look at my hand.

The auction goes:

---

Is "double" by South take-out or penalty.

(I cannot reveal the actual hand until at least 16th July and possibly even then I should not as someone might still play it afterwards).

It must be penalty. Standard. If you don't TO over 1♣, your x over any subsequent # of ♣ says, "I have a stack."