[lycier]

---

What's the exact meanings of this double? What's the exact name of this double?
It just like a conversation :
"Hi,pd,I make double only to show 13+TPs,don't promise 4-card other major."
I'd say that this kind of double is not correct bidding expansion since actually this double only shows 13TPs without other meanings.
Due to the uncertainty of this kind of double,it is very easy for its follow-up to be in chaos.
This hand is just a evidence.
It follow-up is 3♠,is it a correct auction? Does bidding 3♠ depend on Hcp or TPs?
Now please look at another hand.

---

After double,Gib bids 3♣,ok,very good.
However there is a problem at below:
3♣ says " 4+♣,11-hcp,11-12TPs "
Last hand,3♠ says " 11-hcp,11-12-Tps,forcing ".
How many different are there between 3♣ and cuebid-3♠?

This double and its follow-up is worth discussing.

[1eyedjack]

3S is a ridiculous bid.

Clearly there are multiple versions of GIB floating around on this hand, as the auction was identical up to but not including South's advance to the double.

It is of possible concern that the 1st example, against Lycier, may have been a more advanced or later version of GIB.

[Stephen Tu]

lycier, on 2015-April-30, 05:55, said:

What's the exact meanings of this double? What's the exact name of this double?
It just like a conversation :
"Hi,pd,I make double only to show 13+TPs,don't promise 4-card other major."

The exact name is a "takeout double". A double that typically promises 3+ card support for all the other suits, and shortness (2-) in the opponent's suit. Occasionally different shapes with a hand too strong to overcall NT or make a simple overcall.

You seem to be under the impression that takeout doubles should promise 4 cards in the unbid major. This is too restrictive. If you require this, then you require North to pass with good hands with this sort of shape and 1-3-(45) shapes, and you will miss too many good games and partials when South has 5-6 hearts but not strong enough to act himself. The person short in the opponent's suit is the one that should act over preempts in marginal situations.

Yes, making takeout doubles with 3 cds only in the other major sometimes leads to 4-3 fits. This may or may not work out well. Often it works fine because you are doubling with shortness in the opp's suit, the tap is taken in the 3 cd trump hand, so you don't lose control. But sometimes the trumps are too bad and it doesn't work out. Good players realize that finding 5-3 and 6-3 heart fits that would not be found without the double more than compensates you for the losses from when the 4-3 fit doesn't work out.

Quote

I'd say that this kind of double is not correct bidding expansion since actually this double only shows 13TPs without other meanings.

No, it did show 3-5 in the unbids and 2- spades.

Quote

Due to the uncertainty of this kind of double,it is very easy for its follow-up to be in chaos.
This hand is just a evidence.
It follow-up is 3♠,is it a correct auction? Does bidding 3♠ depend on Hcp or TPs?

It's not chaos. It's just that 3♠ is an overbid, and 3♣ playing Lebensohl, showing approx 8-11, is perfectly fine.

[iandayre]

Double is 100% correct. Forget about takeout doubles guaranteeing 4 cards in the unbid major(s). 3 is fine with enough strength to act.

But yes, 3S is a big overbid, 3C is enough playing Lebensohl. Given recent examples of GIB making the strength-showing suit advance over doubles of weak 2's with weak hands, and given that GIB's version of Lebensohl has always been non-standard, an improvement in GIB's use of that convention is clearly called for.

[steve2005]

iandayre, on 2015-April-30, 13:36, said:

But yes, 3S is a big overbid, 3C is enough playing Lebensohl.

One of the biggest advantages of Leb is you don't have to force unless you have a force.

[Bbradley62]

1eyedjack, on 2015-April-30, 07:00, said:

Clearly there are multiple versions of GIB floating around on this hand, as the auction was identical up to but not including South's advance to the double.

It is of possible concern that the 1st example, against Lycier, may have been a more advanced or later version of GIB.

Not surprisingly, 14 of the 16 Souths on Lycier's traveler are humans; the one who wasn't at Lycier's table made the appropriate 3♣ call. It's my understanding that Lycier generally uses basic bots, and we don't know what version was at the other table. Several GIB-West's passed instead of opening 2♠.