[Winstonm]

What is the best use for the double in each sequence?

1H-P-P-X
2H-X

Penalty or responsive or other?

1H-P-P-X
2C-X

Penalty or responsive or other?

1H-P-P-1S
2H-X

Penalty or responsive or other?

[mikeh]

I'm not sure what the 'best use' is, but I'd treat all of them as penalty.

[Winstonm]

mikeh, on Jan 15 2007, 03:56 PM, said:

I'm not sure what the 'best use' is, but I'd treat all of them as penalty.

Yes, but Mike you are ducking the debate. I think all have traditionally been used as penalty; the question is whether or not there is a better use.

[whereagles]

Delayed doubles are usually penalty, but Robson/Segal define all of those as take-out.

[awm]

My general philosophy is to play almost all two-level doubles as takeout. The reasoning is that my partners and I like to compete very aggressively over two-level auctions, and therefore if I have a real "penalty double" the odds of partner balancing with a double are very good. Thus:

(1) 1♥ - P - P - X; 2♥ - X would be takeout/responsive.

(2) 1♥ - P - P - X; 2♣ - X is penalty, because partner's initial double showed clubs (actually all three suits other than hearts). The typical hand involves Hx or better clubs and 4 good hearts. It's not clear this hand "was a penalty pass of hearts" but there is an implication of willingness to double 2♥.

(3) 1♥ - P - P - 1♠; 2♥ - X is responsive; partner will often balance with a double if I have a penalty pass, and there exists a hand with both minors where I had no bid over 1♥ and if this double is penalty I will also have no bid over 2♥. Note that 2NT does have a natural use here.

[mikeh]

1. We have to concern ourselves with two hand-types: one in which we have a good defensive hand with 4 or even 5 chunky ♥s and some values or one in which we have some kind of 4=4 or 54 minor suits with the values to compete to the 3-level. We needn't worry about the ♠ suit: if we had it, we'd bid it.

Certainly a case can be made that the minor two suited hand (which could be 5-5 as well as 44 or 54) is the more frequent of the two. This would suggest that at mps or BAM we'd prefer to have the responsive double available.

OTOH, there will be a non-trivial amount of time when we have good positional trump and decent values...especially since there is a strong tendency, even amongst good players, to want to advance the preemptive effect of their own 1♥ opening by bidding 2♥ on an average 6 card suit: AJx AQ98xx x Kxx: I suspect that 2♥ would get a lot of support in a poll (indeed, many wtp? comments could be expected). Catch LHO with xx KJ107x KQx Axx and we'd see a stampede for the penalty double.... take away the trump x and double is still a good bid imo.

The upside of the penalty double is likely to be much higher, on average, than the upside of the responsive double.

Add to this that with a 5 card minor (or 2), you can always 'guess' which minor to bid or await a second double, and the responsive double, altho still a valuable tool when occasion arises, may not be indespenable.

Of course, a similar argument can be made that the penalty double hand can also be passed around to a second double. However, the penalty double hand usually holds more hcp than the responsive double hand and so that tends to lessen the chances that partner's hand is strong enough for a second double.

I am traditionally more of an imp player, and I love inflicting pain on my opps (in the nicest possible way, of course) so I prefer the traditional meaning, but would concede that takeout may be better at mps.

2. Clearly (relatively) penalty. You have 2♦ available: contrast this to a 2♥ rebid. You can always bid ♠s. So you need the double only to cater to hands with specific holdings: perhaps 4 or 5♦s with 4 weak ♠s. As against that, the frequency of a ♥ stack has increased with opener not rebidding them... so double should be something in ♣s (I would expect xxx or Hx or better) with an intention of hammering 2♥.

3. Partner could, of course, have a side minor, perhaps even a side 5 card minor with a poor hand. But the odds are high, here, that partner lacks the cards that would make a 3-level minor suit contract playable. So I think the relative frequency of use of the responsive double is at its lowest, of all the 3 sequences shown. This makes penalty a clear winner in my view.

[Winstonm]

Quote

especially since there is a strong tendency, even amongst good players, to want to advance the preemptive effect of their own 1♥ opening by bidding 2♥ on an average 6 card suit: AJx AQ98xx x Kxx: I suspect that 2♥ would get a lot of support in a poll (indeed, many wtp? comments could be expected).

Thanks for the answers, Mike. But I have a contradictory point to introduce - against good players at imps it seems less likely that they would stick out their necks with a less-than-good suits for a potential huge loss verses little gain.

The question arises at imps. With a 3154 pattern, many times double is a more convenient balance than a 2-level bid, especially when the hand is reasonably good but the suit isn't so good. In 1H-P-P-X-2H-?, is it better to have the meaning of penalty or is it better to show at least two 4-card suits so that at least the 4/4 can be found and the 4/3 avoided?

In my experience, the really good players are not going to let you take them off for a number in a 2H contract when they have opened and rebid. I would think it actually better to reverse the thinking and play penalty doubles at MPs and responsive at imps - then you can bring the magic +200 into the MP equation.

[pclayton]

All penalty. Doubler is sitting over the bidder in each case.

[Free]

My instinct would tell me 1 & 3 penalty, 2 takeout. However, I can find some logic in R-S's takeout mentality...

[FrancesHinden]

The second is obviously penalties (although based partly on partner's club holding), and is an auction I've seen.

In my partnerships we have defined the first and third as takeout. I don't feel very strongly about this, because to be honest although you think it might do, neither auction comes up that frequently. I play more penalty doubles than most on this forum (as the BPO showed very clearly) but I haven't really felt the lack here.

Against weak players penalties is more useful because they have a tendency to bid 2H on hands where they definitely shouldn't, particularly in 4-card-major-land where they say "oh I wanted to show you I have five of them"

Also, I think there are a lot more hands in an auction such as 1C P P 1S 2C where you want to make a responsive double, and I can't face having different agreements depending exactly on the opening bid and the 4th seat overcall.

[bid_em_up]

I would treat all three as penalty.