[pigpenz]

questions:
what does this show willingness to sit for xx or 3343 hand with four in opps suit?

[awm]

Depends on the level. I think the standard meaning these days is:

(1) At the one-level, partner's pass asks for doubler's best suit. This could be 4333 with 4 in the opponents suit, but there are other examples like 1♦-X-XX with 44 in the majors or 1♥-X-XX with 3244.

(2) At the two-level and above, partner's pass is wanting to defend the redoubled contract.

[Echognome]

By agreement.

I think most play it as "rescue yourself". I normally try to bid at the 1 level even on a 3 card suit if I have to. But others' styles may vary.

[bid_em_up]

The answer to the question is somewhat dependent on your skill level and the skill level of your partner.

It is my belief that the more advanced a player is in their skill level, the more likely they will treat this as a willingness to defend the redoubled contract. Otherwise, they should run. If you are 4-3-3-3, with 4 cards in their suit, they will either bid the next cheapest bid or 1N (depending on what is available and what their hand is).

However, I also believe that most beginner, intermediate and even many advanced players will probably treat this pass as a weak hand with no real preference for any unbid suit.

jmoo.

[Walddk]

No preference, with this message to partner. "Your job to get us out of the mess you created when you doubled".

Roland

[Walddk]

bid_em_up, on Dec 8 2006, 05:35 PM, said:

It is my belief that the more advanced a player is in their skill level,  the more likely they will treat this as a willingness to defend the redoubled contract.

I disagree. Without prior discussion I would expect my expert partner to let me (doubler) decide where to play.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

No preference, pick a suit.

The XX could have been a psych bid,
with a big fit for partner, but even
if this was the case ... you dont want
to defend, do you?

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

awm, on Dec 8 2006, 04:28 PM, said:

Depends on the level. I think the standard meaning these days is:

(1) At the one-level, partner's pass asks for doubler's best suit. This could be 4333 with 4 in the opponents suit, but there are other examples like 1♦-X-XX with 44 in the majors or 1♥-X-XX with 3244.

(2) At the two-level and above, partner's pass is wanting to defend the redoubled contract.

What he said.

(Although 1something P P x xx P is often played for penalties)

[cherdano]

I agree with Adam, except I would also treat passes after their suit has been bid and raised as "no preference". (1H-P-2H-X-XX-P)

[mikeh]

I play that the pass of the redouble announces a desire to defend.

While this is low frequency, it is invaluable when it arises... how else so we get a plus score on these hands, especially since the majority of good players use redouble to deny a fit... to show a hand interested in doubling the opps.

When the redouble tends to deny a fit and to deny an unbalanced hand (other than 4441 with shortness in the opening bid) using pass to say "rescue yourself... I am 4333 bad hand" is an invitation to a spanking. I'd rather bid directly, suggesting (but not showing) 4+ cards in the suit bid... this has the salutory effect of leaving the opps wondering if we have an 8 card fit, in which case defending, especially at the 1-level, is not an easy choice.

Furthermore, when the redouble tends to deny a fit, rather than merely show 10+ points, the odds of advancer holding a penalty pass are enhanced. Give me QJT963 xx xx Jxx and I'd rather defend 1♠ redoubled than play 2♣ doubled.

This penalty pass of the redouble used to be a very common expert treatment (I wouldn't say it was ever universal) and I think a lot of players still use it.

As an aside, many good players no longer have the penalty redouble available: I discarded it several years ago in favour of transfer responses over the opp's takeout double, and have not missed the 'good hand, no fit' redouble at all. The pass of the (transfer) redouble is still penalty for me, should the opps also play this style.

[pigpenz]

to me it would seem to treat bids over the redouble just as you would if they handt redoubled unless partner make some sort of off shape take out doubles. I would bid over the redouble just as I would if the opp hadnt redoubled. Patner asked you to respond to his takeout and unelss you have a reason to pass you should bid.

[kenberg]

"Takeout Doubles" by Mike Lawrence, page 147:

"Passing East's redouble says you have nothing to bid."

Later:

"Rule: When your partner doubles a suit and your RHO redoubles, a pass by you is not for penalties."

Of course you can play it otherwise. But generally Lawrence is pretty good about warning you when he is recommending something that is not the default meaning and no such warning appears here. So I take this as saying not only that this is his advice but also that he would expect this to be the meaning if undiscussed.

ML goes on to suggest three "expert tricks". I take this to mean that you maybe should not trot them out undiscussed:

I. 1C-X-XX-2S is not preemptive, not invitational. I have used this undiscussed and have never had it misunderstood, but there is always the first time.

II. He allows you "might" hold Qxxx/xx/KQx/JT9x. You must pass. He says this problem has arisen once in the thirty years he has been playing. Actually, this doesn't seem so much like an expert trick as a reminder that if your hand doesn't fit your system you have to live with it. I suppose it was opener who psyched. (Psyching a redouble isn't really practical since unless your partner is in on the joke your XX is almost certain to push him into a bad call.)

III. This one goes on for a bit but the essence seems to be that after the opponents have redoubled, any low level redouble on your side side is for rescue:
1H X XX Pass
Pass 1S X XX
Fourth hand holds minors.

All these things seem logical to me but of course there can be sensible arguments for doing them differently. Imo, a lot of time and stress can be avoided by a partnership agreeing to play doubles and the subsequent bids in the way recommended by Lawrence, or by someone else if preferred. You can cover a lot of ground quickly this way, and you can resolve many disputes quickly this way.

[pigpenz]

kenberg, on Dec 9 2006, 09:40 AM, said:

Doing it ML's way is my choice, doing it bobh's way is another.

and if there were no redouble you would bid your longest suit unless you were 5332 or 3334 with your longest being the opps opening suit. So why not bid it now just like you would if there were no redouble....I guess I dont see what you are gaining by not bidding?

[Walddk]

pigpenz, on Dec 9 2006, 05:24 PM, said:

kenberg, on Dec 9 2006, 09:40 AM, said:

Doing it ML's way is my choice, doing it bobh's way is another.

and if there were no redouble you would bid your longest suit unless you were 5332 or 3334 with your longest being the opps opening suit. So why not bid it now just like you would if there were no redouble....I guess I dont see what you are gaining by not bidding?

You gain by getting to your fit when partner has doubled say 1♥ on 4-1-5-3 or 4-1-3-5, and even more important when he has doubled 1♠ with 1-4-5-3 or 1-4-3-5. Because now you are forced to the 2-level.

I am sure we all prefer to play on 5-3 rather than 4-3.

Roland

[pigpenz]

Walddk, on Dec 9 2006, 10:30 AM, said:

pigpenz, on Dec 9 2006, 05:24 PM, said:

kenberg, on Dec 9 2006, 09:40 AM, said:

Doing it ML's way is my choice, doing it bobh's way is another.

and if there were no redouble you would bid your longest suit unless you were 5332 or 3334 with your longest being the opps opening suit. So why not bid it now just like you would if there were no redouble....I guess I dont see what you are gaining by not bidding?

You gain by getting to your fit when partner has doubled say 1♥ on 4-1-5-3 or 4-1-3-5, and even more important when he has doubled 1♠ with 1-4-5-3 or 1-4-3-5. Because now you are forced to the 2-level.

I am sure we all prefer to play on 5-3 rather than 4-3.

Roland

so maybe over major suit opening it has more merit than over a minor suit opening then.

[neilkaz]

I keep reading mentions of Bob's notes, bobh's extensive notes, etc etc, but am unable to find them.

Someone please tell me in detail how to find them.

Staff members and old timers here may wonder why I keep asking how to find things on BBO, but I am very computer illiterate and the site isn't straight forward for me to navigate by any means.

Anyhow I play as ML suggests and passing the XX is not for penalty and simply shows nothing desirable to bid and wants PD to bid 4 card suits up the line so we can escape. Subsequent XX's will be rescue.

.. thx in advance for links to Bob's notes .. neilkaz ..

[temp3600]

neilkaz, on Dec 9 2006, 11:38 PM, said:

I keep reading mentions of Bob's notes, bobh's extensive notes, etc etc, but am unable to find them.

Someone please tell me in detail how to find them.

Try this link : http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?act...lluser&mid=4036
It displays all of bobh2's posts, from most recent to oldest.

[neilkaz]

temp3600, on Dec 10 2006, 11:56 AM, said:

neilkaz, on Dec 9 2006, 11:38 PM, said:

I keep reading mentions of Bob's notes, bobh's extensive notes, etc etc, but am unable to find them.

Someone please tell me in detail how to find them.

Try this link : http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?act...lluser&mid=4036
It displays all of bobh2's posts, from most recent to oldest.

Thx..great reading there !! TY Bob ! .. neilkaz ..

[kgr]

neilkaz, on Dec 10 2006, 06:38 AM, said:

in detail how to find them.

In Bridge Base forums:
Top right of the screen you have Search. Click on search and that will bring you to the search form.
Eg: enter bobh in the field "filter by member name" and click the button <perform the search>
You will find all the topics bobh posted in.

[SoTired]

1x X XX p = weak, no preference, or at least no preference for the cheapest bid. If bidding was 1S X XX p and advancer is 3334, advancer would bid 2C. But if advancer is 3343, advancer can pass 2C and play a 4-3 club fit rather than declare a possible 4-3 (or 4-2) diam fit. I have always thot that was the commonly accepted definition.

This is different from 1x p p X XX p = Defending. Otherwise, bidder could escape by XX.